St. Sophronius of Jerusalem: The Poet-Patriarch’s Mystical Vision and Defense of Orthodoxy

Introduction

St. Sophronius of Jerusalem (c. 560-638 AD), also known as the Poet-Patriarch and Sophronius the Sophist, is one of the most significant figures of the seventh century. He was born in Damascus, one of the great centers of Byzantine spirituality and culture, and grew up in a wealthy and educated family who provided him with a comprehensive education . His studies included rhetoric, philosophy, and literature, which he excelled in, giving him the title of  “Sophist” due to his eloquent and knowledgeable use of language.

He was educated in the classical Greek world of literature, philosophy, and rhetoric through the time when he lived. He read the works of Homer and the tragic poets, studied the works of Plato and Aristotle, and mastered the complex techniques of formal rhetoric. The classical education he received during this period of time influenced the spiritual writings that he would later create; he would make use of many of the ancient Greek literary forms in order to communicate the truths of Christ and make arguments about the nature of God and His truth.

While the education he received while living in the classical world was very impressive, it was not sufficient to satisfy the deeper hunger that was in his heart for God. He faced the same challenge to his faith that many of the thinkers of his time and afterwards encountered as they sought to find an answer to the question of how to know God. He realized that the philosophies which he had studied could not secure sufficient knowledge of God, provide an avenue for him to enter into communion with God, nor give him hope of salvation.

From Damascus to the Desert: The Scholar Becomes Monk

Sophronius was born around 560 AD in Damascus, then a major center of Byzantine culture and learning. His family belonged to the educated, probably wealthy class that could provide their gifted son with a comprehensive education. He studied rhetoric, philosophy, and literature—the traditional curriculum of late Roman education—achieving such mastery that he earned the epithet “Sophist,” indicating his skill in eloquence and learning.

His education immersed him in classical Greek literature, philosophy, and rhetoric. He read Homer and the tragedians, studied Plato and Aristotle, mastered the intricate techniques of formal oratory. This classical formation would later enrich his spiritual writings, as he drew on pagan sources to illuminate Christian truths, employed sophisticated rhetorical devices in theological arguments, and crafted poetry of remarkable literary quality.

But secular learning, however impressive, couldn’t satisfy his soul’s deepest hunger. The same crisis that had afflicted other intellectuals in Christian history—the recognition that classical wisdom, for all its brilliance, cannot save—confronted Sophronius in his youth or early adulthood. The philosophical systems he studied offered no certain knowledge of God, no path to union with the divine, no hope of redemption.

Around 580-590, while still relatively young, Sophronius made the choice to turn toward the religious life and monasticism. He rejected the bright future he would have had as a sophist and rhetorician and turned to pursuing spiritual wealth, instead of fame and wealth. However, Sophronius did not discard his education but realized that all learning serves wisdom, all rhetoric is to promote the truth, and that all philosophy must lead one to a realization of the limitations of philosophy and must lead him to God, who is not reachable through philosophy alone.

Throughout this period of time Sophronius developed a very close friendship with John Moschus, who shared a similar educational background and also was a monk. Their friendship lasted until Moschus died in 619. They shared the experience of traveling around the Christian East visiting the great spiritual leaders of their day, and collecting the wisdom that they found.

Their travels began in Egypt, the center of desert monasticism during the period of the emergence of Islamic culture from c. 580-590. There they met living representatives of the many great spiritual thinkers who had gone before, including Antony and Macarius, and they followed their teaching by embracing the same radical form of solitude and embracing the responsibilities of being a monk.

In the Egyptian desert, Sophronius learned the essential aspects of contemplative spirituality; he learned how to guard the heart and remain free from actions that would take him away from God; he came to understand the emptiness of human will and learned how to be pure in intention; ultimately, he learned what it means to be apatheia—to be free from passions.

Sophronius learned about spiritual warfare, how temptation is manifested, and how to resist temptation from the writings of the desert fathers. The differences between the education he received and what he learned through his desert experience were surely awesome. The classical study of rhetoric empowered Sophronius to communicate clearly and persuasively; through the silence of the desert, he learned to listen to the Holy Spirit; the philosophy he studied led him to think abstractly, while through contemplative spirituality he learned to live practically .

He did not completely abandon his classical education; rather, he integrated it with his monastic experiences. In his writings, he used the sophisticated techniques of rhetoric, the historical precision of philosophy, and the artistry of literary works he produced to express his understanding of spiritual reality. He exemplified the best of the Byzantine empire; his Lord Jesus called upon him to use his classical education for the glory of God, for the service of His Kingdom.

The “Spiritual Meadow”: Collecting Desert Wisdom

Sophronius and John Moschus traveled extensively through the early Christian East, compiling an important, delightful, and instructive volume of early monastic literature called “The Spiritual Meadow” (Leimonarion). While Moschus primarily compiled this collection, Sophronius made a significant contribution, adding material from the monks they met along their travels.

