THE SYRIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH OF ANTIOCH
BY
H.H. MOR IGNATIUS YACOUB III
PATRIARCH OF ANTIOCH AND ALL THE EAST
THE SUPREME HEAD OF THE UNIVERSAL SYRIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH FOR THE PERIOD 1957-1980.
We are thankful to Prof. Dr. W. Strothmann for extending to us an invitation to attend the Congress of the Academy of Gottingen and deliver a lecture on the history of the Syrian Orthodox Church. We gladly take this excellent opportunity to speak to you about the position of our Church within the general church history, its liturgical language, name, patriarchate, missionary work, ascetic life, educational activities, Biblical heritage, practices, doctrine, as well as its point of view concerning the Nestorian-Chalcedonian controversy, Apostolic succession and finally its present situation.
1- ITS POSITION WITHIN THE CHURCH HISTORY
2- ITS LITURGICAL LANGUAGE
3- ITS NAME: THE “SYRIAN”
4- ITS PATRIARCHAL SEE
5- ITS MISSIONARY WORKS
6- ITS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE ASCETIC LIFE
7- ITS EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITY
8- ITS BIBLICAL HERITAGE
9- ITS PRACTICES
10- ITS DOCTRINE CONCERNING THE DIVINE MYSTERIES OF INCARNATION AND REDEMPTION
11- MISUNDERSTANDINGS BETWEEN ITS SCHOLARS
12- ITS POSITION CONCERNING NESTORIUS
13- ITS POSITION CONCERNING THE COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON
14- OUR CHURCH’S APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION
15- THE VICTORY OF ITS DOCTRINE
16- ITS PRESENT SITUATION (prior to 1980s)
1- ITS POSITION WITHIN THE CHURCH HISTORY
This Church enjoys the greatest prestige in the history of Christendom since it is the first Church which was established in Jerusalem out of the Apostles, Preachers and other converted Jews, and was grafted in Antioch by those who were converted from among the Arameans and other gentile elements. It can justifiably claim the wealthiest liturgical and musical heritage, besides a proud theological and missionary record. It suffered untold hardships and tragedies including massacres and repeated transfer of the See of the Patriarchate from one locality to another due to political and other developments. Historians declare that the survival of this Church was nothing short of a miracle.
2- ITS LITURGICAL LANGUAGE
There is no doubt that Aramaic was the language of the Jews during the Apostolic Age as well as during several centuries prior to this period and extending as far back as 500 B.C. The Jews even wrote some of their Holy Scriptures in Aramaic or in Aramaic characters. The Dead Sea Scrolls which were discovered in 1947 by His Eminence Mar Athanasius Y. Samuel, then Archbishop of Jerusalem, confirm this fact. This language, therefore, was used as the liturgical language in this Church. The Aramaic liturgy originally written by St. James, the brother of our Lord and the first bishop of Jerusalem, came to be used for the first time by this Church. Hence it was attributed to it.
We are very proud that this language was sanctified by the birth and life of Christ, by His miracles, teachings, sermons and the establishment of the sacraments of the Incarnation and Redemption. It was honored by His Holy mouth and that of His blessed mother and the Apostles. (1) We are proud also that by this language the Gospel was first preached in Judea, Syria and the neighboring countries.
3- ITS NAME: THE “SYRIAN”
This name was derived from Cyrus the king of Persia (559-529 B.C.) who conquered Babylon (539 B.C.) and liberated the Jews by permitting them to return to Judea. His name is mentioned by the prophet Isaiah, connected with Christ.(2) The name “Syrian” is equivalent to the term “Christian” which was applied to the disciples in Antioch for the first time,(3) because those converted Jews believed that Cyrus, their liberator from captivity in 538 B.C., resembled Christ the liberator of captive mankind. So they used to repeat Christ’s name connected with his name for pride and honour, as their forefathers did upon their return to Judea. When this news arrived to the gentile elements in Antioch, they called them “Syrians” or “Christians” . From that time onwards the name “Syrian” prevailed first among the Christians of Syria and afterwards among the Christians of Mesopotamia, Persia, India and the Far East, through the work of the Syrian Apostles and preachers. This name was used in Syria to distinguish between the Christian Arameans and the Arameans who were not yet converted(4). Hence the word “Aramean” became synonymous to the word “Heathen”, and the word “Syrian” synonymous to “Christian”(5) . Likewise, the Aramaic language was called Syriac. Until the present days the Christians who speak Syriac, are called in this sense, “Suroye” or “Suraye” or “Curyaye” Whereas the name “Christian” prevailed among the Western Christians.
