Manolis Karandinis - To Zeibekiko Tis Evdokias - Solo Bouzouki (Amazing !)

Zeibekiko tis Evdokias is one of the most famous instrumental themes in Greek music. In Greek it should be translated as "Zeibekiko of Evdokia".

Zeibekiko tis Evdokias was composed by Manos Loizos in 1971 for the homonym movie, Evdokiaby Alexis Damianos. It is, along with Zorba the Greek, one of the most recognizable Greek melodies.

Elder Paisios:Easter Monday and Icon of the Virgin "Axion Estin"

Elder Paisios told: "On Easter Monday I was sitting at Archontariki and say the prayer. Suddenly I felt a smell, another thing! I went in the hallway to see where it comes from, I went to church, nothing. I went outside in the yard. The aroma was much more pronounced. Heard the talent to beat. I looked and saw it descends down the litany, and I knew from the icon of the Virgin. " 

On this date the procession of the miraculous icon of "Axion Estin". Descends below the Koutloumousi as the cells of the Apostles (Alypiou). The cell of "Panagouda" is one kilometer. From this distance the Virgin sent a greeting to some extent in the Elder. 


Life Paisios of Mount Elder, Hieromonk Isaac, Mount Athos, 2004, pp. 288 

Tens of thousands Russians show support for Orthodox Church, Patriarch Kirill

Tens of thousands rally in front of Moscow's Christ the Savior Cathedral amid controversies involving Vladimir Putin and Patriarch Kirill.

By Sergei L. Loiko, Los Angeles Times

April 23, 2012

MOSCOW — Tens of thousands of people came to the square in front of a Moscow cathedral Sunday in a show of support for the Russian Orthodox Church, which is facing criticism for its close ties to the Kremlin and the wealth of its leaders.

Under golden cupolas and a warm spring sun, church leaders dressed in red-and-gold robes carried crosses and icons around the mighty white walls of Christ the Savior Cathedral in a procession led by Patriarch Kirill.

"What are we doing, my dears, here today, having gathered in such a multitude?"

the patriarch said to the crowd, which consisted predominantly of middle-aged and elderly women, who, according to church etiquette, were wearing head scarves. 

"We are not threatening anyone; we are not demonstrating our force."Rather, he said, it was a "fateful" moment of history, and no one could forbid the faithful to gather in prayer. Police estimated the crowd at 65,000, but it appeared to be smaller."It was a chance in a lifetime to see the patriarch like this," said Anna Bugayeva, a 54-year-old accountant from the town of Chekhov near Moscow. 

"I was a little worried that he is in danger, but he seems to be in good health and quite well protected."Experts across the political spectrum agreed that the gathering was in fact meant as a demonstration of force."It was a powerful but peaceful show of the church's might," said Maxim Shevchenko, a popular television TV anchor and member of the presidential Public Chamber, a Kremlin advisory body. 

"The church demonstrated today that it is not a defenseless society of strange people who can be insulted and hurt with impunity."The appeal from the patriarchate for this pro-church rally came amid a controversy that started in February with a group of young women who rushed into the cathedral to perform a song-and-dance routine with sacks over their heads in a protest against Russia's most powerful politician, Vladimir Putin. 

The detention of three of them pending trial has split Russians, with the patriarchate and its supporters demanding severe punishment. The patriarchate cited several recent attacks on churches, the defilement of icons and the beating of a priest as evidence of an organized campaign against the church backed by pro-Western business and media elites.Opponents declared the three young women prisoners of conscience.In the weeks that followed, Kirill was the target of news reports and blog entries accusing him of a weakness for luxury. Examples included his wearing a watch worth thousands of dollars and owning a lavish apartment across the river from the cathedral. The patriarch is a monk by status and is not supposed to own real estate.Critics charged that the rally Sunday was not very different from those organized by Putin's successful campaign for the March 4 presidential election. Participants were bused in from the Moscow region and some parts of central Russia. Lines of buses could be seen parked along the Moscow River embankment as far as the eye could see.

"It was very unwise of the patriarchate to call for this show of public support, as millions of people across the country who knew nothing of liberal media accusations against Patriarch Kirill now begin asking questions," said Mikhail Ardov, a priest associated with the Russian Orthodox Autonomous Church, which is independent of the Moscow Patriarchate. 