Sophronius and Moschus used the concept of bees gathering from multiple flowers to collect their spiritual understanding. They traveled to monasteries in various locations including Egypt, Palestine, Sinai, Syria, and Asia Minor where they interviewed monks, collected the teachings of the monks, and recorded the history of the monks they met.

“The Spiritual Meadow” contains approximately three hundred short chapters which describe various events that occurred in the monastic world including sayings, miracles, and events. Some stories demonstrate the practice of various virtues such as humility, charity, obedience, and patience; others describe the warrior spirit in the struggle against evil and the devil while others preserve the teachings of the monks on prayer, meditation, and man’s inner life in God . Together these accounts paint a vivid picture of seventh-century monasticism during its time.

The collection of stories offers many of the same messages. Certainly, the sharing of meager resources, visiting the sick and caring for their needs, and offering hospitality to others portrays the theme of charity within the context of the monastery’s significance. Humility is portrayed by the extremely holy people of God regarding themselves as the least of all sinners and hiding their gifts or talents from the world. Discernment is also a familiar theme, establishing the criteria to distinguish between godly wisdom and demonically inspired deception.

Many stories are written demonstrating the power of prayer by monks who prayed for healing from illness or circumstances; monks who frequently prayed for awareness of God’s presence. It is significant to note that these accounts of miraculous happenings are not just entertainment but are testimonies written to substantiate the realities of the spiritual life of monks and the proof that a union with God has physical results in this world and the next.

The contributions of Sophronius within “The Spiritual Meadow” express his contemplative mindset and the understanding that the knowledge and experience gained by the holy men and women in their lives is far more valuable than the writings of systematic theological treatises that have been written to establish sound doctrine.

Sophronius found value in the specific life experiences of individual saints rather than just generic information of a faith community. The appreciation for the Blessed Virgin Mary is found within the collection because her encounter with God was a unique experience, yet similar to the other saints who had an encounter with God. While the encounter with God had certain patterns, the encounters with God changed lives and were never the same.

Sophronius’ literary ability is also demonstrated through “The Spiritual Meadow” . The stories are written in a concise manner capturing the authors’ style and tone while making use of brevity and grace in the telling of the various accounts of the monks. The way Sophronius tells his stories through the accounts gives readers the opportunity to see how he expresses theological concepts with timeless examples that are easily remembered. Therein lies the success of Sophronius and Moschus within the context of the lives of those early monastic communities and how that success would continue to have influence for centuries after the last of the early monks had died.

Rome, Constantinople, and Theological Controversy

After the death of John Moschus in approximately 619 AD, Sophronius traveled to Rome to deliver the completed manuscript of “The Spiritual Meadow” to its intended recipient, probably the pope. In addition, Sophronius hoped to gain support for his advocacy of the orthodox faith against the growing heresy known as Monothelitism, which would influence the theological discussions throughout the next hundred years.

Monothelitism teaches that Jesus Christ, while possessing two natures (Divine and Human) was able to act through one will (Divine). The theology behind this teaching was promoted by both Emperor Heraclius and Patriarch Sergius of Constantinople as an attempt to unite the Chalcedonian and Monophysite Christians. Sophronius, however, did not view this as an intellectually sound statement – he viewed it as a serious error that attacks the reality of Christ’s incarnation.

His opposition was not based simply upon an intellectual debate regarding Monothelitism; Sophronius had a deeper conviction that resulted from the prayer and meditation that God had given him revelation. Sophronius understood through contemplation that the reality of Christ’s complete humanity, including the human will, was essential for the work of redemption. If Jesus did not take on our human will, he would be unable to redeem it and our willingness would produce Jesus’ struggle with temptation and willingness to obey God’s will. Therefore, Christ’s economy of salvation was based on his fullness of humanity by the perfecting or sanctifying of his complete human nature, including his ability to choose.

As a result, his orthodoxy regarding the study of Christ is contemplative theology; a study of Christology as understood by the mystic rather than through the intellectual speculation.

In the time Sophronius was in Rome, around the year 633-634, Sophronius sought the support of Pope Honorius for the view of dyothelitism (two wills in Jesus). His meeting with Pope Honorius was not encouraging; he was generally sympathetic to Monothelite theology. Nevertheless, Sophronius persisted, writing to various Christian leaders and seeking allies to support him in the conflict against the Monothelite heresy.

Sophronius was officially appointed the Patriarch of Jerusalem in 634 AD, which provided him the opportunity to continue his defense of the dyothelite view. Upon his enthronement as patriarch, Sophronius used the opportunity to write a long and theologically dense sermon in which he described the two wills of Jesus. His theological view stated clearly that Jesus possessed two natures; He had two energies (activities); He possessed two wills. Each nature operated according to nature but were united as one person.