All the Syrian historians agree that the name of Syria itself is derived from the above mentioned Cyrus. So, when the disciples were called “Syrians”, both of these names were combined together, since their source was the same. This name was connected with The Church of Antioch from the very beginning of Christianity. Hence it was called the “Syrian Church” as it is mentioned in the epistle of St. Ignatius, the third Patriarch of Antioch, to the Romans in 107. It was also attached to the churches in the East as far as India, which submitted to the Church of the ancient capital of Syria. It is still connected to these churches which still use Syriac as their liturgical language, that is the first language of the Antiochene Church of Syria and of the Syrian countries. Formerly, according to the Romans, the term “Syrus” meant every body speaking Syriac.(6) We are amazed to know that some of the Western writers and orientalists call our Church the “Syriac Church”. Our Church, from its very inception in the first century, has been called and was known throughout the world only as the Syrian Church. The name “Syrian” to us does not only designate the name of a country, but also designates the proper name of the Church that was established in Syria and used the Syriac (Aramaic), the language of the country. Therefore it became the religious name of our Church wherever located : in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Turkey, Jordan , Egypt , India, North and South America and Australia. Our church has also followed the distinctive Syrian religious and cultural traditions unbroken to the present day.
It is accepted by all that the word “Syriac” means the language of Syria and that of the Syrians, just as Arabic means the language of the Arabs. So we call our Church the “Syrian Church” (and not Syriac Church), because it was and still is the only native Church of Syria, as mentioned above. It so gallantly preserved and continuously maintained the ancient culture, language of Syria and the rituals of the Church of Antioch; Antioch being the ancient capital of Syria.
In short, there can never be any doubt, as all historians and scholars admit, that our Church is the original Church of Syria, and that it is the one and only Church that has preserved the ancient culture and language of Syria, together with the valuable literature and liturgies of the ancient Apostolic Church of Antioch.
4- ITS PATRIARCHAL SEE
The history of the church declares Antioch as the mother of the gentile churches and the headquarters of Christianity in Asia. History also considers St. Peter, the chief of the Apostles, as the founder of its Apostolic See and its first Patriarch.(7) He himself ordained St. Evodius and St. Ignatius who was mentioned earlier. After his martyrdom he was succeeded by St. Evodius and St. Ignatius respectively. Likewise, St. Peter was succeeded by a line of distinguished Patriarchs, most of whom amazed the world with their sanctity, wonderful writings and other accomplishments in many fields. By the Grace of God, we are the 121st in their legitimate line.