"The patriarch wanted to show how much he is worth and how influential he is, but the entire country saw that most of his parish consists of not-so-young women.

source

Our Lady of Filerno and the Malta Knights

Our Lady of Filerno, known as "Filernosa" 

The Knights of Malta are major financiers of MOC and have already tried to seize the relics once. Montenegro's president Milo Djukanovic and the Knights of Malta had a plan to take the relics out of the country in early 2006, but were thwarted by a media campaign organized by the pro-Serb opposition. The relics were the reason Djukanovic had a clandestine meeting with Pope Benedict XVI at the Vatican in late 2005. Bypassing the normal diplomatic protocols, the then Serbian-Montenegrian Union Embassy and the Montenegrin consulate, the audience was arranged by Anton Zbutega of Kotor, a Maltese Knight.

The priceless icon "Our Lady of Filerno", known as "Filernosa" is said to have been painted by Apostle Luke almost two thousand years ago.

History records that it was brought to Malta by the Hospitallers in the 16th century, and that it stayed there till 1789, when it arrived at the Russian court. There the old metal frame was replaced with gold, and the frame was bedecked with precious jewels. Some 270 diamonds were arranged in a double row around the halo, with rubies and brilliants in between.

After the October Revolution, the icon was moved to Denmark, then spent a short time at an Orthodox church in Berlin, and finally came to the Karadjordjevic court in Belgrade. It was moved to Montenegro at the start of World War Two, and has been at the National Museum of Montenegro since 1978

Like "Filermosa" the right hand of St. John has had an interesting historical odyssey, from Jerusalem to Constantinople, Malta, St. Petersburg, and then via Denmark and Berlin to Belgrade.

At the outset of World War Two, King Petar II left Belgrade with the government, carrying the two relics and pieces of the True Cross They were turned over to Patriarch Gavrilo at Ostrog monastery, in the night between April 14-15 1941. Archimandrite Leontije of Ostrog guarded the relics well, and they remained unnoticed until 1952, when Communist authorities found them under the false floor in the Archimandrite's room while searching for the remaining royal gold. The relics were brought to the secret police vault in Podgorica, and kept there till 1978. That year, the Hand of St. John and the pieces of the True Cross were turned over to the Cetinje monastery, while the icon was transferred to the National Museum in Cetinje.
 

Accounts of the Martyrs of the Chinese Orthodox Church who fell victim in Beijing in 1900

Priest Mitrophan, July 1882
photo courtesy of Bishop
Seraphim of Sendai

Priest MITROPHAN. Priest Mitrophan, his Chinese name being Yang Ji ^[1], was born in 1855, on the 10th day of the 12th month ^[2]. Before reaching twenty years of age, he was appointed to the post of catechist. At 25 he was ordained to the priesthood by Nikolai, bishop of Japan. He lost his father in early childhood and was raised under the care of his grandmother Ekaterina and his mother Marina; his mother was a teacher at a school for females. At the time he experienced many troubles. When Archimandrite Pallady became head of the Mission for the second time, he charged his teacher Juren, Long Yuan to take great care in educating Mitrophan, in order to prepare him for eventual ordination. Mitrophan was a humble person, very cautious and quiet, peaceful and not impassioned; even when faced with great insults, he did not try to justify himself. Archimandrite Pallady's successor was Archimandrite Flavian, who later became Metropolitan of Kiev. From the time of his arrival in Běijīng (北京, Peking), Archimandrite Pallady charged him, as well as the teacher Long Yuan, to try to have Mitrophan attain what had been predestined (that is the priestly rank). Mitrophan did not want to accept ordination and constantly refused, saying "how can a person with insufficient abilities and charity dare to accept this great rank?" But under the forceful urging of Archimandrite Flavian and the persuasion of the teacher, Mitrophan obeyed, even though he knew that by accepting priesthood, his end would be inauspicious. Under Archimandrite Flavian, Priest Mitrophan assisted him in translating and checking books. For fifteen years, he tirelessly served God, while suffering many hurts and insults both from his own people and outsiders, he finally had a mild breakdown. Sometime after this spent three years living outside the mission, receiving half of his previous salary. All his life the Priest Mitrophan was not avaricious and many took advantage of this.

