KEVIN FRITTSThM studentSaint John’s University School of Theology

Who’s This Guy? Why Zosimas is Essential to the Story of Mary of Egypt

In the Lenten observations of the Byzantine rite churches, a prominent feature is the

cycle of services for Thursday in the fifth week. The magnificent penitential canon of Saint

Andrew of Crete (c. 660–c. 740),1 which is called The Great Canon due to its length and

primacy among canons (it is thought to be one of the oldest, if not the oldest of this

uniquely Byzantine hymnographic genre),2 is sung at matins. Punctuating the singing of

matins, which revolves around this penitential canon, is the reading of the Life of Saint Mary

of Egypt, attributed to Saint Sophronius, seventh century bishop of Jerusalem (✢ 638).3

Alas, my first exposure to the Life of Saint Mary was non-liturgical. I found an English

translation of it online. This was in the early days of the public’s access to the World Wide

Web, which had previously been the domain of academics and military personnel, and

searching for anything online often seemed to be a matter of feast or famine. I was very

excited to have found the Life; subsequently, I was greatly disappointed because the

document I had downloaded actually turned out to be about some monk named Zosimas. I

scanned for several paragraphs, looking for someone named Mary to enter the scene, but

1 Kallistos Ware, “The Meaning of the Great Fast,” in The Lenten Triodion (South Canaan, PA: Saint Tikhon’s Seminary Press, 2002), 41.

2 Ibid.

3 Ibid.

the document kept talking about Zosimas. I deleted that and tried again. Every time, I

found the same document. Finally I realized that Mary does not appear until almost a third

of the way into what is ostensibly her vita!

Based on this early and infelicitous first encounter with Sophronius’ vita of Mary, I was

of the opinion that the story needed an editor. If you want to tell the story of Mary, just tell

the story of Mary! Get to the point already. It was not until hearing the vita read in the

context of the long matins service of the fifth Thursday in Lent while at Saint Vladimir’s

Seminary that I began to think that Zosimas’ character serves an essential purpose in the

story.

In what follows, I examine the historical background of Sophronius’ story, as well as its

liturgical setting within the Byzantine lenten cursus, and then proceed to a narrative analysis

of the story, with the help of Evagrius, Saint John Cassian, Abba Isidore, Amma Syncletica,

and two modern commentators.

Background and ContextPrevious versions of the story

Subsequent to Sophronius’ version of the story in Greek, Mary of Egypt became a

favorite feature of medieval hagiography in the West and even sometimes became confused

with the Magdalene,4 but it is the version attributed to Sophronius that became the basis

for later embellishment;5 it is in Sophronius’ exciting tale that we get the heroine

transformed from misunderstood singer or fallen nun into insatiable harlot.

Fritts 2

4 Benedicta Ward, SLG, Harlots of the Desert: A Study of Repentance in Early Monastic Sources, Cistercian Studies Series (Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1987), 26.

5 For later, Western versions of Saint Mary of Egypt, see Ronald Pepin and Hugh Feiss, OSB, Saint Mary of Egypt: Three Medieval Lives in Verseibid. (2005).

As is often the case with ancient and medieval texts, the attribution to Sophronius is

sometimes questioned by scholars. Maria Kouli provides a very brief summary of some of

the scholars arrayed on either side of the question or in between, but her short answer is,

whether written by Sophronius or a pseudo-Sophronius, “the work was probably composed

in the seventh century [i.e., contemporaneous with Sophronius], since in the eighth century

it was cited by John of Damascus and translated into Latin.”6 In what follows, I follow the

traditional attribution to Sophronius for the sake of ease and simplicity of identification.

Prior to Sophronius, at least three other versions of the story exist.7 The earliest version

comes to us via Cyril of Scythopolis, who tells the tale of a young Maria in his Life of Saint

Cyriacus. Cyril’s Maria is a canoness8 or a ψάλτρια9 in the Church of the Resurrection in

Jerusalem10 who flees to the desert to avoid scandal. Efthalia Makris Walsh writes of this

Maria, “[F]earing that she might be found responsible for the devil’s ensnarement, through

her, of many men, [she] left Jerusalem and lived for many years in a cave.” The translation in

Benedicta Ward, however, paints a slightly graver picture: “[B]y the fault of the devil I

became an object of scandal to many. Fearing that, although I had already done penance for the

Fritts 3

6 Maria Kouli, “Life of St. Mary of Egypt,” in Holy Women of Byzantium: Ten Saints’ Lives in Translation, ed. Alice-Mary Talbot, Byzantine Saints’ Lives in Translation (Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks, 1996), 66. Virginia Burrus, who will be cited heavily in the narrative analysis below, accepts the argument of Paul Harvey supporting Sophronian authorship (“Mary the Egyptian: Sources and Purpose”; this apparently unpublished paper may be the same as or a previous version of “‘A Traveler from an Antique Land’: Sources, Context, and Dissemination of the Hagiography of Mary the Egyptian.,” in Egypt, Israel, and the Ancient Mediterranean World: Studies in Honor of Donald B. Redford, ed. D.B. Redford, G.N. Knoppers, and A. Hirsch (Leiden, NL: Brill, 2004).) Virginia Burrus, The Sex Lives of Saints: An Erotics of Ancient Hagiography (Philadelphia, Pa.: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004), 192 n3.

7 Efthalia Makris Walsh, “The Ascetic Mother Mary of Egypt,” Greek Orthodox Theological Review 34, no. 1 (1989): 61.; cf. Ward, Harlots of the Desert: A Study of Repentance in Early Monastic Sources, 28–32.