The jurisdiction of the Holy See of Antioch extended to the Far East. In other words, it covered all Asia.(81) It ruled during its golden age over 12 metropolitans and 137 suffragan bishops.(9)
5- ITS MISSIONARY WORKS
It is well known that this Church carried the torch of the Gospel to all the parts of the East, where it guided in the true path thousands and thousands of the children of different nations, namely, Arabs of various tribes, Persians, Afghans, Indians and Chinese. It contributed as well to the conversion of the Armenians.(10) In the sixth century it attracted to the fold of Christ a great number of people from Ethiopia and Nubia through the efforts of a priest called Julian,(11) and eighty thousand of the inhabitants of Asia Minor, Carya, Phregia and Lydia, through the efforts of St. John, the famous bishop of Ephesus.(12)
Syriac was the liturgical language of the Eastern churches in spite of their different nationalities. Many of their followers learned it perfectly well and translated the Syriac version of the Holy Bible into their mother tongues. This was true, especially in India where we have a flourishing Syrian Church. However, the Armenian Church, besides using Syriac, in which some of its bishops were well-versed, utilised the Syriac “Alphabet” to write its native language up to the 5th century. Then Mesrob, one of its scholars, invented the Armenian “Alphabet”.(13)
The first Arabic liturgy mentioned in our Church was in Iraq, during the tenth century. It is said that the Metropolitan of Tigrit, ordained an Arab bishop in 912, celebrated the Divine Eucharist in Arabic.(14)
6- ITS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE ASCETIC LIFE
This Church strengthened the Ascetic life and founded from the 4th Century onwards hundreds of monasteries which were occupied by thousands of monks and nuns who trained themselves in the virtues of piety, celibacy, chastity, humility, obedience, silence, self-imposed poverty, fasting and prayer. Besides, they bestowed favour upon human society by taking a deep interest in education and the arts. An everlasting wealth is found in the thousands of volumes of manuscripts which they wrote. While they instructed many people, they attracted many others to the Christian fold. We can realise the magnitude of the activities of this Church in this field from the fact that, in the fifth century, there were in the mountain of Edessa alone three hundred monasteries(15) occupied by ninety thousand monks,(16) in St. Matthew’s monastery east of Mosul-Iraq twelve thousand,(17) and in the following century there were six thousand and three hundred monks in St. Basus monastery near Homs, Syria.(18) In the same period, one hundred and thirty-five abbots in southern Syria signed the declaration of faith.(19) We are sure that the number of our monks and nuns in that golden age was about six hundred thousand.
The most famous one among these monasteries is the monastery of St. Mark in Jerusalem, because it is the very house of Mary the mother of John-Mark, where our Lord Jesus Christ observed the Passover and His Last Supper, washed the feet of His disciples and entrusted to them the Sacrament of his body and blood. To this house he came after His Resurrection, while the doors were closed, and granted His disciples the Holy Priesthood. After his Ascension, the disciples gathered together along with His mother and brothers in this house to pray regularly, and it was here that the Holy Spirit descended upon them. Afterwards it was consecrated a Church in the name of our Lady. A Syriac Estrangelo inscription of the sixth century engraved on the inside of the right hand side of the entrance to this Church confirms this fact. This inscription was discovered in September of 1940 when the old plasterwork of the Church was removed for renovation. The following is its correct translation: – “THIS IS THE HOUSE OF MARY THE MOTHER OF JOHN SURNAMED MARK. AFTER THE ASCENSION OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST TO HEAVEN, THE APOSTLES CONSECRATED IT INTO A CHURCH AFTER THE NAME OF MARY, GOD-BEARER.” It was rebuilt in 73 A.D. after kind Titus had destroyed Jerusalem.
7- ITS EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITY
This Church engaged itself in various fields of studies such as theology, music, philosophy, medicine, language, poetry, history, mathematics and astronomy, and established many important educational institutions through which it exerted its influence on the history of culture. It succeeded in graduating in its schools many remarkable scholars well-known in the East and in the West. The Arab conquerors sought their assistance to educate themselves and to translate into Arabic many Greek books on various topics, besides their wonderful works in Syriac. Their translations and writings became in the following centuries a rich and remarkable source for the Arab scholars and philosophers and through them for the western world. A quick look at the philosophic letters of Al-Kindy can convince you of how much that first Arab philosopher in the ninth century had quoted from these writings. For example, his expressions “Is, Lais, Huwayya, Qunyat and Kuthmat”. So also the Arabs adopted many of the Syriac melodies, tunes and poetical metres which were invented especially by Bardaisan, Mar Ephraim, Mar Balay and Mar Yacoub of Sroog. Moreover, the Arabic language itself was affected by Syriac. We are proud to say that one can find in these Syrian Scholars excellent treatment of some of the theories which were well accepted by the West. For example, the theory of Harder “The man is a small world”, was treated by St. Ahodemeh the famous Catholicos of the East and a Martyr in the sixth Century: the theory of Galileo, the astronomer, was treated by the bishop of Edessa in the tenth century, in his book called “The cause of all causes.” In this book too, we find exactly Nietzsche’s theory of the super-man.
