Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=bap.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
BRILL is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Vigiliae Christianae.
http://www.jstor.org
Vigiliae Christianae 20 (1966) 227-234; North-Holland Publishing Co.
BY
by the angle from which they start. Thus Jaeger who had spent many
years on the critical editions of Gregory rightly saw the De Institutto
Christiano as authentic but instinctively tended to see all its details as
the source for the parallel material in Macarius. Conversely students of
Macarius come upon the Great Letter as a typical work of its author and
are apt to find certain details preferableand prior to the relevant passages
in Gregory.4
I own to be among the second class, and as an exercise for a seminar
on Macarius undertook this very question. The results were published
in Studia Monastica.5 That investigation was concerned with the New
Testament quotations which are recited in almost identical order in the
two works.6 It was intended to show that where the citations agreed with
one another yet contained a significant discrepancy with the normally
printed text of the New Testament, the variant was typically "Macarian".
It is against this line of solution that Klijn has made his cautionary
remarks. He has shown that so-called "Western readings" are as much
a feature of Gregory's scriptural text elsewhere as they are of Macarius,
and therefore nothing can be proved either way by generalisations about
the kind of text the respective authors used.7 Nevertheless the investiga-
tion of individual New Testament readings has value if it concerns the
consistency or inconsistency of the quotations- not with a hypothetical
text-type- but with what the respective authors have elsewhere. While
it is admitted that this could not provide absolutely decisive proofs either
way, high degrees of probability could be attained. This article offers
the fruits of some such investigations carried out since the conclusion of
the article in Studia Monastica. The work has been much facilitated by
the use of the new critical edition of Macarius' homilies8 which will be
designated by the initials of its three editors "DKK". Other sigla are as
follows:
9 Neue Homilien des Makarius/Symeon aus Typus III, edited E. Klostermann and
H. Berthold(Berlin,1961).
10
Gregorii Nysseni Opera, edited W. Jaeger and others (Berlin and Leiden, 1929 f.)
11 Die Syrische Didaskalia, translated by H. Achelis and J. Fleming, TU XXV, 2
(Leipzig,1904) p. 13, 34.
12 O0&py6; psrle: EOtiTo- KaiUkaXxo0- To6 6&apyoi) Kai c6 0e6; iLtcLEcf. II
Thess. 3,10 cited in Didaschalia Apostolorumn,op. cit., p. 74, 22f, "so aber jemand bei
230 DOM AELRED BAKER
(ii) GL 270,15-16 and DIC 80,6-7 cite Lk. 18,7 almost identically.
At any rate the variants from the New Testament text are the same in
both; H6acp (o taXov begins the citation, though it is entirely absent 13
in the scriptural text; icpO6aTo6v14 instead of the better attested aict;
TOv cKEcKTCOV is omitted without mss authority; vuKT6Og Kai fi]tppag
instead of lpcSpag Kai vuKT6g.
As far as I can see Gregory never cites this text elsewhere. On the
contrary as Klijn 15 has noted it appears in DKK 13,273 and 44,425
witnessing to the same variants.16 Klijn however perhaps overlooks its
importance for Macarius and for our problem. For it also appears in
DKK 259,43 supporting the last three of the variants 17 and is found
three times in KB 88,8 f, 134,13f, and 144,25f. Moreover as Dorries 18
has rightly said this quotation is fundamental to Macarius as a Messalian.
If DIC is prior then Gregory certainly served Macarius with a favourite
quotation. But the point is why does Gregory cite the text of Lk. 18,7
in such a peculiar form?
The full version as in GL and DIC appears nowhere in New Testament
mss. It does however appear in two near contemporary works - the
Pseudo-Clementine19 and Mark the Hermit.20 Now we know that Maca-
euch nicht arbeitet der soil auch nicht essen" and then follows the comment as in
Macarius"denn die Faulen hasst Gott der Herr".
13
A. Merk, Novium Testamentum, cites Tatian and the Syriac as witnesses for
lakOkov.
1 The
reading is that of the Textus Receptus.
15
Art. cit., (p. 166).
16 In the second case some but not all mss have
lgpaq Kaci vuKTO6g rpoco8oKcoa
VUKTO6Kai fPIUpac KUi 0pooca irpO6aUO6v ... 0toriaet Tzlv K65iK6crl1V.