8 Ibid., 28.

9 Walsh, “The Ascetic Mother Mary of Egypt,” 61.

10 The Ανάστασις [Anástasis], built over the traditional site of Jesus’ tomb.

cause of the scandal, I would add sin to sin (Eccl 3.29) I prayed to God that He would

remove the cause of the scandal.”11 In this version, Maria has performed a penance for

causing scandal, which may indicate her complicity in it, though not necessarily. Walsh notes

that Roman law under Justinian provided that a deaconess who was assaulted against her

will (i.e., she was innocent) was still to be sent to a monastery for several years.12 The Maria

in Cyril’s tale may not be a deaconess, but as an ecclesiastical singer, she is an ecclesiastical

functionary and some similar discipline may have been at work.

In the version found in John Moschus’ Spiritual Meadow, the woman is an anonymous

Hagiopolite nun who discovers that she has become the subject of “a satanic desire”

implanted in “a certain young man.” She withdraws to the desert in order to avoid being the

cause of his temptation. Whereas Cyril’s Maria is found somewhat by accident, Moschus’

nun is revealed “by the providence of God, so that her virtuous conduct should not remain

unknown….”13

Yet another version lengthens considerably the tale which Cyril and Moschus relate.

Benedicta Ward provides a translation of an anonymous vita found in the Bibliotheca

Hagiographica Graeca. In this account, the nun (here, a “consecrated virgin living in the Holy

Sepulchre”) has progressed from being an innocent source of temptation to being complicit

in an affair with a monk. Upon coming to the monk’s cell and being ignored, compunction

pierces her conscience when she hears him (rather conspicuously) bewailing his sins and

begging God for mercy. Spurred by his repentance, she flees to the desert to do the same.14

Fritts 4

11 Ward, Harlots of the Desert: A Study of Repentance in Early Monastic Sources, 28. Emphasis added.

12 “The Ascetic Mother Mary of Egypt,” 62.

13 John Moschus, Spiritual Meadow, 179.

14 Ward, Harlots of the Desert: A Study of Repentance in Early Monastic Sources, 29–32.

All of these stories feature several shared elements, many of which are also shared by

Sophronius’ narrative of the Egyptian Mary:

•A woman of Jerusalem, in some way dedicated to the Lord’s service,

•Flees into the Palestinian desert beyond the Jordan.

•She takes with her food and water that miraculously does not diminish, and

•A wandering monk or monks serendipitously finds her and learns her story.

Two of the three share the following tropes (they are absent from Moschus’ narrative):

•The monk(s) are dismissed and asked to return, at which time they discover that she has

reposed in the Lord.

•The story begins with the desert amma being mistaken for a man.

One other antecedent story deserves explicit notice: Saint Jerome’s Life of Paul the

Hermit. Sophronius’ vita of Mary of Egypt shares so much in common with the Hieronymian

vita of Paul, that it must be said that Sophronius uses Jerome’s narrative as a model for his

own.15 This rhetorical imitatio Hieronymi features prominently in the narrative analysis below.

Historicity of the underlying characters

Given the clear similarity of all these tales, it is difficult to know how to judge the

historicity of the underlying tropes. Ward generously notes the basic possibility of an

underlying historical kernel: “The story [of Sophronius] seems to fall into two parts: a sinful

woman in the holy sepulchre, and a repentant woman in the desert.” She writes, “There is

nothing impossible about the framework of either story, and the two parts have parallels

Fritts 5

15 Lynda L. Coon, Sacred Fictions: Holy Women and Hagiography in Late Antiquity (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1997), 87.

elsewhere.”16 Her implication here seems to be that the existence of multiple versions of the

same story indicates a likely grain of historical facticity.

Kouli, likewise, allows the possibility that someone historical had a story like Mary’s.

“There were indeed female solitaries in both the Syro-Palestinian and Egyptian deserts, and

one of them may well have inspired the edifying tale of Mary of Egypt.” However, “since

Cyril of Skythopolis describes a similar female hermit around the middle of the sixth

century,” the scholar “must treat with skepticism” Sophronius’ vigorous protestations “that

the events he relates occurred in his own time.” Indeed, Sophronius’ tale “is almost totally

lacking in fixed chronological reference points, indicating only Mary’s age at various stages

in her life.” As a result, “[d]espite the attempts of certain scholars, it is impossible to provide

a chronology for the life of Mary, or even to establish her historicity”17—or lack thereof.

Walsh is the most generous, assuming rather than proving the historicity of an

underlying Mary. “Neither [Cyril’s nor Moschus’] version of Mother Mary's life specifies that

she was one of these women, but Mary's departure from Jerusalem because men found her

attractive, as both Moschos and Cyril of Scythopolis attest, does suggest that this may have

been the case.”18

Before analyzing Sophronius’ tale, it would be helpful to see some elements of the

setting in which most Eastern monks (and subsequently, most Eastern laity, as well) have

experienced the life of Saint Mary.

Fritts 6

16 Ward, Harlots of the Desert: A Study of Repentance in Early Monastic Sources, 28.

17 Kouli, “Life of St. Mary of Egypt,” 66–67. Kouli notes K. Doukakes’ nineteenth century Μέγας Συναξαριστής as an example of such a scholar.

18 Walsh, “The Ascetic Mother Mary of Egypt,” 62.

The Great Canon of Saint Andrew of Crete

Sophronius’ vita becomes most familiar to Eastern Christians through its being read in

the setting of the Great Canon of Saint Andrew of Crete, as I mentioned above. The singing

of the Great Canon, also composed in the seventh century,19 was likely already a fixed

feature in the Palestinian Lenten order by the ninth century, when Saint Theodore the

Studite’s reforms bring the practice of the Palestinian Monastery of Saint Sabas to

Constantinople in the wake of the controversy over the icons.20 Saint Andrew possibly never

intended for his magniloquent hymn to repentance to be sung liturgically; Metropolitan

Kallistos (Timothy Ware) says that the Great Canon “apparently [was] composed towards

the end of [Saint Andrew’s] life—he refers many times to his old age—and intended by its

author as an expression of personal devotion rather than for public liturgical use.”21 The

juxtaposition of the Great Canon and Sophronius’ vita likely never occurred to either writer

but rather happened organically as a rousing bugle call to repentance at the end of the Great

Fast.

