Christological Insights in Jacob of Serugh's Typology As Reflected in His Memre
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CHRISTOLOGICAL INSIGHTS IN JACOB OF SERUGH'S TYPOLOGY AS REFLECTED IN HIS MEMRE Jacob of Serugh († 521) lived during a period of intense Christological controversy. Born around the year of the council of Chalcedon (451), he was to witness the painful division that followed. The Chalcedonians, who supported the Antiochian “in two natures” Christology, accused their opponents of being Eutychians and Monophysites1. The non- Chalcedonians, influenced by Alexandrian Christology, maintained the Cyrillian formula of “one incarnate nature”. They insisted that once the union of natures takes place, it is impossible to speak of two natures in Christ2. They were ready to accept the formula “from two natures”. The insistence that no change occurred in Christ in the incarnation can be con- sidered as one of the bases of non-Chalcedonian Christology3. This asser- tion was considered as a denial of the real humanity in Christ, by their enemies4. Even though modern research and ecumenical dialogues have shown that these two positions are not irreconcilable5, to the contempo- * The study is based on the metrical homilies (memre) of Jacob. The enormity of homi- lies attributed to Jacob and the problem of their authenticity have forced me to make a se- lection of homilies from nearly 250 of them, which are already published. As the work is on the types of Christ, I have considered only those homilies dealing with Old Testament themes. Out of them, I have chosen fifty which are typologically important and which ap- pear as authentic. The authenticity of eleven homilies published by M. ALBERT, Jacques de Saroug: Homélies contre les Juifs (PO, 38/1), Paris, 1976, and K. ALWAN, Jacques de Saroug: Quatre homélies métriques sur la création, 2 vols. (CSCO, 508-509; Syr. 214- 215), Louvain, 1989, was taken for granted as the editors themselves have solved the prob- lem. To determine the authenticity of the remaining ones published by P. BEDJAN, Homiliae selectae Mar Jacobi Sarugensis, 5 vols, Paris – Leipzig, 1905-1910, the results of some modern researches have been used by J.G. BLUM, Zum Bau von Abschnitten in Memre von Jakob von Sarug, in III Symposium Syriacum 1980 (OCA, 221), Rome, 1983, pp. 307-321, and by M. ALBERT, La langue syriaque: Remarques stylistiques, in Parole de l'Orient 13, 1986, 225-248, side by side with some criteria developed by the author himself. The scope of this article does not permit me to describe those criteria or to enlist the selected homilies. This article is an extract from my doctoral thesis presented at the “Université catholique de Louvain-la-Neuve”. I thank Prof. P. Bogaert and A. Schmidt, my promoters, and the organization “Solidarité Orient”, Bruxelles, and its director Prof. J.M. van Cangh, for pro- viding the financial help necessary to complete this work. 1. The use of the term “Monophysites” for the non-Chalcedonians has been avoided because it assumes that they denied the human nature of Christ. Modern research has shown that this assumption is incorrect. See below, n. 5. 2. J. LEBON, Le monophysisme sévérien, Louvain, 1909, pp. 178-179. 3. P. KRÜGER, Zur Problematik des Memra über den Glauben des Jakob von Serugh, in Ostkirchliche Studien 23 (1974) 188-196, p. 194. Becoming without change was a notion dear to Philoxenos of Mabbog. See below pp. 57, 58. 4. Jacob of Serugh was also unjustly accused of Monophysism by P. Krüger. See be- low, pp. 51, 59. 5. A. de Halleux, for example, has shown that Philoxenus of Mabbog never denied the humanity of Christ (Philoxène de Mabbog: sa vie, ses écrits, sa théologie, Louvain, 1963, CHRISTOLOGICAL INSIGHTS IN JACOB OF SERUGH'S TYPOLOGY 47 rary ecclesiastical leaders, certain words and expressions were very im- portant. The changing policies of Roman emperors added more fuel to this burning theological dispute. The emperors shifted religious policies as the situation demanded6. Jacob lived and wrote during the periods of Anastasius I (491-518), a staunch non-Chalcedonian, and Justin I (518- 527), who favoured the opposite side. In such a tumultuous situation it was difficult for a Church leader not to identify himself with one of these groups and Jacob's adherence to either of the two sides (Chalcedonian or non-Chalcedonian) was a disputed question. Each of the Christian de- nominations in Asia, except the “Nestorians”, claimed his allegiance to its side. After years of intense research and discussion among theolo- gians, the question of Jacob's adherence is now considered settled. Re- searchers agree that he was a non-Chalcedonian and remained such until his death7. We do not intend to reopen the discussion. The aim of the present work is