This sermon also exemplifies how the two aspects of Sophronius’ learning, the contemplative and the theological, are combined into one. While it is a theologically dense writing, it is a passionate statement of faith expressed in beautiful language but substantiated through logical thought and theological depth. Sophronius’ writing makes use of the liturgical language of the church and numerous Scripture references, demonstrating that good theology (orthodoxy) is doxological (praise of God) in its inspiration, and that good doctrine is birthed through the act of praying and seeking God’s presence.

Patriarch During Crisis: Jerusalem’s Fall

Patriarch Sophronius’s leadership during the siege and fall of Jerusalem to the Muslim army in 638 AD occurred against a backdrop of significant crisis for the Byzantine Empire. After decades of struggle against Persia, the Empire was faced with a new enemy emerging from the Arabian Peninsula—the Muslim armies united as a result of Islam. Within four years of Sophronius’s ordination, the city of Jerusalem would fall to the Muslim forces.

This great crisis would also have a significant impact upon Sophronius as a man of faith; as a man who had once sought God in solitude, he now had to take on the responsibility of protecting the Holy City during a time of impending death. Whereas he had devoted himself to study, prayer, and theology, he now had to seek the help of other nations and attempt to protect his flock while witnessing the destruction of the holy sites of Christianity.

According to contemporary accounts, Sophronius tirelessly tried to defend the city of Jerusalem; he worked to create defenses for the city, maintain the morale of its people, encourage resistance, and seek aid from the Byzantine Empire, which, unfortunately, would not be forthcoming. He also recognized the reality that the invading Muslim armies were far too numerous, and that help from the Byzantine Empire would not arrive. To prolong the siege would only result in greater suffering for the people of Jerusalem.

In the year 638, after approximately two years of siege, Sophronius was able to negotiate the surrender of the city of Jerusalem to Caliph Umar. The terms offered by Caliph Umar were relatively generous under the circumstances: the Christians in Jerusalem could continue to practice their faith and remain open; clergy would not be harmed; but additional restrictions and taxes would be imposed on Christians. Although Sophronius was forced to negotiate with the Muslim armies to obtain this degree of protection for his people, he did so skillfully.

But the psychological and spiritual toll that the surrender of Jerusalem had on Sophronius was very difficult for him to bear. Jerusalem was the city where Jesus was crucified and raised from the dead and was, therefore, the destination for Christian pilgrims for centuries until the time of the conquest. Although the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, which was built over Calvary and the empty tomb, remained standing after conquest, it came under Muslim authority. Sophronius, who had devoted his life to Christ and His Church must have felt that he was a participant in cosmic tragedy.

Yet his faith did not collapse. The sermons that he delivered during this time, especially his Christmas sermon of 634 AD (given while the threat of the Muslims was looming), show that at this darkest time of suffering, Sophronius was continuing to maintain his faith in God. Although he did not provide simplistic answers or false comfort to those suffering, he did acknowledge that this was a tragedy but also asserted that God’s plan for humanity transcends present reality, divine wisdom far exceeds human comprehension, and faith continues on even in times when all seems lost.

Sophronius died shortly after the fall of Jerusalem around November in the year 638 AD. According to some historians, he died as a result of extreme grief for what he had witnessed as a devoted servant of the Church. Whether this is an accurate explanation or simply a historic view of his passing is difficult to determine, but ultimately Sophronius witnessed the end of an era, the end of the domination of Christianity over the birthplace of Christianity.

Liturgical Poetry: Prayer in Verse

Sophronius’s literary talents found their fullest expression in the area of liturgical poetry. The prayers and hymns of Sophronius reflect the combined qualities of beauty in poetry and theological correctness. Many of the prayers that Sophronius composed are still used by Orthodox churches and municipalities today, and they provide evidence of the depth of Sophronius’s contemplative vision through the use of artistry.

Sophronius wrote hymns for important feast days: Christmas, Epiphany, Presentation of Christ in the Temple, and Annunciation. These hymns, like the prayers, contain a wealth of meaning about the mystery of God.

Christmas hymns explore the paradox of the Incarnation (the Infinite God seen in an infant; God from Eternity entering Time; God Who cannot be defined being wrapped in swaddling clothes). Sophronius employs the use of paradox and antithesis (rhetorical devices from his classical training) in creating hymns that celebrate the mystery of God’s Incarnation. He does not seek to “explain away” the paradoxes, but rather to express celebratory wonderment over the miracles of God’s Incarnation.

In his baptismal hymns, Sophronius considers the cosmic significance of Christ entering the waters of the Jordan River to bless the Creation, the elevation of the sinless Son as a blessing upon the cursed waters, and the revelation (through the voice of the Father and descent of the Holy Spirit) of the Holy Trinity. Sophronius interprets baptism as a revelation of the Trinity (voice, Spirit, and Son), as an act of recreation (the cleansing of water as a means of regeneration), and anticipates the experience of Christ as He descends into hell and rises again.