The most prominent feature of the canon is Andrew’s use of biblical figures to provide

examples, negative and positive, often addressed to his soul. A few characteristic verses from

the Great Canon and other hymns from the same service will provide a sense of the context

in which Sophronius’ story would have been heard by many monks:

* Refrain: Have mercy on me, O God; have mercy on me.Like Joshua the son of Nun, search and spy out, O my soul, the land of your inheritance and take up your dwelling within it, through obedience to the law.

Fritts 7

19 Ware, “The Meaning of the Great Fast,” 41.

20 Thomas Pott, Byzantine Liturgical Reform: A Study of Liturgical Change in the Byzantine Tradition, trans. Paul Meyendorff, Orthodox Liturgy Series (Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2010), 121–24.

21 Ware, “The Meaning of the Great Fast,” 41.

* Refrain: Have mercy on me, O God; have mercy on me.Rise up and make war against the passions of the flesh, as Joshua against Amalek, ever gaining the victory over the Gibeonites, your deceitful thoughts [τοὺς ἀπατηλοὺς λογισμούς]. …* Refrain: Have mercy on me, O God; have mercy on me.O savior, I am the coin marked with the king’s likeness, which you lost of old. But light your lamp, your Forerunner, O Word, and seek and find again your image.* Refrain: Holy Mother Mary, pray to God for us.Your soul on fire, O Mary, you ever shed streams of tears, to quench the burning of the passions. Grant the grace of these, your tears, also to me, your servant.22

These verses are then followed by this hymn, the kontakion, which concisely presents the

theme of the canon and of the entire service:

My soul, O my soul! Rise up! How long will you sleep? The end draws near and anguish will soon overwhelm you. Rouse yourself, then; watch and be ready., that you may win mercy from Christ, who is everywhere present and fills all things.23

As admitted above, this liturgical juxtaposition almost certainly was not the intended

setting of either the vita of Mary or the Great Canon. However, the vita’s setting would

have surely been a monastic reading, either as part of the daily office or at table in the

monastic refectory or dining hall. Indeed, it would not be much of a stretch to imagine an

initial juxtaposition in which the reading of the vita serendipitously coincided with the

singing of the Great Canon, with the resulting pathos demanding an annual repetition of the

coupling. In any case, the initial audience of the tale was certainly monastic; the analysis

which follows underscores this point.

Fritts 8

22 Ode VI of the Great Canon. Trans. alt. from The Lenten Triodion (South Canaan, PA: Saint Tikhon's Seminary Press, 2002), 398. The troparia (verses) to Ss. Mary and Andrew obviously date from later than Andrew’s original composition.

23 Kontakion, Fifth Thursday in Great Lent. Trans. the Monks of New Skete, Troparia and Kondakia (Cambridge, NY: Monks of New Skete, 1984), 20.

Summary of Sophronius’ Life of Saint Mary of EgyptIntroductory remarks and Introduction of Zosimas24

Sophronius begins with eloquent declamations that the incredible tale we are about to

hear is absolutely true, and he could not keep silent even if he desired to. As mentioned

previously, we are first introduced to Zosimas. Zosimas, we are told, has been in the

monastery since being weaned.25 After many years of obeying the rule of his monastery,

ceaselessly singing psalms and studying the scripture, and acting as spiritual father or guide

to many monks far and wide, he begins to be “disturbed, as he said, by certain thoughts,

namely, that he had become perfect in all practices and did not need anyone else’s teaching

at all.”

Translation to Monastery of the Forerunner on the Jordan

At this point “someone” (the Greek has no subject, implying generic subject; the

Slavonic appears to have an angel speaking)26 comes to Zosimas and commends him on his

labors. However, “there is no man on earth who has achieved perfection. …In order for you

to learn how many other ways lead to salvation …go to that monastery …near the river

Jordan.” He goes and is accepted by the abbot of the monastery, where he finds monks that

are his equal in every good monastic work: singing psalms, keeping vigil, meditating on the

Fritts 9

24 In the summary that follows, quotes are from the translation by Maria Kouli unless other wise noted. Sophronius of Jerusalem, “The Life of Mary of Egypt, the Former Harlot, Who in Blessed Manner Became an Ascetic in the Desert of the <River> Jordan.,” in Holy Women of Byzantium: Ten Saints’ Lives in Translation, ed. Alice-Mary Talbot, Byzantine Saints’ Lives in Translation (Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks, 1996). The I have omitted the brackets with which Kouli notes her interpolations. Greek text of Sophronius is found in Patrologia Graeca (PG) 87:3697–3726.

25 Kouli notes that she has read μητρικών for πατρικών, which seems to be a vey common reading, as most translations prefer it.

26 See “The Life of Our Holy Mother Mary of Egypt,” in The Great Canon of Saint Andrew of Crete (Jordanville, NY: Holy Trinity Monastery, 2005), 82.

scriptures, strict diet. “When Zosimas saw these struggles, as he said, he was greatly edified,

striving for progress and constantly intensifying his course of monastic life, since he had

found fellow travelers who were admirably re-creating the divine paradise.”