In describing the educational interest of the Syrian scholars we cannot but blame some of the orientalists who wrote of Bar Ebraya, the greatest scholar in our Church, as being of Jewish origin. In fact, his nickname “Bar Ebraya” was applied to him because he belonged originally to a village called “Ebra” which was situated on the bank of the River Euphrates, close to Malataya. Moreover, his grandfather’s name was Touma (Thomas). This Christian name alone is enough to prove that he descended from an old Christian family.
8- ITS BIBLICAL HERITAGE
This Church played an active role in the field of the Biblical literature. Its scholars dived into its vast ocean and extracted brilliant pearls with which they decorated the neck of human society. They translated the Bible, first into Syriac, their own language, and then studied it thoroughly and wrote many volumes of commentaries on it. The libraries of the East and the West are heavily stacked with these in spite of many dreadful calamities which destroyed many thousands of manuscripts, especially during the first world war. After studying the Bible in Syriac, they translated it from Syriac into other living languages. Around 404 the Syrian Professor Daniel co-oerated with the Armenian scholar Mesrob in translating the Bible into Armenian. (20)Around 643, our Arab scholars of the “Tay” and Tanouckh tribes and others from Aaquoula (Coufa) translated the Holy Gospels into Arabic by the order of our Patriarch St. John II,(21) in response to the wish of Umeir son of Saad son of Abi Waqqas el Ansari, the Prince of el Jazira.(22) In 1221, John , son of Joseph, the priest of Taflis (South of Russia), translated it into Persian.(23) In the beginning of the 19th century, the V. Rev. Philipose Remban of south India translated it into Malayalam, the language of south India. In the present century, the V. Rev. Konathu mathew Malpan translated and published in Malayalam the whole New Testament except the book of Revelation.
The conversation which took place between the above mentioned Ruler of el Jazira and our Patriarch St. John confirms the faithfulness of the Syrian translators of the Holy Scriptures. The Ruler asked the Patriarch to translate the Holy Gospel on condition that he would mention in it neither the Godhead and crucifixion of our Lord Jesus Christ nor the baptism. “I will never omit a single letter from the Gospel of my Lord, even if all the arrows of your army pierce me “, the saint answered him with great courage. When the Prince had noticed his courage he told him, “Go and write as you know”.
What makes us more proud is that the scanty remnant of that rich heritage which withstood the plights of ages is considered to be the most ancient among the manuscripts of the world, especially those which were taken from the library of the Syrian Monastery in Egypt of the libraries of Vatican, London, Milano, Berlin, Paris, Oxford, Cambridge and others. Some of these go back to the fifth and sixth centuries. Moreover, the most ancient manuscript of the Holy Gospel at present is found in Syriac. It was copied by the writer Yacoub in Edessa in 411 A.D. It is preserved in the library of the British Museum.
In order to appreciate the efforts of the Syrian Church in the field of the publication and preservation of the Holy Bible we should note the number of manuscripts preserved in various libraries in the world. The Rev. Fr. Paulan Martain counted 55 Syriac Estrangelo manuscripts of the “Peshitha” Version, copied in the 5th, 6th and 7th centuries , compared to 22 (only) in Latin and 10 in Greek.(24)
The Syrian scholars arranged the Holy Scriptures into chapters, and fixed according the Ecclesiastical order readings that agree with the services of Sundays and festivals throughout the year, besides special readings for the days of the Lent, the orders of the celebrated Festivals, ordinations, baptism, matrimony, consecration of the Chrism and baptismal oil, and funerals. They specified for each Sunday and festival three readings from the Old Testament and five from the new Testament.
Due to their boundless love of the Holy Bible, they employed many of its words in the liturgical books.
9- ITS PRACTICES
There is no doubt that the Syrian Orthodox Church was formed of various nationalities with different religious heritages. There is no wonder, then, if it adopted from them some customs and adapted them to agree with the Christian principles, along with the rich rituals which it inherited from its forefathers. For example, on Christmas Day when the Gospel of Nativity is read we light a bonfire. Probably that is copied from the Persians who used to do so on Dec. 25th out of their joy in and respect for the sungod, on the occasion of his birthday. Apparently, the church celebrated Christmas on that particular date to convince the Persians that Christ Himself is the sun of righteousness and thus to attract them to the Christ fold.
The faithful prostrate themselves during their worship as the Jews and others in the East did. This kind of worship is copied also by the Muslims.