18
Symeon von Mesopotamien; die Uberlieferung der Messalianischen 'Makarios'-
Schriften (Leipzig, 1941) p. 163 note 1 "Lk viii, 7f kann man als die Grundstelle des
Messalianismus bezeichnen".
19 Edited B. Rehm
(Berlin, 1953) p. 231, llf.
20 PG 65,1021c OUT(og ev TOISEbcayyeXiolt 6 K6uploSs;TrlyyikaTzo t01otac T1V
PSEUDO-MACARIUS AND GREGORY OF NYSSA 231
(iii) Both our authors at one point make use of Mt. 7,14. GL 257,18
has Ti arsvi 6&9 Kcai r,te9l vi40Vl3668utco; DIC 68,8-9 has tfiv TOXi1t-
,evrv v 6v pabicov. It will reasonably be admitted that O6evuSzo in
Macarius is equivalent to pa6Sicovin Gregory. As the New Testament
text says that the way "leads" anayouca to life, one or other of our
authors must presumably be the source of the unusual interpretation.
Gregory does refer to Mt. 7,14 twice elsewhere VI, 353,5 and VII, 1
132,9 but in neither case is it possible to determine the verb after 666v
in the version he is using. On the other hand in Macarius' frequent
citation we notice a curious thing. In DKK 109,48-9 and 229, 301, and
in KB 49,13, 50,24, 78,4 and 79,3 the verb 8to6sO) appears, so much so
that the editors of KB at 78 ask in a note if this verb is derived from a
24
GCS IX,266 iv Tcirt/pa.
25
GCS VI,11 'in die Jesu Christi'.
26 Studia Monastica, art. cit., (p. 385).
27 Art. cit., (p. 649).
PSEUDO-MACARIUS AND GREGORY OF NYSSA 233
(v) Both authors GL 237,19 f, and DIC 46,16 f, run together Lk. 13,24
(Mt. 7,13) and Mt. 11,12 giving a particularly unusual reading for the
[O
latter; 3pt&a Pitacaai yap aptdouacn T'iv 3palXktiavTCOvobpavcov
We need to explain (a) why the quotations are together, and (b) why
there is such a variant text.
In Macarius DKK 183,23 both points are explained, because the two
texts are cited together, though in the reverse order, and the reading for
Mt. 11,12 is exactly as in GL and DIG. The context of the passage in
DKK is not parallel to that of GL. Thus we can say that Macarius in the
latter work used a connection and a variant reading which he had
adopted elsewhere.
How do we explain the passage in DIC? Possibly the connection of
the two quotations might have occured to him independantly, but what
of the variant in Mt. 11,12? Jaeger in the footnote suggests that Gregory
has cited the text from memory - "an ex memoria citavit?". It is a
plausible explanation. But how remarkable is it that Gregory's memory
produces a variant reading unknown elsewhere except in the homilies
of Macarius and GL?
28
It is fair to add that Jaeger'sedition shows Macariusto be inconsistentin citing
Jn. 5,44; GL 243,9 as nap&avOpbvntovand 263,15as napi aXkkikjv, but the apparatus
in the first case shows that there may be a confusion among the mss.
29 Art. cit., (p.
167) "Thereare howevernot many quotations in parallelpassages
which can be found in Gregory elsewhere". This point in itself may be thought
significant.
30
E. Nestle, Novum Testamentum,gives S, Koine, D, G, for vilpy7rlcv and B, A,
for the other.
234 DOM AELRED BAKER
It goes without saying that the arguments and observations given are
not intended to prove the priority of one or other of our writers. It could
fairly be said that the examples given refer only to some isolated in-
stances in any case. But for reasons given at the beginning of this essay,
it is only by study of small details that any arguments can be made at all.
Doubtless other such detailed investigations from the side of Gregory
would produce arguments of the same kind in his favour. Even so, and
at the very least, the arguments given here seem to offer unavoidable
difficultiesto acceptance of the priority of Gregory. Each argument taken
by itself may be thought to yield only a "more probable" conclusion.
What degree of probability can be reached by taking the arguments to-
gether as a whole, judicet lector.