This monastery, we are told, has a custom whereby all the monks leave the monastery

during Lent and live as anchorites or hermits in the desert. Zosimas journeys into “the

innermost part of the desert,” a key ideal for monasticism, and a key phrase for our story,

“hoping to find a holy father dwelling there, who could help him to find what he longed for.”

Introduction of Mary and her story

One day, while resting and chanting psalms and hymns, he sees a figure which he at first

thinks is a demonic phantasm but then realizes it to be a human figure. Chasing the

creature, he begs the “slave (male) of the existing God (δοὖλε του ὄντος Θεού)”27 to stop.

The creature stops and clairvoyantly calls Zosimas by name and tells him that he cannot see

her “face to face” because she is a a woman and naked; she asks him to throw her his cloak.

Both bow to each other, each begging the other’s blessing. Finally, Mary relents and gives a

blessing, “Blessed be God, Who is concerned for the salvation of men [ἀνθρώπων] and

their souls.”28

After the woman assures Zosimas, again reading his thoughts, that she is neither a

phantasm nor a demon, Zosimas begs her to tell him how she came to be in the desert—no

doubt expecting to hear about her ascetic exploits—she again relents and describes her life:

She came from Egypt. At twelve she ran away from home to Alexandria, and engage in every

sort of licentious and lustful activity. “For more than seventeen years—please forgive me—I

Fritts 10

27 PG 87:3705 Trans. mine.

28 The genitive plural ἀνθρώπων can be either masculine or feminine—referring to either multiple men, multiple women, both, or humankind as a whole.

was a public temptation to licentiousness, not for payment, I swear, since I did not accept

anything although men often wished to pay me.” One day, she saw attractive young men

running down to the seaport, and she follows hoping for more sexual exploits. She trades

the use of her body in exchange for passage; the ship is bound for Jerusalem, where the

pilgrims will take part in the Exaltation of the Holy Cross. In transit, her lust knows no

bounds, and at Jerusalem she continued “hunting after the souls of young men” until she was

swept away with the crowd on its way to the Church of the Resurrection for the Exaltation

of the Cross. On arriving, she was miraculously prevented from entering by “some kind of

divine power [which] held me back.”

In the courtyard—the space allotted for penitents—she wept before the icon of the

Mother of God, begging to be allowed into the church and venerate the relics of her Son’s

Passion, promising to repent of her sins and abandon her former life. “As soon as I spoke

these words, I received the fire of faith,” and, “[t]hus I found myself inside the Holy

[place],29 and I was deemed worthy to see the life-giving cross, and saw the mysteries of God

and knew that He is always ready to accept our repentance.” She heard a voice telling her, “If

you cross the river Jordan, you shall find a fine place of repose.”

Mary bought three loaves of bread and headed for the Jordan. Once there, she washed

her face and hands in the sacred waters and receives communion before crossing the Jordan.

She spends seventeen years fighting her passions (equal to the number she spent a slave to

Fritts 11

29 PG 87:3713 Kouli has “the Holy <of Holies>,” an interpolation I feel is unjustified here, as that term seems more appropriate to the sacred space within the templon (an architectural feature roughly corresponding to today’s icon screen in the East or the medieval rood screen in the West).

them).30 When her battle against her passions was complete, she saw “light shining

everywhere around” her, an allusion connecting her to the Life of Saint Anthony written by

Saint Athanasius, the fourth century archbishop of Alexandria.

Burial of Mary and concluding remarks

Mary correctly predicts that Zosimas will be too ill to sojourn in the desert according to

the custom of the monastery, but will be able to bring to her holy communion on the

Thursday of Passion Week (Maundy Thursday). They rendezvous at the Jordan, which she is

able to cross by walking on the water. However, when next he sees her, she has reposed,

miraculously inscribing her name in the sand along with a message to Zosimas (as she

professed to be completely illiterate).

Zosimas weeps over the reposed Mary, “bath[ing] the feet of the blessed woman with his

tears, for he did not dare to touch any other part <of her body>.” Instructed by her message

to bury her, he tries in vain to dig in the dry ground with a small piece of wood. At this

point, the parallels to Jerome’s Life of Paul the Hermit are unmistakable,31 as a lion appears

from out of the desert and digs a grave for her body. Zosimas returns to the monastery, now

free to tell the brothers what has transpired, a story passed orally up until Sophronius’ time

(so we are told), which he commits to writing for our benefit, that we may imitate this

blessed lady.

Fritts 12

30 Also the number of years the anonymous woman in John Moschus’ tale spent in the desert. It is possible that there is a numerological significance to the number seventeen. It is the seventh prime number, and (for reasons related to Osiris and the lunar calendar) it is considered an abomination by Pythagoreans (Plutarch, Moralia 42).

31 Burrus 154

The key: the thought of prideDisturbed by thoughts

The key to unlock this story that Sophronius has narrated arrives very early. Zosimas

begins to be

disturbed, as he said, by certain thoughts (λογισμῶν), namely, that he had become perfect in all practices and did not need anyone else’s teaching at all. For, as he said, he thought to himself, “Is there a monk on earth who can teach me anything new, or who has the power to help me in any form of ascetic discipline that I do not know or have never practiced? Is there any man among those leading a contemplative life in the desert who surpasses me in ascetic practice or spiritual contemplation?”

The first notch in this key are the thoughts: Zosimas is being disturbed “by certain

thoughts.” Thoughts (λογισμοί), their destructive power, and the weapons with which to

fight them, form the heart of the monastic spiritual tradition. Evagrius of Pontus, John

Cassian, and the sayings of the desert fathers will be taken as exemplary of this tradition.