With regard to the Clergy, we have two orders in our Church. The first is that of the monks or the unmarried priests who do not take charge of the parish churches. The Archbishops and the Patriarch are selected from among their ranks. the second is that of the married priests who are in charge of the parish churches. They do not receive any higher position except that of Cor-Episkopos. A parish priest may be ordained a bishop only after the death of his wife if he is qualified.
Formerly the church did not allow the monks, archbishops and the Patriarch to eat meat, but in these days that prohibition is lifted, except for those in India.
Our Church possesses some holy relics and celebrates their festivals with solemn processions inside and outside the church. For example, our Lady’s Church in Homs is known as the Church of the Lady of the Girdle because it possesses the Girdle of our Lady. On August 15, the bishop and the clergy carry the Girdle in a great procession inside the Church, and the bishop blesses the faithful with this Holy Relic. So also, St. Thomas the Apostle’s Church in Mosul possesses St. Thomas’ Relics, and does the same thing on his festival on the 3rd of July every year.
10- ITS DOCTRINE CONCERNING THE DIVINE MYSTERIES OF INCARNATION AND REDEMPTION
The Syrian Orthodox Church’s belief in the Divine Mystery of incarnation is as follows:
THE UNIQUE SON AND WORD OF GOD, WHO IS THE SECOND PERSON IN THE HOLY TRINITY, DESCENDED FROM HEAVEN TO THE WOMB OF VIRGIN MARY AND WAS INCARNATE AND MADE MAN OF HER BY THE HOLY SPIRIT AND BORN FROM HER AFTER NINE MONTHS IN AN UNDESCRIBABLE WAY, WHILE SHE REMAINED VIRGIN DURING THE TIME OF BRINGING FORTH AND AFTER THAT ALSO. IT MAINTAINS ALSO THAT THE UNION OF GODHEAD WITH MANHOOD WAS AFFECTED AT THE FIRST MOMENT WHEN THE VIRGIN CONCEIVED HIM IN HER WOMB. THAT IS, NEITHER GODHEAD WAS IN EXISTENCE IN THE WOMB BEFORE THE EXISTENCE OF THE MANHOOD IN IT, NOR THE MANHOOD WAS IN EXISTENCE THERE BEFORE GODHEAD. AS A RESULT OF THIS FIRM AND INSEPARABLE UNION THE CHURCH MAINTAINS THAT THE INCARNATE WORD OF GOD HAS ONE PERSON OF TWO, AND ONE COMPOUND NATURE WITHOUT CONFUSION OR MIXTURE OR CHANGE. SINCE THIS CHILD IS REAL GOD AND REAL AND PERFECT MAN HIS MOTHER WAS THEOTOKOS OR GOD-BEARER.
In maintaining these teachings the Church rejected the heretics, who denied the reality of His Manhood, or regarded as untenable the possibility of the union of God who is good with matter which is evil (According to them), and those who said that His body was from heaven, or that His Manhood was without the human and rational soul and that Godhead filled its place and was mixed with manhood, or that the Incarnation took place by matrimony, or that the person born from St. Mary was merely a man, who was later on justified by his deeds and became worthy of the reception of Godhead in him.
As for the divine Mystery of Redemption, the Church believed as follows:
THE INCARNATE SON AND WORD OF GOD WAS REALLY CRUCIFIED AND HE SUFFERED AND DIED IN MANHOOD BY THE SEPARATION OF HIS SOUL FROM HIS BODY AND HE WAS BIRED IN THE TOMB, WHEREAS HIS GODHEAD WAS SEPARATED NEITHER FROM HIS SOUL NOR FROM HIS BODY, WHILE HE WAS ON THE CROSS OR IN THE TOMB. THE SUFFERINGS DID NOT TOUCH HIS GODHEAD. ON THE THIRD DAY, HE ROSE FROM THE DEAD.