In 1900, on the evening of June 1 (which was the 17th day of the 5th month on the Chinese calendar) ^[3], the Boxers burned the Mission's buildings. Many Christians, hiding from danger, assembled in Priest Mitrophan's home. Although Fr. Mitrophan's former ill-wishers were among them, he did not drive them out. Seeing that some people were dispirited, he strengthened them, saying that the time of troubles had come and would be difficult to avoid. He himself several times daily went to look at the burned church. On the 10th of June, towards 10 in the evening, soldiers and Boxers surrounded Fr. Mitrophan's dwelling. Up to 70 Christians were there at the time; the stronger among them fled, while Fr. Mitrophan and many others, primarily women and children, remained and were tortured. Fr. Mitrophan sat in his courtyard when the Boxers punctured his chest like a honeycomb and he fell under a date tree. His neighbors removed his body to the Mission's almshouse. Later the Priest-monk Avraamy picked up Fr. Mitrophan's body and, in 1903, during the first commemoration of the martyrs, it along with others, was placed under the altar in the martyrs' church. At the place were Fr. Mitrophan was tortured, now a cross is erected and every memorial day of the martyrs a sacred procession takes place to commemorate them. The family of Fr. Mitrophan also included his wife Tatiana from the Lǐ (李) family, and three sons -- the older, Isaiah; the second Sergiy -- now an archpriest^[4]; and the third Ioann.

TATIANA, 44 years of age. On June 10th Tatiana was saved from the Boxers with help from her son Isaiah's bride, but on the following day, June 11th, she was seized in the morning and together with 19 others, was sent outside the Āndìngmén Gate (安定门) to Xiaoyingfang, to the Boxer camp and was then executed by beheading, at the place where there is now the "Treugol'nik" [Triangle], an almshouse for the poor.

ISAIAH, served in the artillery for 23 years. On June 7th, the Boxers executed him by beheading on the big street near the Píngzémén Gate (平则门) , because it had been known that he was a Christian.

IOANN (John). He was 7 years old at the time. On the evening of June 10th, when Fr. Mitrophan was killed, the Boxers split Ioann's shoulders and severed his toes. His brother Isaiah's bride managed to save him from death by hiding him in a latrine. In the morning he sat at the entrance without clothes and shoes, and when people asked "are you hurting?", he answered "it doesn't hurt." Boys scoffed at him, calling him "èrmáozǐ" (二毛子), but he answered, "I believe in God, and am not 'èrmáozǐ'." He got used to answering thus, becuse the pagans constantly called Christians devil's disciples, (the word "èrmáozǐ" has this meaning). Ioann asked neighbors for water, but they not only did not give it to him, but chased him away. Protasy Chang and Irodion Xu, who were not yet baptized, testify that they saw this boy with wounded shoulders and feet; the wounds were 1¾ inches deep, but he felt no pain and, when seized again by the Boxers, he felt no fear and went peacefully. One old man expressed a regret about him, saying "What is this boy guilty of? It is his parents' fault that he became a devil's disciple. Others made fun of him, derided him, or simply smiled with contempt. So he was taken as a lamb to slaughter.

MARIA, 19 yrs. old, bride of Fr. Mitrophan's son Isaiah. Two days before the Boxer's pogrom, she came to Fr. Mitrophan's home, wishing to die in her groom's family. When the Boxer's surrounded Fr. Mitrophan's house on June 10th, she very courageously helped to rescue others, supporting them in climbing over the wall. When the Boxers and soldiers broke down the doors and entered the courtyard, Maria bravely accused them of beating people lawlessly and indiscriminately, and they didn't dare to kill her, but simply wounded her hand and pierced her leg. In general, she exhibited uncommon courage and sense. Fr. Mitrophan's son Sergiy, three times tried to convince her to leave and hide, but she answered: "I was born near the church of the Most Holy Mother of God and here I will die" and she remained where the church was. Soon soldiers and Boxers arrived there, and the courageous woman was martyred, considering death as departure to a place of blessed rest.

Give rest, O Lord, to the souls of your servants -- Priest Mitrophan and those with him -- and make their memory to be eternal. Amen.

---

End Notes by Mitrophan Chin

^[1] In the original Russian text of this account which was first published in the original Kitayskiy Blagovestnik in 1917, used the Cyrillic transliteration that was equivalent to the pinyin Jichong. In this English translation, St Mitrophan's Chinese name has been restored to Yang Ji, which is derived from the actual Chinese characters of his name that was found in the records of the All Japan Council of 1882.