The liturgical poetry of Sophronius exposes a fundamental understanding of worship as contemplative experience, wherein prayer through music can be internalized and considered the vehicle for transcendence. The quality of these texts is syntactically and aesthetically composed of memorable diction and structure, so that they can be more easily memorized; and their beauty elevates the mind and heart toward the divine, and honors God through artistry.

In addition to hymns, Sophronius wrote ceremonial prayers for a number of liturgical occasions. Like his hymns, the prayers illustrate his ability to combine formal eloquence with genuine devotion, rhetorical sophistication with spiritual authenticity. The ceremonial prayers of Sophronius were the intersection of literature, art, and liturgical devotion; his prayers reflect his belief that ultimately all creations of humankind can serve as a conduit for divine grace when presented to God.

The liturgical works of Sophronius extend beyond single texts; they demonstrate how the Eastern Orthodox tradition has developed its understanding of worship as being at once true and beautiful; artistic and orthodox; and that beauty and truth should be combined in worship and held in unity with aestheticism to foster sound theological teaching. The intersection of truth and beauty, for art and theology reflects the Byzantine culture as seen at its best and continues to be a formational pattern within Orthodox liturgical worship.

“The Life of Mary of Egypt”: Hagiography as Contemplative Teaching

Another of the important hagiographical works of Sophronius is his “Life of Mary of Egypt”. Although there has been much debate regarding whether or not Sophronius entirely wrote this document, or whether or not he compiled it from previous writings, there is general agreement among scholars that the text we currently possess has the fingerprints of Sophronius and reflects the worldview of Sophronius’s Christian spirituality.

In this document, Sophronius recounts the life of Mary of Egypt, a woman who lived a dissolute life as a prostitute in Alexandria, and later returned there to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre to seek redemption from God. Upon her arrival at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre during the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, Mary encountered an invisible barrier that prevented her from entering. Recognizing that this was God at work, she turned to the Virgin Mary for help and ultimately repented.

After her renewal, Mary withdrew into the wilderness beyond the Jordan River, where she lived alone for forty-seven years, possessing virtually nothing but surviving on extremely little food and devoting all her time to prayer and penance. Zosimas, an older monk from Jerusalem, was guided by God to find her during his desert journey, and when he finally had contact with her, each were provided with the source of satisfaction to their souls.

Sophronius’s treatment of this story demonstrates his understanding of the way in which God can transform any individual into Himself. Sophronius’s treatment of Mary of Egypt demonstrates that the years spent in the isolation of the desert would radically purify Mary’s former carnal desires and pour that passion into God’s love. Once filled with lustful desire after men, Mary was now consumed with the love of God. Mary’s radical transformation did not occur immediately. For at least several years, the initial stages of Mary’s conversion were filled with difficulty, but ultimately Mary was transformed through grace by God’s work.

One of the primary purposes of Sophronius’s work is found in the theology of Mary’s spiritual battles—her first years were filled with inner turmoil—a constant barrage of memories, temptations of lust, threats of despair, etc.—and yet her persistence and faith allowed her to overcome her past. Calling upon the Lord Jesus, she prayed and wept over her sins, experiencing gradual diminishment of her temptations; ultimately reaching the state of apatheia (freedom), allowing her to achieve contemplative vision.

While Sophronius describes miraculous experiences, he is adamant that they were gifts of divine grace and confirms that Mary’s humility is due to grace and not any effort by her to boast of her holiness. By modeling humility in her gifts, Sophronius reflects that true spiritual gifts create humility and not pride. The “Life of Mary of Egypt” was one of the most influential works of Christian spirituality in the East. Her story became the standard Lenten reading, many conversions were attributed to the example of Mary, and the witness of Mary demonstrated that no one is too far removed from God to experience His redemptive grace. Through Sophronius’s artistic telling of the life of Mary, she became a timeless parable regarding the power of repentance and the possibility of transformation by contemplation.

The Synodical Letter: Theology as Prayer

Sophronius’s synodical letter is a significant theological document from the seventh century, written after he was chosen as Patriarch of Jerusalem in 634 A.D.. Although this long letter is apparently meant to be a formal letter sent to other patriarchs to announce his election, it grew into an extended confession of orthodox Christology that focused on the Monothelite controversy.

The opening of the letter demonstrates that Sophronius brought together theology and doxology. Rather than providing technical definitions at the beginning of the letter, Sophronius offered a series of extended praises of the Trinity using poetic language and contemplative imagery. Sophronius prayed and worshiped before he articulated doctrine; thus this order shows that he believed theology grew from prayer, and that the only doctrine that can be truly accurate is a result of contemplative vision expressed clearly.

Sophronius addresses Christology specifically in his continued doxological mode but reaches an incredible level of precision when he does so. He confesses Christ has two natures (the divine and human) united in one divine person without confusion and without separation. The two natures possess the properties of the nature from which they are drawn; that is to say, the divine nature remains impassible and eternal, while human nature experiences suffering and temporality. However, both natures belong to the one Christ, the Eternal Word incarnate.