The Church in maintaining these facts, rejected the heretics who maintained that this happened by fancy. That is, He pretended to be suffering whereas He did not really suffer, or another one like him suffered, or His Godhead was separated from His Manhood , hence it suffered together the crucifixion and death.(25)
11- MISUNDERSTANDINGS BETWEEN ITS SCHOLARS
Towards the end of the 4th century and the beginning of the 5th Diodore bishop of Tarsus and Theodore bishop of Mopsuestia turned from this orthodox teaching. In explaining this point, Dr. John Gieseler says : “But in the east they were now accustomed to distinguish the two natures, and the expressions used concerning them, with greater care; and the two most eminent men of the Antiochene school Diodore bishop of Tarsus, and Theodore bishop of Mopsuestia, confirmed the accuracy of this distinction by their writings which were still highly esteemed in the whole east, while in Egypt the formula of Athanasius respecting a Divine nature made flesh was maintained. On the other hand, Ambrose and Augustine in the west endeavoured, after the example of the two Gregorys, to avoid the two rocks of this doctrine, viz, the division into two persons, and the mistaking of two natures”.(26) Not only that, but Theodore and other professors and graduates of the Antiochene school gave also no importance to Theotokos or God-bearer,(27) particularly Nestorius who developed these teachings.
Nestorius was first a priest in the Church of Antioch. In April 10, 428, he was consecrated as Patriarch of Constantinople. We can collect from the reliable sources available that he denied both the incarnation and redemption. He maintained that the Word of God did not descend to the womb of Virgin mary, and the Virgin brought forth only the man Jesus Christ who became God by Grace and her virginity ceased when she gave birth to this man. He said that it is unlawful, therefore, to call Virgin Mary “Theotokos”, when she was in reality the moth of Christ. When this man became thirty years old, he added, the Word of God descended upon him and made him his temple, and at the time of the sufferings and crucifixion he was separated from him. Hence the crucified was merely a man.
In defending this strange teaching, Nestorius maintained two persons and two natures for Christ, and spoke of Christ to be two Christs, one of them the Son of God and the other the son of man.(28) For this purpose he distinguished the two natures and distinguished some of His words and deeds as divine and some as human; whereas in reality the two sets of words and deeds are expressions of the one Person Himself. He said: “the Word of God is God and Lord of Christ”, “and God the Word was acting in the man Jesus” “and the power of the Unique Son of God was attached to him”, “and Christ had power to make miracles by the Grace of the Holy Spirit”. “and it is lawful to worship the man who was taken to heaven with God”, “and the body of Christ heals and gives life, not because he is the Word of God but because God the Word is dwelling in him.”(29)
We cannot believe that a patriarch descending from an ancient Christian lineage could declare such a strange teaching and thus could shake the very foundation of Christian faith. For this reason I am compelled to reconsider the origin of Nestorius. Formerly I considered him a Syrian by nationality and language, but after a thorough study of his biography and teachings, I changed my mind. I understood that his parents migrated to Syria from some part of Persia. Heaven knows whether they were not newly converted from Judaism into Christianity, since the teaching of Nestorius was favoring the Jews. This is confirmed by St. Cyril of Alexandria in his remarkable speech delivered in the third Ecumenical Council in 431. He says:
“NOBODY SHOULD SAY HERE-AFTER TO ME, HOW HARD IS THE IMPUDENCE OF THE UNCLEAN JEWS. THOSE OPPRESSORS LIFTED THEN A HAND AGAINST CHRIST, BUT THE PRESENT JEWS WERE GIVEN BY THIS BLASPHEMER FAMILIARITY IN THE PRESENCE OF GOD, BY TELLING THEM THAT “YOU HAVE CRUCIFIED A MAN AND NOT GOD” . In directing his words to Nestorius, St. Cyril says: “O HERETIC! IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THE PROPHETS, APOSTLES, PREACHERS AND GABRIEL THE ARCHANGEL, YOU MUST IMITATE AT LEAST THE DEVILS WHICH RESEMBLE YOU. THE DEVILS FEARED HIS POWER AND CRIED: “WHY MEDDLE WITH US, SON OF GOD? HAVE YOU COME TO TORTURE US BEFORE THE APPOINTED TIME?” AND YOU WERE NOT CONVINCED ALSO BY SATAN YOUR DECEIVER WHO SAID: “IF YOU ARE THE SON OF GOD, COMMAND THESE STONES TO TURN INTO BREAD”. IT IS INDEED A TERRIBLE AND WONDERFUL THING! THE EVIL SPIRITS WITH SATAN THEIR FATHER CALL HIM WHO WAS BORN FROM MARY THE “SON OF GOD”. BUT THIS MAN CHANGES THE SON OF GOD TO A MAN”.(30)
