Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T05:05:48.340Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pseudo-Macarius and the Messalians: The Use of time for the Common Good

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2016

Stuart K. Burns
Stuart K. Burns*
Affiliation:
St John’s College, Nottingham
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the year AD 431 the Council of Ephesus anathematized the ‘Messalians’ (Syriac) or ‘Euchites’ (Greek) – both terms meaning ‘those who pray’ – referring to them as ‘impious’ and ‘contaminating’. A defining characteristic of this group was their emphasis on constant prayer. The Messalian phenomenon, which originated in Syria and Mesopotamia, spread to Armenia and Asia Minor during the late fourth century, causing concern amongst the ecclesiastical hierarchy of many areas. In condemning the movement in AD 431 the Council of Ephesus confirmed the judgement of the synods of Antioch (c. 380) and Side (c. 390) that the Messalians, who were also known as ‘enthusiasts’, were a dangerous and divisive group who rejected work and discipline for the sake of prayer and individual advancement. The Messalians could be considered negligent and wasteful in their use of time.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Church History , Volume 37: The Use and Abuse of Time in Christian History , 2002 , pp. 1 - 12
Copyright
Copyright © Ecclesiastical History Society 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 ODCC, 3rd edn, p. 1075 (art ‘Messalians’).

2 Perceval, H. R., ed., The Seven Ecumenical Councils of the Undivided Church, A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, 2nd ser., 14 (Oxford and New York, 1900), p. 240.Google Scholar

3 For a full discussion of the lists see Stewart, C., Working the Earth of the Heart (Oxford, 1991), pp. 52–69.Google Scholar

4 The connections were first brought to light in 1920: Villecourt, L., ‘La Date et l’origine des “Homélies spirituelles” attribuées à Macaire’, Comptes rendues des sessions de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres (Paris, 1920), pp. 250–8 Google Scholar. See Gribomont, J., ‘Le Dossier des origines du messalianisme’, in Fontaine, J. andKannengiesser, C., eds, Epektasis: Mélanges patristiques offerts au Cardinal Jean Daniélou (Beauchesne, 1972), pp. 611–25.Google Scholar Recent suggestions that the connections between Ps-Macarius and the Messalians have been exaggerated include Stewart, Working the Earth, pp. 52–9; Fitschen, K., Messalianismus und Antimessalianismus. Ein Beispiel ostkirchlicher Ketzergeschichte, Forschungen zu Kirchen- und Dogmengeschichte, 71 (Göttingen, 1998), p. 218 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Burns, S., ‘Charisma and spirituality in the early Church: a study of Messalianism and Pseudo-Macarius’ (University of Leeds, Ph.D. thesis, 1999), pp. 244–7 Google Scholar.

5 See Gribomont, ‘Dossier’.

6 See Fitschen, Messalianismus und Antimessalianismus, p. 218; Burns, ‘Charisma and spirituality’, pp. 244–7.

7 The Macarian corpus exists in three published collections: Collection I – II. Berthold, ed., Makarios/Symeon: Reden und Briefe. Die Sammlung I des Vaticanus Graecus 694 (B), 2 vols, Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten drei Jahrhunderte [hereafter GCS] (Berlin, 1973).

Collection II – Dorries, H.,Klosterraann, E., andKroeger, M., eds, Die 50 Geistlichen Homilien des Makarios, Patristische Texte und Studien, 4 (Berlin, 1964)Google Scholar; Marriott, G. L., Macarii Anecdota (Seven Unpublished Homilies ofPs-Macarius), Harvard Theological Studies, 5 (Cambridge, MA, 1918)Google Scholar.

Collection III – Klostermann, E. andBerthold, H., eds, Nette Homilien des Makarius/Symeon, Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des altchristlichen Literatur, 72 (Berlin, 1961)Google Scholar; Desprez, V., ed., Pseudo-Macaire, Œuvres spirituelles, I: Homélies propres à la Collection III, SC, 275 (Paris, 1980)Google Scholar. See also ‘The Great Letter’, in Staats, R., Makarios-Symeon: Epistola Magna. Eine Messalianische Mbnchsregel und ihre Umschrift in Gregors von Nyssa ‘De instituto Christiano’, Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, philologische-historische Klasse, 3/134 (Göttingen, 1984)Google Scholar.