Sophronius also points out, particularly, that Christ has two wills, one divine and one human. He maintains that these two wills worked in perfect harmony and without conflict. The human will, being truly human and therefore able to experience temptation and resistance from Satan, always submits freely to the divine will. This submission is not forced, but rather is the human will acting as God intended for it to act. The choices made freely by the human will correspond to God’s will.

The soteriological implications of Sophronius’s precision on Christology are equally important. Sophronius stressed that whatever Christ did not assume, he did not redeem. To say that if Christ did not possess a human will, then he did not redeem the ability to will; and, if Christ did not take on our complete humanity, he cannot save our humanity. To accomplish redemption, it is essential that Christ possess the integrity of his human nature—and this includes his human will.

Throughout the letter, Sophronius references Scripture. By doing so, he shows that orthodox Christology is not merely a philosophical issue but rather a biblical issue. He quotes passages in the Bible that show us divine attributes of Christ, such as omniscience, omnipotence and eternity, as opposed to human limitations, such as hunger, fatigue and a lack of knowledge regarding the date he would return. Instead of providing a solution through the Monothelite compromise to bring the two groups together into a single point of tension, Sophronius does not attempt to resolve the tension between the two, but acknowledges that mystery exists in both affirmations.

The letter also outlines the manner in which the Christological doctrine has practical applications for a person’s spiritual life. If Christ possessed and sanctified human will, then Christians, through faith, can trust that their own will, once corrupted by sin, can be healed and turned back towards God. If Christians face real temptation like Christ did, but did not sin, Christians facing similar temptations have a symbol of hope. Furthermore, if Christians desire to achieve unity with God by submitting their will to him, then they have an authentic model in Christ.

Sophronius’s synodical letter became one of the key documents in the Monothelite controversy. Even though Monothelitism enjoyed a temporary political advantage (as Emperor Constans II actually prohibited discussions regarding how many wills Christ had), Sophronius’s position ultimately prevailed. The Third Council of Constantinople (680-681), held decades after Sophronius’s death, vindicated his dyothelite Christology, condemned Monothelitism as heresy, and confirmed orthodox belief regarding the two wills of Christ.

Prayer and the Holy Cross

Sophronius’s devotion to the Holy Cross greatly influenced both his spirituality and theology. As the Patriarch of Jerusalem, Sophronius was responsible for the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, where the True Cross was located. Through his writings, Sophronius gives us evidence of his deep meditation on the meaning and the power of this Cross.

He wrote numerous prayers and hymns for the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross; in doing so, he contemplated how the instrument of torture became the instrument of salvation and life; how the death-dealing wood became the tree of eternal life; how that which brought shame to Christ became glory. These are not only theological reflections—they are the fruits of his continuing contemplation of the Cross and its paradoxical character.

When Christ died on the Cross—the Cross became the focal point of all of creation; therefore, the entire creation participated. When Christ was crucified, the earth quaked, the sun was darkened, the rocks were split, and the graves were opened. The Cross is the central point on which all history revolves, where divine and human, vertical and horizontal, time and eternity meet. Through his contemplation of the Cross, Sophronius begins to see the fundamental structure of reality.

Sophronius also reflects on the Cross as a Christian’s spiritual weapon. When Christians are attacked by demons, tempted by desires, or in spiritual danger, the Cross can be used as a shield by praying, and using the sign of the Cross. This is not magical thinking, but rather the awareness of the divine power given to all believers through faith in the Cross as the place where the power of sin and death was conquered.

In his reflections on the passion of Christ, Sophronius also showed his use of classical rhetorical techniques as expressions of devotion to Christ crucified. For example, with respect to the crucifixion scene, Sophronius describes his personal responses to how Christ was crucified—the nails piercing his hands and feet, the blood pouring from his wounds, and Jesus’s anguish when he called out that God had abandoned him. Sophronius did not include these descriptions for shock value; they served a theological purpose: to help make clear to his readers the truth that God actually suffered in human flesh.

In his prayer before the Cross, he brings together personal devotion and clear theological understanding of Christ’s natures. The one who was crucified is divine, since Christ is one Divine Person, however, the one who suffered was human, since divinity cannot suffer. The clarity of this understanding presupposes that it is impossible for the divine nature of Christ to suffer; and that it is incorrect to say that Christ suffered only in appearance .

When Jerusalem fell under Muslim control in 638, Sophronius’s devotion to the Cross took on special meaning. The holy places in Jerusalem where Christ suffered, died, and rose again now passed from the control of the Christian Church. Nevertheless, Sophronius continued to maintain that the true meaning of the Cross transcends a specific geographical spot. Through faith, Christians everywhere can receive access to the Cross and participate in God’s kingdom through the sign of the Cross, and they can also participate in Christ’s suffering through contemplation .