^[2] Judging from the writing style from the rest of the account, this date is probably according to the Chinese calendar, since the name of the month is not used. This would be equivalent to January 17, 1856 on the Gregorian calendar, January 5, 1856 on the Julian calendar, and 咸丰岁次乙卯年己丑月己亥日 on the Chinese calendar. ^[3] According to various calendar conversion programs such as Calendrica, the Chinese date noted is off by one day. June 1, 1900 according to the Julian calendar was actually the 18th day of the 5th month on the Chinese lunar calendar. ^[4] Father Sergiy in other accounts being listed as martyred together with his family is probably based on the account of Chinese Martyrs published in January 2000 KITAĬSKIĬ BLAGOVESTNIK. However, he have miraculously survived martyrdom and lived to give account of the Chinese Martyrs. See page 79ff in the 1935 issue of KITAĬSKIĬ BLAGOVESTNIK which by that time Fr Sergiy was mentioned as an Archpriest. ^[5] Earlier accounts have St John at age of 8 which was due to traditional Chinese method of calculating age. See Coming of Age for a Young Chinese Martyr by Mitrophan Chin.

source

Daniel and Nebouchodonosor

 

“Then Nebouchodonosor was filled with anger, and the appearance of his face was distorted against Sedrach, Misah and Abdenago. And he said that the furnace should be stoked up sevenfold until it would be heated completely and told men, strong in strength, after they had bound Sedrach, Misah and Abdenago, to throw them in the fire… And they were walking around in the middle of the flames, singing hymns to God and blessing the Lord… But the angel of the Lord came down into the furnace… and shook the flame of the fire out of the furnace and made the inside of the furnace as though a moist breeze were whistling through. And the fire did not touch them at all and caused them no pain or distress… And Nebouchodonosor heard them singing hymns and was astonished. And he rose up in haste and said to his nobles, “Was it not three men we threw bound into the middle of the fire?”…”Here I see four men unbound and walking in the middle of the fire… and the appearance of the fourth is like the son of God”. (Daniel 3: 19-20; 49-50; 91-92 [LXX])

Of all Old Testament narratives, Daniel 3 is undoubtedly the most contentious. There is, first of all, a significant difference between the Septuagint Daniel and the Hebrew text. Chapter 3 of the Septuagint is considerably longer, and contains what is known as the “Song of the Three Children”, and also mentions “The Angel of the Lord” descending into the fiery furnace. But let us leave aside the debate about which text one should use. For the Orthodox, the authoritative text is the Septuagint, full stop. The arguments made against the Septuagint by some Protestant Christians that the only texts that are divinely inspired are those which are to be found in the Hebrew canon (though the Hebrew Old Testament was not canonised until the 2nd century A.D.) are nonsensical. The Septuagint was not only used by the Jews of the Dispersion between around the 2nd Century B.C. and the 2nd Century A.D.; it has been the Christian Old Testament since the beginning of the apostolic era. All quotations from the Old Testament in the New are from the Septuagint. If we believe that the New Testament is divinely inspired, then surely the Septuagint which is quoted in the New Testament must also be divinely inspired. Furthermore, because the Septuagint was from the very beginning the Christian Old Testament, all patristic commentaries and hymns are based on the Septuagint.

But the most contentious passage in Daniel is this: “Here I see four men unbound and walking in the middle of the fire…and the appearance of the fourth is like the son of God”. Many translations read: “like a son of the gods” instead of “son of God”. There are two arguments for this translation:

1.         Nebouchodonosor was a pagan and would not have known anything about the Son of God, and therefore what he must have said is “a son of the gods”.

2.         The original Aramaic text reads “gods”, not “God”.

The problem with the first argument is two-fold. First of all, many Christians read Scripture as a work of history rather than a work of theology. By this I do not mean that Scripture is all myth and legend, and that there is nothing historically accurate about its contents; I mean that we are not to read Scripture with the mind of an historian which bases valid interpretation on timelines, literary sources, archaeology and physical evidence. This is significant for our subject, because if we read Daniel as a work of theology, then we have to ask ourselves: “Is it not possible that the author of Daniel is making a theological point with this statement, “son of God”? We must also ask: “Is it not possible that Nebouchodonosor was divinely inspired to say what he said?” Some Christians argue that since Nebouchodonosor was a pagan and not a prophet of God, this is not possible. They would do well to remember the narrative concerning Balaam and the Angel of the Lord in Numbers 22, when God speaks through Balaam’s donkey. If God can speak through a dumb animal, then can He not speak through a pagan if He so chooses?