Evagrius, upon arriving in the Egyptian desert, found a wealth of knowledge, drawn from

practical experience battling passions and thoughts. He organized the teachings on the

thoughts into eight categories—eight thoughts that the ascetic battles.32 Saint John Cassian

translates Evagrius’ work and presents it to the nascent Western monastic tradition.33 The

birth of the monastic tradition occurred in the deserts of Egypt, so the monastic tradition

holds the fathers and mothers of that desert tradition in high esteem.

Thoughts (particularly disturbing, intrusive thoughts such as the ones attacking Zosimas

in our story) do not arise from within; they are not within our control, according to the

monastic psychology. “Intense conflict with demons, …especially in the form of thoughts,

Fritts 13

32 John Eudes Bamberger, “Introduction,” in Evagrius: The Praktikos & Chapters on Prayer (Spencer, MA: Cistercian Publications, 1970), lxviii.

33 Ibid.

lay at the heart of the early Egyptian monk’s struggle for virtue, purity of heart, and thus for

salvation,” writes David Brakke in his introduction to Talking Back, his translation of

Evagrius’ Antirrhetikos, “In Talking Back we find the thoughts, circumstances, and anxieties

with which the demons assailed the monk, and we observe a primary strategy in the struggle

to overcome such assaults: antirrhēsis, the speaking of relevant passages from the Bible that

would contradict or, as Evagrius puts it, cut off the demonic suggestions.”34 This also helps

explain the heavy use of scriptural allusions and quotations throughout the Sophronian tale.

Evagrius, Cassian, and the desert fathers and mothers on pride

The second notch in our key to understanding Mary’s vita is the content of the thoughts

that torment Zosimas: That he has surpassed every other monk and there is no one to guide

him. The thought of pride attacks experienced monastics by tempting them to trust in their

own efforts and think of themselves as better than others.35 Pride is particularly destructive

because it destroys and contaminates any good work an ascetic has accomplished. Robert

Sinkewicz, in his introduction to The Greek Ascetic Corpus, writes, “The monk overcome by

pride is abandoned by God and has left himself open to demonic fantasies, terrifying visions,

and nightmares, which can destroy his mental and emotional balance, driving him to

madness.”36

In the Antirrhetikos, one of the scriptural quotes Evagrius provides for use against pride

is “Against the demon that said to me, ‘Look, you have become a perfect monk’: There is hope

Fritts 14

34 David Brakke, “Introduction,” in Talking Back: A Monastic Handbook for Combating Demons (Trappist, KY: Cistercian Publications 2009), 2.

35 Robert E. Sinkewicz, Evagrius of Pontus: The Greek Ascetic Corpus (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), xxx.

36 Ibid., xxxi.

because a living dog is better than a dead lion (Qo 9:4).”37 Or, “Against the proud thought that

considered me pure and victorious: Who will boast that he has a pure heart? Or who will boldly

say that he is pure from sins? (Prov 20:9).”

Cassian also has strong words against the thought of pride. In The Institutes 12.7, he

writes,

How great the evil of pride is, that it deserves to have as its adversary not an angel or other virtues contrary to it but rather God himself! For it must be noted that it is never said of those who are caught up in the other vices that the Lord resists them, or that the Lord is set against the gluttonous, or fornicators, or the angry, or the avaricious; this is true of the proud alone. For those vices only turn back upon wrongdoers or seem to be committed against those who have a part in them—that is, against other human beings. This one [pride], however, of its very nature touches God, and therefore it is specially worthy of having God opposed to it.

The desert fathers and mothers, too, had strong words against pride. Two examples are

Abba Isidore and Amma Syncletica. “[Abba Isidore] also said, ‘If you fast regularly, do not be

inflamed with pride, but if you think highly of yourself because of it, then you had better eat

meat. It is better for a man to eat meat than to be inflamed with pride and to glorify

himself.’”38 The desert attracted female ascetics, too: “[Amma Syncletica] also said, ‘As long

as we are in the monastery, obedience is preferable to asceticism. The one teaches pride, the

other humility.’” (No doubt some poor sister objected to having her zeal for ascetic feats be

tempered by her abbess.)

Returning to Evagrius, in On the Eight Thoughts, his final word on pride reads, “Humility

is the parapet of a housetop, and it keeps safe the one who gets up upon it (Deut. 22: 8).

When you ascend to the height of the virtues, then you will have much need of security. He

Fritts 15

37 Evagrius, Antirrhetikos, 839. Qoheleth (Qo) is the Hebrew name for the book known in Greek, Latin, and English as Ecclesiastes.

38 Benedicta Ward, SLG, The Sayings of the Desert Fathers: The Alphabetical Collection, trans. Benedicta Ward, SLGibid. (Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1984), 106–07.

who falls at ground level gets up quickly, but he who falls from a high place is in danger of

death.”39 The monastic audience hearing Sophronius’ story would have immediately

understood the danger in the proud thought that begins to torment Zosimas. It would have

been a bright red Chekov’s gun placed over the mantlepiece—someone will need to take it

down by the final act.

Narrative analysis of the textZosimas as quintessential monk, “the monk’s monk”

Although we have seen that the “certain thoughts (λογισμῶν)” of pride that disturb

Zosimas are a red flag, Sophronius carefully avoids characterizing Zosimas as a proud monk:

He’s disturbed by these thoughts, and though he does not dismiss them, say in the manner

of the Antirrhetikos, neither does he precisely give in to the temptation to pride. Several

other aspects of Zosimas’ characterization merit a similar examination. Zosimas moves from

his original monastery to a new one, seeking a more perfect asceticism and a more perfect

guide or spiritual father, but he does this out of obedience. While one can detect the hint of

rebuke in the words of his new abbot, he never openly reproves Zosimas.

