On the Reception of Assyrian Saints in the Eastern Orthodox Tradition

St. Isaac the Assyrian, Bishop of the Church of the East

Anonymous (Edited by Bp. Joseph of the Ancient Church of the West ) 

St Isaac the Syrian is likely the most famous example of a post-Ephesus saint of the Assyrian tradition who has been embraced by the Orthodox Churches (both Eastern and Oriental), but he is not at all the only one, or a one-off exception. 

Our Mother among the saints, Christina of Persia, lived in the Sassanian (Persian) Empire in the 6th century. She is reported by Babai the Great in his Syriac hagiography of her to have been a Zoroastrian by birth, from the modern-day region of Kirkuk, Iraq. Her father, Yazdin, was governor of Nisibis. She converted from Zoroastrianism to the Christian faith, being received into the Assyrian Church, an illegal act in the Sassanian Empire, and changed her name from Yazdoi to Christina. She was martyred for her faith, most likely during the reign of Khosrow I (531-579). Her martyrdom therefore comes approx. 50-80 years before the birth of St Isaac the Syrian in Beth Qatraye, Eastern Arabia, circa 613. 

A Contemporary Greek Orthodox Icon of the East Syriac Saint, St. Christina of Persia

St Christina's vita, or hagiography, comes to us first from Babai the Great in Syriac, sometime before his death in 628. This Syriac original is mostly lost, but the Georgian Orthodox Church was commemorating her as early as the 7th century. It is likely from the Georgians that her hagiography was brought to the Greek speaking Orthodox world, as St Christina is recorded in the Synaxarion of Constantinople in the 10th century. Also of note is this Synaxarion received a translation into Armenian by a Constantinopolitan deacon named Joseph within the 10th century, and this translation formed the basis of an extended synaxarion used by the Armenian Apostolic Church which was written in the 13th century. Perhaps from the Armenian sources, and original Syriac sources, St Christina came to be venerated among the Oriental Orthodox as well as the Eastern Orthodox. 

St Christina is a lesser-known example pointing to the fact that relations and intermingling between the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox traditions and the Assyrian tradition, of which the East Syrian Rite is predominant, were still quite prevalent in the 6th-7th centuries. Another example from the 6th century is the famed 13 Assyrian Fathers who came from Mesopotamia and were central figures in the development of the Georgian monastic and ascetical traditions. 

Mar Shemmon Bar Sabbae, Patriarch of the Church of the East in the 5th Century, Martyred by the Persians and Venerated by the Assyrians, Chaldeans, Roman Catholics, and the Eastern Orthodox in Georgia and Armenia

The Seven Martyred Sons of Shimun, Members of the Church of the East and Venerated by the Eastern Orthodox

St. Zaia the Great, an Assyrian Saint also Commemorated by the Eastern Orthodox

Don't forget that the Church of the East was not entirely Nestorian during that time. There was still a power struggle between three camps, the super Nestorians, the super Chalcedonians, and a middle group that strived by every means to bridge the gap between Nestorians and Chalcedonians within the Church of the East. Throughout that time up until 613, the official creeds of the Church of East kept to the Chalcedonian formula of "two natures in one person" and avoided to insist on two hypostases so as not to aggrevate the Chalcedonian party. They likewise avoided speaking of one hypostasis or using the term Theotokos in order not to aggrevate the Nestorian party. Once, Henana of Adiabene began teaching entirely Chalcedonian views at his theological school, believing in one hypostasis (kha qnoma) and accepting to call Mary the Theotokos (Yaldath Alaha). This led to controversy as many monks left the seminary. Although Henana was summoned and banished by the ultra Nestorian party, later on one of Henana's disciples became Catholicos. That Catholicos, Ishoyabh restored communion with the Byzantine Church, and accepted the Byzantine "formula of union" by Emperor Zeno. This too led to controversy as the Nestorian party within the Church of East broke communion with the Catholicos in protest of his union with the Byzantine Church. Another union also took place at a later time. Both unions were ended so that the Church of East could resolve its internal schisms. It was not until the usurpation of the catholicate throne by Timothy I that we see a permanent separation of Chalcedonians and Nestorians, and the creation of two distinct Catholicate lines, the Chalcedonian one being called the Catholicate of Romagyris or Irenopolis or Khorasan (depending on its location) and that of the Nestorians being elevated to a Patriarchate and formally condemning all the mystic East Syriac fathers, who were instead embraced by the Chalcedonian Catholicate and from there spread to all Chalcedonians at large. As a side note, the Miaphysite party within the Church of the East had already gone its separate way back in 550 with the establishment of what became known as the Maphrianate of the East based at Tikrit. 

The Two Greatest Eastern Saints, Sts. Ephrem and Isaac, Both Members of the Church of the East

If one questions how we can allow for the Church of East to take so long to change from three christological parties fighting for power within the same church to becoming three distinct church structures, we only need to look at how long the Byzantine Church itself took to forge its final course, as the Chalcedonians and Miaphysites were fighting over thrones in the same church structure from 451 until 550, and it wasn't until Jacob Baradaeus created parallel patriarchates and episcopal sees that a formal split occurred into two ecclesiastical structures of Chalcedonians vs. Miaphysites parallel to each other. The same is observed during the century long dispute over Monotheletism, not only before the 6th Ec. Council, but even after it. For example, St Andrew of Crete attended a local Greek council that repudiated the 6th Ec. Council and restored monotheletism. Yet we still venerate him as a saint. The miracle of the Holy Protection of Constantinople from the attacks of the Avars also took place when the Patriarch of Constantinople was a Monothelite. Likewise it took over two centuries to resolve the iconoclastic issue, and during that time the iconoclasts and iconodules were in communion and some of our current saints were ordained by iconoclast bishops, and only after this came out as iconodules. We must also take into account that the martyrdom of St Artemius and the miracle of St Theodore regarding kollyva took place when the Patriarchs of Constantinople and Antioch were Arians. Perhaps it is also worthy to mention that the Filioque clause was adopted in parts of the West in the 6th century, and yet the final schism with the West over this issue didn't occur until 1054. Yet the Orthodox accept all the Western saints before 1054 even if they most likely recited the Filioque as a habit. So if we grant economia to the Byzantine Church and allow her time (decades and even centuries) of grace period, why should we deny this to the Church of the East which was thriving in Sassanid Persia, and was simply striving by every means to keep all its members formally united despite their disagreements, for the sake of holding a strong united front against the onslaughts of the Zoroastrian rulers? 

A Byzantine-Assyrian Icon of Mar Shemmon Bar Sabbae from the Georgian Exarchate of the Chaldean Church