The three holy youths cast into the fiery furnace

Secondly, is it really impossible that Nebouchodonosor did in fact know about the Son of God? As we saw in my previous article (The Angel of the Lord), the notion of a plurality in the Godhead was not alien to the prophets of the Old Testament. The Angel of the Lord, while subordinate to God, was recognised as God Himself (Genesis 16, Genesis 32, Exodus 3, Exodus 23, Judges 2, Judges 6, Judges 13. The “Spirit” of God is also mentioned in the Hebrew Scriptures (Genesis 1:1, Genesis 41:38, Numbers 11:29, 1 Kingdoms 10:6, Psalm 50:13, Joel 2:28). While we do not find the clear New Testament definition of God as Father, Son and Holy Spirit, the notion of one Godhead in a plurality of persons permeates the Old Testament Scriptures. But is it possible that the pagan king, Nebouchodonosor, also knew about the Son?

In Daniel 3 we read that Nebouchodonosor ordered that “some of the children of Israel” should be brought to teach the “learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans”. Among them were Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, whose names were quickly changed to Belteshazzar, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. In Daniel 2 we read that Nebouchodonosor had a dream and there was no one who could to tell him its meaning, but “the secret was revealed to Daniel in a night vision” (Dan. 2:19). Daniel is then brought before the king to interpret his dream. Daniel says that “there is a God in heaven that reveals secrets, and makes known to King Nebouchodonosor what shall be in the latter days.” (Dan. 2:28). Daniel continues, “You, O King, are a king of kings: for the God of heaven has given you a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory” (Dan. 2:37). Clearly the notion of one God was not foreign to Nebouchodonosor, and if it was, he was certainly now being introduced to the idea by Daniel. In response, Nebouchodonosor says: “Truly, your God is a God of gods, and a Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets” (Dan. 2:47). It is therefore not impossible that Daniel had initiated Nebouchodonosor into the mystery of the God of his Fathers.

The second argument against the Septuagint translation, “son of God”, in Daniel 3 is that in the original Aramaic text, “son of God” reads “bar-Elahin”, bar meaning ‘son’, and Elahin being the plural for ‘God’; and so it literally reads, “Son of Gods”. This argument, however, does not stand up to scrutiny when one considers that the Hebrew word for God (Elohim) is also plural; as is the Hebrew word for Lord (Adonai). In fact, this only further supports the argument that the Old Testament prophets did indeed know that there was more to God than the person of the Father.

When we consider all the manifestations of the Angel of the Lord which we examined in my previous articles, what makes Daniel 3 particularly interesting from a theological perspective is that this is the first time we hear the same Angel of the Lord described as “the Son of God”. The Greek patristic analysis of the fourth person in the furnace is clear: the Angel of the Lord who came down into the furnace was indeed the pre-incarnate Christ:

“He who delivered the Young Men from the furnace, becoming man suffers as a mortal, and through suffering he clothes the mortal with the glory of incorruption: the only blessed and most glorious God of our fathers”. (7th Ode of the Canon for Pascha)

“The Offspring of the Mother of God saved the holy children in the furnace. He who was then prefigured has since been born on earth, and he gathers all creation to sing: O all you works of the Lord, praise the Lord and exalt Him above all for ever”. (8th Ode of the Katavasia for the Mother of God)

“The all-powerful Angel of God revealed to the Children a flame that brought refreshment to the holy while it consumed the ungodly. And He made the Theotokos into a life-giving fount, gushing forth to the destruction of death and to the life of those that sing: ‘We who have been delivered praise the one and only Creator and exalt Him above all forever’.” (8th Ode of the Katavasia for the Dormition of the Mother of God)

“O Word of God who in the midst of the fire dropped dew upon the children as they discoursed on things divine, and who took up your dwelling in the pure Virgin: we praise you as with piety we sing: Blessed are you, O God of our fathers”. (7th Ode of the Katavasia for the Meeting of the Lord)

“The Babylonian furnace, as it poured forth dew, foreshadowed a marvellous mystery: how the Jordan should receive in its streams the immaterial fire, and should encompass the Creator, when He was baptised in the flesh. Bless Him O people and exalt Him above all for ever”. (8th Ode of the Katavasia for the Theophany)

source 

Belisarius, bodyguard of Emperor Justin I - Byzantine and one of the greatest generals of all time