different. Jacob is more renowned as a poet, a pastor, than as a theologian en- gaged in controversies8. The deep meanings of terms like hypostasis, physis and prosopon were not subjects of his concern. He tried rather to contemplate the incarnation as a mystery. It is true that he treated Christology in a more systematic manner in his letters9, but his thoughts about Christ's incarnation also lie hidden in the types of Christ and other images he exposes in his metrical homilies (memre). These Christo- logically important images are usually brought out while commenting the Bible, the reason why B.M.B. Sony has remarked that “Jacques (est) un exégète dont le but principal est christologique”10. A failure to understand p. 514). The two families of Orthodox Churches have mutually accepted that “despite fif- teen centuries of formal separation, both families of Churches have preserved the same Orthodox faith”; cf. T. FITZGERALD, Towards the Reestablishment of Full Communion: The Orthodox-Orthodox Oriental Dialogue, in Greek Orthodox Theological Review 36 (1991) 169-182, p. 174. 6. For details see T. KOLLAMPARAMPIL, Jacob of Serugh: Select Festal Homilies, Rome-Bangalore, 1997, pp. 6-8. 7. J.S. ASSEMANI, Bibliotheca Orientalis, 3 vols., New York, reprint 1975 (I, pp. 290- 299); J.B. ABBELOOS, De vita et scriptis sancti Jacobi Batnarum Sarugi in Mesopotamia episcopi, Louvain, 1867, pp. 146-185; and P. PEETERS, Jacques de Saroug appartient-il à la secte monophysite?, in Analecta Bollandiana 66 (1948) 134-198, tried to prove that Jacob was a Chalcedonian or at least became one towards the end of his life. P. MARTIN, Un évèque-poète au Vème et au VIème siècles ou Jacques de Saroug, sa vie, son temps, ses œuvres, ses croyances, in Revue des sciences ecclésiastiques 4/4 (1876) 309-352, 385-419, had already questioned this view. But it was T. JANSMA, Encore le Credo de Jacques de Saroug: Nouvelles recherches sur l'argument historique concernant son orthodoxie, in L'Orient Syrien 10 (1965) 75-88, 193-236, 331-370, 475-510, who finally asserted that Jacob never had Chalcedonian tendencies. 8. He always strove to avoid controversies. It was only when forced by the monks of Mar Basus that he gave an official declaration of faith. JANSMA, Encore le Credo, p. 355. 9. Iacobus Sarugensis, Epistulae quotquot supersunt, ed. G. OLINDER (CSCO, 110; Syr., 57), Louvain, 1937. A French translation is soon to appear. 10. B.M.B. SONY, La méthode exégétique de Jacques de Saroug, in Parole de l'Orient 9 (1979-80) 67-103, p. 103. In spite of this remark, Sony has not studied Jacob's typology from a Christological angle. He has mainly tried to expose Jacob's exegetical method; ty- pology does not receive the merit it deserves (pp. 92-103). He mentions that Jacob's Christological position is Cyrillian (p. 90) but does not substantiate his argument. 48 J.A. KONAT the symbolism of Jacob will be a serious handicap to anyone studying his Christology – a mistake R. Chesnut made11. The present study is an en- deavour to bring to light the importance of Christological insights inher- ent in Jacob's typology. Without categorizing his thoughts in accordance with any philosophical or theological system, we will begin by analysing the affirmations made about Christ and the titles attributed to him. I. AFFIRMATION OF CHRIST'S DIVINITY Nobody has yet accused Jacob of having denied Christ's divinity. He is reproached by certain scholars for having emphasized the point too much12. “God from God” ( ), “of the same essence” ( )13, “the hidden one in God” ( )14, “of the same nature” ( ), “not less than the Begetter in anything” ( )15, “having the same status in the God- head” ( )16, etc. are some of the expressions used to show Christ's relation to God the Father. But the most important and frequently used phrase is “Son of God” ( ). God Himself has announced that Jesus is His Son and the proclamations of the proph- ets are in line with it. If God is Father He should have a Son, says Jacob17. The belief that Jesus is the Son of God is central to his Christology. Not only is Christ the Son of God, but He is the “unique Son” ( ), “the beloved Son” ( )18. He stresses the uniqueness of Christ to the extent of removing all doubts about the existence of another son19. What Jacob reproaches mainly in the Jews is their inability to realize the divinity of Christ. Our author reveals Christ's divinity first of all by trying to define the resemblance of the Son to the Father. To make this affirmation more ef- fective, he brings in his favourite interpretative technique-typology. It is in Seth, the son of Adam, that the type of Christ's resemblance to the Fa- ther is pictured. Seth resembled () his father, says the book of Gen- esis (5,3). This resemblance was of an unmatched perfection, says our author.