Contemplative Vision in Tumultuous Times

Sophronius experienced the development of his contemplative lifestyle through non-stop travelings, as well as theological conflicts, and finally an event in history that would destroy the whole world. The spiritual path of Sophronius states the fact that one can become more strongly established in the nucleus of contemplation during trials by confronting difficulties rather than fleeing to a place of peace away from those difficulties, and that a person may also develop a mystical vision from wretched crises in history, while prayer is what gives strength to those that are in the ministry and those that are experiencing trials.

The formation of Sophronius as a child in the desert allowed him the necessary foundation for the establishment of that contemplative basis. Thus learning how to guard the heart, to practice inner silence, to develop awareness of God at all times, and to struggle against negative, evil thoughts. These basic elements that Sophronius learned from living in the Egyptian and Palestinian deserts would go on to carry him through the next several decades of active ministry.

During the years when Sophronius traveled with John Moschus he was engaged in active ministry, yet at the same time, in regard to his contemplation, he still maintained a contemplative approach to his many travels. The purpose of their traveling to find holy men and women was not for research or gathering data but to find nourishment for their souls by means of an encounter with holiness. With each visit to the monasteries, conversations with monks from the desert, and each miracle they witnessed, the consciousness of their contemplation grew deeper.

Although it may seem impossible that the historical controversies of Sophronius’s later ministry could be inconsistent with the concept of contemplation, they were not considered oppositional by Sophronius. For Sophronius, defending orthodoxy was accomplishing contemplative activity; i.e. through prayer and by the practice of contemplation, he developed a Christological understanding of the mystery of the Incarnation. In his defense of orthodoxy, he expressed in words what he had seen through contemplation and in prayer, and in engaging in controversies, he expressed his love for the Christ he had met in prayer.

Even the downfall of Jerusalem, which was perhaps the most tragic external event of Sophronius’s life, gave him an opportunity to engage in a deeper level of contemplation. As a result of witnessing the destruction of Jerusalem by the invading armies, Sophronius was forced to confront many questions that confronted him about God’s providence, as to why God allows evil to conquer for a time, and as to how one can retain faith when all appears to be lost. Sophronius’s Christmas message of 634, delivered while the Muslim army was establishing itself in Jerusalem, expressed candidly his thoughts regarding these questions. He wrote his Christmas message, not providing quick answers to the questions, but stating he would continue to have faith in the goodness of God and trust in God’s goodness, even if he could not understand the purpose of God.

Throughout the trials of his life, Sophronius’s liturgical spirituality was the foundation for his strength. The pattern of daily office prayers, annual seasonal celebration of Advent, and celebration of the Eucharist renewed his communion with God, created a foundation in the chaos, and continued to provide stability even when he had to flee from everything else. Sophronius also composed liturgical prayers that provided a greater amount of beauty and theology to the worship of those who were not only in communion with him, but of others in time and place.

The Mysticism of Orthodoxy

Sophronius has been a good example of the “mysticism of orthodoxy” because of the belief that orthodoxy helps develop a contemplative, as well as the notion that when a person forms a correct theology, it facilitates the individual’s development of a view of God. Contemplation through prayer can also assist one in developing a better understanding of who God is and what God has done through Jesus Christ for those who have their belief in Him.

The views of Sophronius in regard to the Christology of Christ were also integral in Sophronius developing a dyothelite Christology based upon the contemplative vision he had of God. The dyothelite Christology of Sophronius worshipped God, yet He also saw God as expressing Himself fully in Christ.

The dyothelite Christology was integrally connected to the orthodox teachings of Christ. The argument that Monophysites had against the Dyothelites stated that if Monophysites claimed that Christ had one divine will and not also a human will, then there would be no imitative equality of Christ, and so, therefore, there would be no way for a contemplative to grow into Christ by imitating Christ.

This type of mysticism of orthodox is also evident by Sophronius in regard to his liturgical theology. Worship is a moment in time for a believer to make communion with the Holy God. In making communion with God, the liturgist comes into divine connection and prepares himself for an extended experience with God. Understanding proper theology of God and understanding who God is through Christ is essential in experiencing communion with God through worship. Satan, by his heretical belief, corrupted the worship of God through the heretical theology of Monophysites and through presenting images of God that were not true representations of God.

Poetry as Contemplative Expression

Sophronius’ poetry: Contemplation and Expression. The classical education of Sophronius in Rhetoric has allowed him to express his contemplative vision through poetry. His ability to express his contemplative vision can be found in his hymns and prayers. Poetry is not simply a piece of art; it is a way to express spiritual truths that cannot be fully expressed in prose.

One reason for this is that poetry forces the poet to use the best possible words and phrases to convey exactly what he wants to express because of its compressed form. This is true in theology as well. The poet-theologian must always strive for exactness of language in order to do justice to the mystery of God.