Hereafter the collections are cited by collection number, homily number, and paragraph.

8 The lists of condemnations of the movement include those by Ephrem the Syrian in Contra haereses (ed. E. Beck, 2 vols, Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium, 169–70 [Louvain, 1957]), Madrashe 22, stanza 4 (1, p. 79); Epiphanius, in Ancoratus, ch. 13 and Panarion, ch. 80, in Epiphanius (Anacoratus und Panarion), 3 vols, ed. K. Holl (Leipzig, 1915–33), 1, pp. 21–2, 3, pp. 484–96; Theodoret, in his Haereticorum fabularum compendium, IV.11 (PC 83, cols 429–32), and Historia ecclesiastica, IV.11 (Theodoret: Kirchengeschichte, ed. Parmentier, L., GCS, 44 [Berlin, 1954], pp. 229–31)Google Scholar; Severus of Antioch, Contra addsitiones Juliani, 34.17-21 (in Sévère d’Antioche: La Polémique antijuíianiste. Contra additiones Juliani, ed. R. Hespel, Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium, 295 [Louvain, 1927], p. 34); Philoxenus, Letter to Patrikos (in La Lettre à Patricius de Philoxène de Mabboug, ed. R. Lavenant, Patrologia Orientalis, 30/v (Paris, 1963), pp. 850–5); Timothy of Constantinople, De Us qui ad ecclesiam ab haereticis accedunt (PG 86, cols 12–74), and De receptione haereticorum (PG 86, cols 45–52); John of Damascus, De haeresibus (in Die Schriften des Johannes von Damashos, ed. Kotter, P. B., 4, Patristische Texte und Studien, 22 [Berlin, 1981], pp. 42–6)Google Scholar.

9 Stewart, Working the Earth, pp. 55–6, App. 1–2.

10 Ibid., pp. 55–6; Gribomont, ‘Dossier’.

11 See also the reports of the conversation between Adelphus and Flavius at the Synod of Antioch: ibid., pp. 615–16.

12 Theodoret (ed. Parmentier), Kirchengeschichte, IV.II (pp. 230–1).

13 Timothy of Constantinople, De iis qui ad ecdesiam, XIII (PG 86, cols 45–52); see Stewart, Working the Earth, p. 263.

14 Timothy of Constantinople, De iis qui ad ecdesiam, XIV (PG 86, cols 45–52); see Stewart, Working the Earth, p. 267.

15 Theodoret, Haereticarum fabularum compendium, IV.11 (PG 83, cols 429–32); see Stewart, Working the Earth, p. 266.

16 For a summary of the influence of the Messalian Homilies see Maloney, G., Pseudo-Macarius: the Fifty Spiritual Homilies and the Great Letter, Classics of Western Spirituality (New York and Mahwah, NJ, 1992), pp. 20–7.Google Scholar

17 See Bouyer, L., ‘The spirituality of the New Testament and the Fathers’, in idem, History of Christian Spirituality, vol. 1: The Spirituality of the New Testament and the Fathers (London, 1963), p. 371.Google Scholar

18 Burns, ‘Charisma and spirituality’, pp. 240–7.

19 1.4.1-5; II.40.2.

20 II.6.3.

21 I.32.1-8; II.15.13.

22 I.48.3; II.15.15.

23 I.4.1-5; II.40.3.

24 II.17.14.

25 I.56.1-2; II.19.2,4.

26 E.g. 11–33.

27 I.56.1-2; II.19.9.

28 II.31.2,6.

29 II.33.2.

30 II.33.1,2,3.

31 I.4.1-5; II.40.2.

32 II.3.2.

33 II.3.1.

34 II.3.1.

35 II.3.2.

36 See Stewart, Working the Earth, App. 2, p. 262. Timothy of Constantinople, De iis qui ad ecdesiam, PC 86, cols 45–52: ‘They say that the work of the hands is to be shunned as loathsome’; John of Damascus, De haeresibus, 80 (ed. Kotter, pp. 42–6): ‘Yet they shun the work of the hands as not fit for Christians’; Theodoret (ed. Parmentier), Kirchengeschichte, Iv. 11, pp. 229–31: Those who are fully taken into the complete sickness shun manual labour as if it were vice.’