So, although Zosimas’ character rides a razors edge, a thin line between perfect monk

and deluded monk, he generally comes off as remaining on the perfect monk side. He has

been a monk since he was a young boy; he has been perfectly obedient, and he has mastered

the monastic disciplines such that he is a sought after spiritual guide. We are tempted to

think that Zosimas represents the ideal of monastic life—the monk’s monk, so to speak. In

fact, therein lies the deception, and it will be unmasked in a shocking way.

Fritts 16

39 Evagrius, On the Eight Thoughts, 8.32.

Mary as the anti-monk, the “sinner’s sinner”

When first we encounter Mary, Zosimas wonders if she might be a demonic phantasm,

evoking Christ’s temptation in the wilderness,40 but from the beginning she is shown to be

an ascetic who charismatically gains the authority for spiritual guidance. She is characterized

as a thaumaturge—a wonder-worker—who unselfconsciously commands the created order:

by clairvoyance and by levitating a cubit (a foot and a half)41 above the ground. So before she

begins narrating her life, the story within the story, we already know she’s a living saint

(whereas we may have wondered about Zosimas’ sanctity).

Once she begins telling her story, however, she reveals herself to have been a harlot

among harlots—the sinner’s sinner, as it were. From her own youth, she too left her home,

but to seek sexual adventure. In embodying the archetypal “sinful woman,” Lynda Coon

writes, “By classical standards, Mary was the worst kind of harlot because she engaged in

intercourse not from financial need but to satisfy lust. She always carried a spindle, as if to

mock the distaffs of the chaste, charitable women of sacred and classical discourse.”42

Virginia Burrus concurs: “She is not a prostitute but something still worse: ‘I did not accept

anything although men often wished to pay me.’ She thereby converts her lust into ‘a free

gift,’ as she puts it. Nor does she refuse money because she does not need it: ‘You should not

think that I did not accept payment because I was rich, for I lived by begging and often by

spinning coarse flax fibers.. The truth is that I had insatiable passion.’”43

Fritts 17

40 Coon, Sacred Fictions: Holy Women and Hagiography in Late Antiquity, 86.

41 Richard J. Clifford, SJ and Roland E. Murphy, OCarm, “Genesis,” in The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, ed. Raymond E. Brown, Joseph A. Fitzmyer, and Roland E. Murphy (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1990), 2.12.

42 Coon, Sacred Fictions: Holy Women and Hagiography in Late Antiquity, 86–87.

43 Burrus, The Sex Lives of Saints: An Erotics of Ancient Hagiography, 150.

When Mary says that Zosimas will “run from her as from a snake,” Sophronius connects

Mary to the fallen Eve.44 Her travels to Jerusalem are “a perverted pilgrimage”; her lascivious

acts “invert the Christian apostolic mission.”45 She is the exact opposite of Zosimas; Coon

writes, “Before narrating the miraculous conversion of her sinful existence, the saint warns

Zosimas that her life has been the exact opposite of priests, God’s chosen vessels, for she had

been the ‘chosen vessel of the devil.’”46 She is even his exact opposite in gender; yet, despite

her protestation, she herself becomes God’s chosen vessel for Zosimas’ redemption.

Mary as Christ figure

At the center of both her story and the entire narrative, we find Mary repenting and

consecrating her life to the Mother of God, and by extension to her Son, the relics of whose

Passion she venerates at the center of this somewhat chiastic narrative. Her repentance is so

complete, her appearance changes; she is hailed as an amma and given alms by a pious

Christian. At the Jordan, she washes herself, evoking baptism47 and Thecla’s self-baptism.48

Sophronius carefully and skillfully uses subtle biblical allusion to tie Mary to biblical

figures, including prophets and wonder-workers,49 and ultimately characterizes her as a

Christ figure. The initial contact between Mary and Zosimas invokes the image of

the temptation of Jesus in the desert by the devil but ultimately inverts it—who

Fritts 18

44 Coon, Sacred Fictions: Holy Women and Hagiography in Late Antiquity, 86.

45 Ibid., 87.

46 Ibid., 86. Emphasis added.

47 Ibid., 87. The baptismal imagery is particularly strong since she immediately goes and receives the sacrament of communion.

48 Burrus, The Sex Lives of Saints: An Erotics of Ancient Hagiography, 196 n55.

49 Coon, Sacred Fictions: Holy Women and Hagiography in Late Antiquity, 84.

is tempting whom? The initial description of her as dark complected with hair “white like

wool” alludes to the image of the son of man, the apocalyptic Messiah, in Saint John’s

Apocalypse or Revelation (1.14)50 and, by extension, to the Ancient of Days (Daniel 7.9). She

leaves home at twelve (the age at which Christ abandoned his parents and taught in the

temple [Lk 2.41–49]), and she spends thirty years in the desert after seventeen years battling

her passions, possibly a reference to the age at which Christ began his preaching ministry.51

Zosimas, chastened, as disciple of Mary

Coon notes that Sophronius consciously places Mary and Zosimas in a master-disciple

relationship (after all, this is what he has been seeking throughout the entire story, as we are

reminded explicitly immediately prior to their first encounter). After describing her

conversion and repentance in the desert,

the hagiographer employs the rhetoric of inversion from the gospels in order to make a spiritual point about miraculous power. A favorite motif of the evangelists uses spiritual doubters to prove the wonder-working abilities of Christ. In the Life of Mary of Egypt, it is not the ex-harlot who functions as the “doubting Thomas,” but a priest, Zosimas. In Matthew (6.31-34) unfaithful men ask Jesus: “What shall we eat? What shall we drink? What shall we wear?” Zosimas, in like fashion, asks the holy woman: “What have you been able to find to eat? Have you passed this length of time without suffering? Did you not have any food or vestments?” Mary, like Christ, convinces the doubting Zosimas that God has mandated her ascetic and charismatic life. In her vita, Mary becomes confessor, absolver, and prophet….* At the end of the narrative, the hagiographer provides a second significant gender reversal. Zosimas journeys again to the desert to administer communion to Mary, only to find her dead. Zosimas responds to this discovery by expressing for Mary the same piety Mary Magdalene demonstrates for Christ (Matthew 26.6-13; Mark 14.3-9; Luke 7.36-50; John 12.1-8): “He saw the holy one lying dead, her hands folded and her face turned to the East. Running up to her, he watered the feet of the blessed one with tears; otherwise he did not dare to touch her. He wept for some time.” The hagiographer emphasizes the intense feelings of Zosimas by framing him in the evangelical role of Mary Magdalene and the Virgin Mary at the cross. Zosimas