Sophronius’ liturgical poems achieve a remarkable density of doctrine by being compacted into lines that are memorable due to their repetitiveness. By incorporating metaphors and symbols into their writings, poets can also express mystical experiences that would otherwise be difficult to convey with plain, literal language.

Metaphor allows the poet to hint at something that cannot be conveyed literally; symbols express a truth that goes beyond their physical manifestation; and images provide an avenue for the imagination to engage with God, leading to greater understanding.

Sophronius uses classical rhetorical devices such as parallelism, antithesis, and repetitiveness, alliteration, to create verses which possess dual functions of beauty and meaning. The use of beauty is not only for its aesthetic value, but for its role as a spiritual force for raising people to God. When worshipers sing, the beauty of the poetry continues to transform their consciousness.

Sophronius’ poetry is also an expression of the Byzantine belief that all theology should be aesthetic. For the Byzantine, Truth and Beauty are two different aspects of the same reality. God is both Truth and Beauty; therefore, doctrines of God that reflect Truth should also be aesthetically beautiful. Worship of God as an Aesthetically Beautiful God should also be done with aesthetic regard for Beauty .

Sophronius’ poetry integrates these concepts and illustrates that the contemporary church does not have to segment theologians and artists into separate compartments. The contemporary church often teaches un-inspiring hymns that may be theologically sound but artistically mediocre, or teaches artistically attractive songs that may have not much theological content.

Sophronius’ poetry demonstrates that an individual may combine excellent poetry with stringent theological doctrine, and that deep contemplative thought is possible in poetry through the use of artistic mastery.

The Final Days: Faith Under Conquest

The disease of unbelief took root in Sophronius as he watched the Muslim conquests get closer and closer to Jerusalem. He had devoted himself entirely to the Church of Christ; now he watched as the Christians seized the very place which belonged to them by right, the Holy City. A man who vigorously defended the truth of the faith was forced to watch helplessly as political and military matters were placed above orthodoxy and the teachings of Christ. A man whose liturgical hymns contained the beauty of the celebration of our Lord’s birth and resurrection probably contemplated (with fear) whether or not there would be a time in the future when the Church (Christ) would stop celebrating his victories.

We do not have much of a written account regarding Sophronius’ last years, but by reading between the lines, we can gather a good deal of information as to the nature of his negotiations regarding Jerusalem’s surrender and the Christian community in that city. We also know that he passed away shortly after the fall of Jerusalem; it was suspected that Sophronius would perish shortly before November 638. Even with the little that we do know, the specific cause for Sophronius’ death is still unknown.

When you read Sophronius’ works, it is evident that throughout the tumult of his life, he developed a strong and unwavering faith in God. In all that he wrote, he wrestled with the question of God’s providence and, through time, settled on the answer that God allows evil and free will to exist in order to bring about the greater good, and that through the storms of our lives, we can rest secure in God. This faith, built from years of quiet contemplation and introspection, was likely a strong anchor that kept him steadfast through his life even in the face of overwhelming historical events.

In writing about the birth and resurrection of Christ in his liturgical hymns during and after the liturgical seasons of Christmas and Easter, Sophronius expressed himself in complete confidence that the Lord was not only sovereign over his life and circumstances; he was absolutely convinced that God would continue to gain victory over everything. Sophronius was willing to write, compose, and, to a greater extent, to produce liturgies; he continued to produce them, even in the midst of suffering from the losses he experienced. Sophronius, in his liturgical hymns, clearly acknowledged and recognized his suffering, but he did not lose sight of the victory that he expected God to bring about for himself and for the Church. Sophronius’ suffering was always accompanied by the expectation of future victory. He placed suffering into the context of redemption and held to the belief that in the scheme of things, present pain would be used to prepare an even greater glory for God.

Sophronius’ condition of grief at the death of Jerusalem and its Holy Places did not detract from the fact that he continued to write and produce liturgical hymns, regardless of the circumstances he faced. Sophronius’ suffering at the hands of the Muslims also reminded him that prayer could manifest itself in many ways; at the same time, prayer could be the greatest demonstration of our love for God. If, in fact, Sophronius did die from a “broken heart,” he died for God and for Jesus who had suffered a broken heart for us.

Legacy: Liturgy, Theology, and Sanctity

Although St. Sophronius may not be as widely recognized as some of his contemporaries, his influence on the spirituality of Eastern Christianity is profound. His liturgical works continue to shape the way Orthodox Christians worship; his Christological precision has contributed to the dogmatic development of the Church; and he has shown how both contemplative depth and active ministry can integrate.

His prayers and hymns continue to form worshippers’ consciousness and are used in Orthodox liturgies for major feasts. Although thousands have never read Sophronius’ theological writings or known his life, many continue to pray from his prayers, sing from his hymns, and take from the contemplative vision he inspired through the worship he helped provide.