 

Belisarius,  (born c. 505 - died March 565),born in Germane or Germania, a city that once stood on the site of present day Sapareva Banya in south-west Bulgaria, in the borders of Thrace and Illyria. Born into an Illyrian^[2][3] or Thracian^[4] family, he became a Roman soldier as a young man, serving as bodyguard of Emperor Justin I and Byzantine general, the leading military figure in the age of the Byzantine emperor Justinian I (527–565). As one of the last important figures in the Roman military tradition, he led imperial armies against the Sāsānian empire (Persia), the Vandal kingdom of North Africa, the Ostrogothic regime of Italy, and the barbarian tribes encroaching upon Constantinople.

Little is known of Belisarius’ early years. Some traditions assign him an unlikely Slavic background, but his exact origins and the precise date of his birth are undocumented. As a member of Justinian’s bodyguard, he came to the emperor’s attention, and he was appointed to a command at about the age of 25. His public career thereafter is thoroughly described by the historian Procopius, who was a member of his personal staff for the first 15 years of his campaigns and who observed the general’s activities personally. 

Belisarius won his first laurels as commander on the Mesopotamian front against the empire’s eastern neighbour and rival, Sāsānian Persia. He won a brilliant victory at Dara in 530; despite a subsequent defeat the following year at Sura (Callinicum), he emerged as the hero of the war by the time Justinian negotiated its end. Belisarius was in Constantinople, the capital, when the Nika Insurrection broke out there in January 532, and he further gained the emperor’s confidence by commanding the troops that ended the episode by massacring the rioters. About this time, meanwhile, Belisarius married the widowed Antonina, who, as an old friend to the empress Theodora, had influence at court that was later to be of great importance to him.

Justinian next chose Belisarius to begin the reconquest of the western Roman territories occupied by Germanic peoples. In 533 he was sent with a small force to attack the Vandals in North Africa. In two stunning victories he shattered the Vandal kingdom within a few months. Returning to Constantinople, he was granted a triumphal celebration. The recovery of Italy from the Ostrogoths began in 535. Belisarius quickly took Sicily and moved steadily northward on the mainland, seizing Naples by storm and occupying Rome. Revitalized under their new king, Witigis, the Goths besieged Rome in 537–538, but Belisarius held out there brilliantly. Hampered by conflicts within his command, his advance further northward was delayed, but by 540 the Goths, hard-pressed, offered to surrender if Belisarius would rule over them as emperor. Justinian had already come to fear that so popular a commander might win sufficient prestige to aim at his throne. Dissembling, Belisarius accepted the Goths’ capitulation and then refused the title, which would have proved dangerous, thus antagonizing the Goths without relieving Justinian’s suspicions.

The emperor recalled him from Italy in temporary disfavour but sent him in the following year to fight again in Mesopotamia against the Sāsānians. Despite some successes, Belisarius had difficulties with his unruly soldiers, and then he was stripped of his command on charges of disloyalty. Only Theodora’s intervention, out of friendship for Antonina, relieved his disgrace and ruin. Imperial rule had broken down in Italy under Belisarius’ incompetent successors. He was reassigned there in 544, but Justinian, more suspicious and niggardly than ever, would not back him with sufficient men and money. Belisarius operated insecurely around the Italian coasts for the next few years, even briefly holding Rome once more, but effective opposition to the Ostrogoths was impossible. Theodora died in 548, and he was soon recalled. The Italian wars were left to be completed by other generals, notably the eunuch Narses, who would receive Justinian’s fuller support.

Returning to Constantinople, Belisarius was allowed to retain his wealth and large household bodyguard. When marauding Hun tribes menaced the city in 559, the emperor summoned Belisarius back into service. Adding what men he could find to his private retinue, he frightened the Huns away by clever stratagems and then resumed his retirement. Three years later he was accused of involvement in a plot against Justinian’s life and, though probably innocent, was disgraced. Partially restored to favour in 563, he was left in peace until his death, a few months before the death of the ungrateful emperor he had served so well.

Belisarius’ character is elusive. Two primary impulses guided his life: loyalty to Justinian and passion for his wife, Antonina. Despite the treatment he often received from Justinian, Belisarius never wavered in his obedience, contributing one of the nobler dimensions to Justinian’s era. Antonina seems to have utterly captivated him, but her reckless and immoral behaviour brought him embarrassment and humiliation.