Fritts 19

50 Ibid., 85.

51 Burrus, The Sex Lives of Saints: An Erotics of Ancient Hagiography, 196 n53.

anoints Mary with his tears, weeps for her, covers her with his monastic cloak, and buries her with maternal care; he dares not touch her, just as the Magdalene was instructed not to touch the risen Christ (John 20.17). The hagiographer represents Zosimas emotionally identifying with the saint to the extent that he is seen to assume the persona of both Mary Magdalene and Mary of Egypt.52

While Coon’s argument focuses more on the gender stereotypes being subverted here, her

excellent insights support my argument that Zosimas has been chastened, subtly, and

transformed into a disciple of Mary, the Christ figure. Sending Zosimas back to his

monastery mimics St Paul’s dismissal of Anthony (cf. Life of Paul 12), and Mary

crossing the Jordan by walking on the water invokes Jesus coming to his

disciples,53 emphasizing that Zosimas is now the disciple; Mary is the master.

ConclusionAt the center of the double narrative, as mentioned above, is Mary’s repentance. The

inversion and characterization of Zosimas as ambiguously perfect monk and Mary as chief

among sinners (echoing the Apostle’s self-identification) leads to that center: The perfect

ascetic—tonsured monk or para-ecclesial anchorite—is the ascetic who perfectly repents. At

the end of the story, Zosimas is a disciple of Mary, the mistress of perfect repentance. “As

soon as I spoke these words [of repentance], I received the fire of faith…. Thus I found

myself inside the Holy [place], and I was deemed worthy to see the life-giving cross, and saw

the mysteries of God and knew that He is always ready to accept our repentance.”

Fritts 20

52 Coon, Sacred Fictions: Holy Women and Hagiography in Late Antiquity, 88.

53 Burrus, The Sex Lives of Saints: An Erotics of Ancient Hagiography, 153.

BibliographyBamberger, John Eudes. “Introduction.” In Evagrius: The Praktikos & Chapters on Prayer.

Spencer, MA: Cistercian Publications, 1970.

Behr, John, Andrew Louth, and Dimitri Conomos, eds. Abba: The Tradition of Orthodoxy in the

West: Festschrift for Bishop Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s

Seminary Press, 2003.

Brakke, David. “Introduction.” In Talking Back: A Monastic Handbook for Combating Demons.

Trappist, KY: Cistercian Publications, 2009.

Burrus, Virginia. The Sex Lives of Saints: An Erotics of Ancient Hagiography [in English].

Philadelphia, Pa.: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004.

Cassian, John. The Institutes. Translated by Boniface Ramsey, Ancient Christian Writers. New

York: Newman Press, 2000.

Clifford, Richard J., SJ, and Roland E. Murphy, OCarm. “Genesis.” In The New Jerome Biblical

Commentary, edited by Raymond E. Brown, Joseph A. Fitzmyer and Roland E.

Murphy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1990.

Coon, Lynda L. Sacred Fictions: Holy Women and Hagiography in Late Antiquity [in English].

Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1997.

Evagrius. Antirrhetikos (Talking Back: A Monastic Handbook for Combating Demons). Translated

by David Brakke, Cistercian Studies. Trappist, KY: Cistercian Publications 2009.

———. On the Eight Thoughts. In Sinkewicz, trans., The Greek Ascetic Corpus. (Cited below.)

Foss, Sonja. Rhetorical Criticism: Exploration and Practice. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland

Press, 1989.

Fritts 21

Harvey, Paul. “‘A Traveler from an Antique Land’: Sources, Context, and Dissemination of

the Hagiography of Mary the Egyptian.”. In Egypt, Israel, and the Ancient Mediterranean

World: Studies in Honor of Donald B. Redford, edited by D.B. Redford, G.N. Knoppers

and A. Hirsch. Leiden, NL: Brill, 2004.

Kouli, Maria. “Life of St. Mary of Egypt.” In Holy Women of Byzantium: Ten Saints’ Lives in

Translation, edited by Alice-Mary Talbot. Byzantine Saints’ Lives in Translation.

Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks, 1996.

Monks of New Skete. Troparia and Kondakia. Cambridge, NY: Monks of New Skete, 1984.

Moschus, John. The Spiritual Meadow. Translated by John Wortley. Kalamazoo, MI:

Cistercian Publications, 1992.

Pepin, Ronald, and Hugh Feiss, OSB. Saint Mary of Egypt: Three Medieval Lives in Verse.

Cistercian Studies Series. Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 2005.

Pott, Thomas. Byzantine Liturgical Reform: A Study of Liturgical Change in the Byzantine Tradition

[in Translated from the French title "La réforme liturgique byzantine : étude du

phénomène de l'evolution non-spontanée de la liturgie byzantine."]. Translated by

Paul Meyendorff. Orthodox Liturgy Series. Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir's Seminary

Press, 2010.