Sophronius’s dyothelite Christology is now officially accepted as Orthodox by the Third Council of Constantinople (680-681). His insistence that Christ has two wills, one Divine and one Human, working together in harmony, has allowed for a full understanding of both the Divinity and Humanity of Christ and has preserved the Orthodox soteriology of the Church.

The “Life of Mary of Egypt,” written by Sophronius, has had a tremendous impact on many Christian lives, especially during Lent when the Life is read. Through Sophronius’ brilliant writing, the story of Mary has become an enduring example of the conversion power of repentance and shows that there is no past so sinful that it cannot be redeemed by the grace of God. It illustrates that the contemplative transformation of an individual is truly possible, and that the desert path is still open to any person who is willing to embrace radical simplicity and prayer.

St. Sophronius offers an example of how to maintain contemplative depth while engaging in theological controversies and in a pastoral crisis and provides a model for contemporary Christians. He is a witness to the natural integration of spirituality with theology, mysticism with doctrine, and prayer with the defense of truth and is an example of the maturity of the Christian life.

Conclusion: The Contemplative Patriarch

The integrated spirituality of St. Sophronius of Jerusalem invites contemporary Christians into a united whole where contemplation, theology, mysticism, and orthodoxy, prayer, and poetry are one. The life of Sophronius is a demonstration that these dimensions do not compete with each other but are complementary, drawing on one single reality, the search for God who is both Truth, Beauty, and Goodness.

The Christology of Sophronius invites Christian believers to challenge therapeutic spiritualities which tend to minimize the importance of correct doctrine. Sophronius demonstrates the importance of rightly understanding Christ, devoutly holding to theological precision as encouraging, not obstructing, growth in contemplation, and that the mystical experience of the mystical life should be put to the test of the orthodox defenders of truth. It is essential to understand that the Christ who is worshipped in prayer is the same one proclaimed by the Church; He is truly Divine and truly Human, and He possesses both Divine and Human natures, wills, and energies.

The liturgical legacy of Sophronius reminds us that worship is contemplation, that corporate prayer shapes individual consciousness, and that beauty serves truth. In an age when worship often sacrifices either theological content for aesthetic appeal or aesthetic quality for doctrinal rigor, Sophronius illustrates that both can coexist when pursued to the highest standards.

The example of Sophronius’ pastoral leadership during times of crisis provides a model for maintaining faith in God even when circumstances appear contradictory to God’s promises. Sophronius lost everything that he held dear to the conquest of Jerusalem, and yet he maintained his trust in God and continued to compose and offer beautiful prayer despite the tragedy of the conquest. He also engaged honorably in his negotiations during his defeat. The faith that Sophronius possessed, which was tested through catastrophes and proven through crisis, is a witness to Christians who face overwhelming trials.

The hagiographical work of Sophronius, particularly his “Life of Mary of Egypt,” illustrates that contemplation can be enhanced through storytelling. Through the masterful art of storytelling, spiritual truth becomes personal; the abstract becomes concrete; and the timeless wisdom of God is revealed in the individual lives of God’s people. In this time when contemporary Christianity appears to be saturated with information, and starving for transformation, there is a need for these kinds of stories so that the imagination can be formed and the mind instructed.

The life of Sophronius, particularly his understanding of contemplation, illustrates that it is not necessary to withdraw from the struggles of the world; rather engagement in the struggles of this world will lead to the growth of contemplation. The development of Sophronius’ prayer life occurred as he engaged the theological controversies of his day, as he experienced pastoral responsibilities, and as he participated in the crisis of history. The God whom Sophronius encountered in prayer, in silence, during his time in the desert remained with him in Jerusalem during times of chaos. The Christ whom he worshipped in liturgical beauty provided the sustaining influence during his time of theological controversy. The Spirit upon whom Sophronius relied for the poetic genius of his work was still with him during his time of catastrophic defeat.

St. Sophronius of Jerusalem was a monk and patriarch, a poet and theologian, a contemplative and controversialist; he is a witness to the good and true tradition of Christianity: classical learning baptized with faith, writing skills employed for truth, poetic gifts offered to God, contemplative depth inspiring active ministry, and theological precision directing the mystical vision. His liturgical hymns have been sung for centuries and his voice continues calling each generation to worship the God who is both beyond our comprehension and intimately near, to serve the Christ who is true and divine, and to trust the Holy Spirit who sustains our faith even when Jerusalem falls, who maintains our hope even when all appears lost, and who promises that one day—beyond all historical catastrophes and in spite of temporal defeat—divine love will accomplish purposes that cannot be fully grasped by human understanding but can only be seen dimly through contemplative vision: the salvation of the world, the redemption of creation, and the fulfillment of all God’s promises in Christ Jesus; to whom with the Father and the Holy Spirit, all glory, honor, and worship belong now and always, for ever and for ever. Amen