Bélisaire, by François-André Vincent (1776). Belisarius, blinded, a beggar, is recognised by one of his former soldiers

In Procopius’ Secret History (Historia arcana), Belisarius is given the least unfavourable treatment of the age’s leading personalities. His reputation endured for centuries, and later legends, often mixed with stories about others, developed about him. The most famous had him actually blinded by Justinian and forced to beg in the streets in his old age. The 18th-century French writer Jean-François Marmontel used the story of Belisarius as a vehicle for an oblique attack on Louis XV and for a plea for tolerance and justice, in his philosophical novel Bélisaire (1767). Robert Graves’s vivid novel Count Belisarius (1938) is the best fictionalized treatment of the general’s life.

source

CNN: Holy Land's Miracle: the River Jordan Reversed its Flow!

This specific video was recorded through a cell phone camera on the day before Epiphany Day (according to the Julian Calendar, on January 18, according to the "new", so-called Gregorian Calendar) in 2006, during the blessing of the waters which takes place every year on the same day in the Jordan, at the very same spot where Jesus Christ himself was baptized.

Those who have visited the Holy Land or those who plan to visit in the future, should know that when one stands on the Israeli side the current of the Jordan always flows toward the right. This can be confirmed by anyone who visits the Jordan at any time of the year.

Every year, however, on the same day (the day before Epiphany Day according to the Julian Calendar, January 18, according to the "new" Gregorian Calendar) during the blessing of the waters, the same miracle is repeated (some years with more intensity) that, according to our Holy Church, occurred when Jesus entered the Jordan to get baptized by Saint John: "the Jordan reversed its flow!"

On January 2006, I had the opportunity to witness the occurrence of the miracle and along with more than 4,000 pilgrims from various nations, observed in awe this Great and Unique miracle, which was recorded with a cell phone camera by one of the pilgrims we knew and which we considered our spiritual responsibility to share with you as infallible evidence of our Lord's presence amongst us.

During the ceremony which was led by Theophilus the Third, the Patriarch of Jerusalem (who was standing on the same bank with us, that is on Israel's side), and by one of Jordan's Orthodox priests (whom we were able to see on the other bank of the river, on the Jordanian side) the waters continue to flow as usual toward the right. However, as soon as the Patriarch and the Jordanian priest dropped the Cross into the river, chanting "En Iorthani Vaptizomenou Sou Kyrie" (that means "During your Baptism in Jordan, Lord"), the waters started mysteriously to bubble in places. The bubbling then spread, and the river developped two currents (!), one running to the right and another running to the left, with the two currents finally merging into each other! Eventually, after a few minutes, the miracle was completed! The new current was steadily flowing! The Jordan had reversed its flow like then, when God Himself was baptized in it and Blessed it!

This miraculous occurrence lasted (more or less) as long as the two Crosses remained in the river. Right after the Crosses were taken out, the Jordan started reverting to its original course (to the right) until the change was complete.

In the next few days the news of the miracle started spreading all over the world. For example in Russia, the news service "Interfax-Religion" reported the news as follows:

"Moscow, 24 January 2006: around 5,000 pilgrims from around the world became witnesses of a miracle, which took place in the holy river Jordan on Epiphany day.

Immediately after the Patriarch Theophilus of Jerusalem blessed the waters, the Jordan started flowing backwards, exactly as it did after Jesus's baptism, as the daily newspaper Zhizn (Life) wrote.

At the very moment when the silver crosses were dropped into the calm waters after the blessing, the river started bubbling, and there was turbulence in the water, while the flow of the river was reversed for several minutes.

A yell of surprise and awe from the 5,000 people present enlivened the Judaic desert. People had difficulty believing what their very own eyes could see, exactly as it was 2,000 years ago, when Jordan reversed its flow the moment Jesus Christ entered its waters."

See the Jordan River reversing its flow after the Holy Cross was dropped into its waters and believe the Truth, because, as the greatest prophet of Orthodoxy Saint Kosmas the Aetolian has taught us:

 "the depths of wisdom I explored; all religions are fake. This I truly understood: only the Orthodox Christian Faith is correct and holy. And this I finally tell you, you must be happy to be Orthodox Christians and you must lament for the unfaithful and the heretics that walk in the dark."

source