Powell, Mark Allen. What Is Narrative Criticism? Guides to Biblical Scholarship. edited by

Dan O. Via, Jr. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990.

Sinkewicz, Robert E. Evagrius of Pontus: The Greek Ascetic Corpus [in English]. Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2003.

Sophronius of Jerusalem. “The Life of Mary of Egypt, the Former Harlot, Who in Blessed

Manner Became an Ascetic in the Desert of the <River> Jordan.” Translated by Maria

Fritts 22

Kouli. In Holy Women of Byzantium: Ten Saints’ Lives in Translation, edited by Alice-Mary

Talbot. Byzantine Saints’ Lives in Translation. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks,

1996.

———. “The Life of Our Holy Mother Mary of Egypt.” In The Great Canon of Saint Andrew

of Crete. Jordanville, NY: Holy Trinity Monastery, 2005.

Walsh, Efthalia Makris. “The Ascetic Mother Mary of Egypt.” Greek Orthodox Theological

Review 34, no. 1 (1989): 59-69.

Ward, Benedicta, SLG. Harlots of the Desert: A Study of Repentance in Early Monastic Sources.

Cistercian Studies Series. Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1987.

———. The Sayings of the Desert Fathers: The Alphabetical Collection. Translated by Benedicta

Ward, SLG. Cistercian Studies. Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1984.

Ware, Kallistos, and Mother Mary. The Lenten Triodion. South Canaan, PA: Saint Tikhon's

Seminary Press, 2002.

Fritts 23

BibliographyBamberger, John Eudes. “Introduction.” In Evagrius: The Praktikos & Chapters on Prayer.

Spencer, MA: Cistercian Publications, 1970.

Brakke, David. “Introduction.” In Talking Back: A Monastic Handbook for Combating Demons.

Trappist, KY: Cistercian Publications 2009.

Burrus, Virginia. The Sex Lives of Saints: An Erotics of Ancient Hagiography [in English].

Philadelphia, Pa.: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004.

Clifford, Richard J., SJ, and Roland E. Murphy, OCarm. “Genesis.” In The New Jerome Biblical

Commentary, edited by Raymond E. Brown, Joseph A. Fitzmyer and Roland E.

Murphy. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1990.

Coon, Lynda L. Sacred Fictions: Holy Women and Hagiography in Late Antiquity [in English].

Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1997.

Evagrius. Antirrhetikos (Talking Back: A Monastic Handbook for Combating Demons).

Translated by David Brakke, Cistercian Studies. Trappist, KY: Cistercian Publications

2009.

———. On the Eight Thoughts.

Foss, Sonja. Rhetorical Criticism: Exploration and Practice. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland

Press, 1989.

Harvey, Paul. “‘A Traveler from an Antique Land’: Sources, Context, and Dissemination of

the Hagiography of Mary the Egyptian.”. In Egypt, Israel, and the Ancient Mediterranean

World: Studies in Honor of Donald B. Redford, edited by D.B. Redford, G.N. Knoppers

and A. Hirsch. Leiden, NL: Brill, 2004.

Fritts 24

Jerusalem, Sophronius of. “The Life of Mary of Egypt, the Former Harlot, Who in Blessed

Manner Became an Ascetic in the Desert of the <River> Jordan.” Translated by Maria

Kouli. In Holy Women of Byzantium: Ten Saints’ Lives in Translation, edited by Alice-Mary

Talbot. Byzantine Saints’ Lives in Translation. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks,

1996.

———. “The Life of Our Holy Mother Mary of Egypt.” In The Great Canon of Saint Andrew

of Crete. Jordanville, NY: Holy Trinity Monastery, 2005.

Kouli, Maria. “Life of St. Mary of Egypt.” In Holy Women of Byzantium: Ten Saints’ Lives in

Translation, edited by Alice-Mary Talbot. Byzantine Saints’ Lives in Translation.

Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks, 1996.

Moschus, John. The Spiritual Meadow. Translated by John Wortley. Kalamazoo, Mich.;

Spencer, Mass.: Cistercian Publications ; Distribution, Saint Joseph's Abbey, 1992.

Pepin, Ronald, and Hugh Feiss, OSB. Saint Mary of Egypt: Three Medieval Lives in Verse.

Cistercian Studies Series. Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 2005.

Pott, Thomas. Byzantine Liturgical Reform: A Study of Liturgical Change in the Byzantine Tradition

[in Translated from the French title "La réforme liturgique byzantine : étude du

phénomène de l'evolution non-spontanée de la liturgie byzantine."]. Translated by

Paul Meyendorff. Orthodox Liturgy Series. Crestwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir's Seminary

Press, 2010.

Sinkewicz, Robert E. Evagrius of Pontus: The Greek Ascetic Corpus [in English]. Oxford: Oxford

University Press, 2003.

Skete, Monks of New. Troparia and Kondakia [in English]. Cambridge, NY: Monks of New

Skete, 1984.

Fritts 25

Walsh, Efthalia Makris. “The Ascetic Mother Mary of Egypt.” Greek Orthodox Theological

Review 34, no. 1 (1989): 59-69.

Ward, Benedicta, SLG. Harlots of the Desert: A Study of Repentance in Early Monastic Sources.

Cistercian Studies Series. Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1987.

———. The Sayings of the Desert Fathers: The Alphabetical Collection. Translated by Benedicta

Ward, SLG. Cistercian Studies. Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1984.

Ware, Kallistos. The Lenten Triodion. South Canaan, PA: Saint Tikhon's Seminary Press,

2002.

———. “The Meaning of the Great Fast.” In The Lenten Triodion. South Canaan, PA: Saint

Tikhon’s Seminary Press, 2002.

Fritts 26