The Council of Ephesus condemned this teaching, surnamed Nestorius as “Second Judas”, confirmed the Orthodox Doctrine that was prevailing in the Church from the very beginning, called the Virgin Mary, “Theotokos”, declared that Christ the incarnate God has, after the union of Godhead and Manhood, one Person and one Nature, and the Person who was crucified and who dies was the incarnate Word of God. St. Cyril of Alexandria, in his book TRUE
BELIEF IN THE MANHOOD OF OUR LORD SAYS:
“WE DEPRIVE NEITHER THE MANHOOD OF GODHEAD NOR THE WORD OF MANHOOD AFTER THE OBSCURE AND INDESCRIBABLE UNION, BUT WE MAINTAIN THAT CHRIST THE ONE IS FORMED OF TWO THINGS JOINED TOGETHER AND MADE ONE, WHO IS FORMED OF BOTH OF THEM, AND THAT NEITHER BY DESTROYING THE TWO NATURES NOR BY THEIR MIXTURE, BUT BY MOST EXCELLENT AND HONOURABLE UNION.”(31)
12- ITS POSITION CONCERNING NESTORIUS
There is no doubt that the Syrian Church sided in the beginning with Nestorius along with its Antiochene Patriarch John I, Archbishops (except three) and bishops, because Nestorius was one of the graduates of Antiochene school, but later on the Church had to condemn him and his teachings by writing, and to maintain that “the Word who was born eternally from the Father, He Himself was reborn in flesh from our Lady the Virgin, and the Virgin is therefore Theotokos”. The Church accepted also the expression of the “union” of the two natures.(32) St. Cyril in explaining that said: “The saying of the Easterns that “the union of the two natures was affected”, is the same saying as the “Oneness of the two natures or the incarnate God is one nature”.(33)
Hiba of Edessa and Theodoret of Cyrus were the greatest defenders of Nestorius and his teachings, as they were his close relatives. Probably like him they also were newly converted from Judaism.
Hiba, while still a priest and superior of the theological school of Edessa, wrote a letter to Mari bishop of Parsis – Riordashir, who was formerly his colleague in the school of Edessa. In that letter he attached St. Cyril of Alexandria and his twelve anathemas, saying that they are “full of hypocrisy” and “against the Orthodox faith”, “for he has established in them one nature for the Godhead and manhood of our Lord, and said the it is unlawful to distinguish His words or the words of the Evangelists concerning Him”. Hiba accused St. Cyril to have maintained that the Godhead suffered. In the same letter he attached also St. Raboula of Edessa, calling him “Tyrant” while he included Theodore of Mopuestia among the Fathers of the Church, calling him “The beatific, the preacher of the truth and doctor of the Church, who maintained the true faith, who left in his writings a spiritual arm for the children of the Church, and was not satisfied in guiding his city from error to the truth, but he taught also the far away churches by his writings which are not strange to the true faith”.
In this letter, Hiba speaks of the “Temple”, that is the man, and of “who lives in him”, that is the Godhead.
In other treatises he imitates Nestorius and says: “The Jews should not be proud. Because they did not crucify God, but merely a man”, and put the following question “If God had died, who raised him from the dead”?(34)
Theodoret, in his letter to the monks of the East, calls the anathemas of St. Cyril “Hypocritical”, and his disciples “the spoilers of the true faith”, “the introducers of the strange teaching into the evangelical teaching” and “errants who do not obey the truth”. He continues: “Indeed the wicked father begets a child more wicked than himself”. After the demise of Cyril, Theodoret wrote to Domnus II of Antioch in which he not only laughed at his demise but also ridiculed his doctrine by saying : “With difficulty and too late died the wicked men live a long life”. He himself said in the church of Antioch and in the presence of Domnus : “Let heaven rejoice and the earth be cheerful, because the Egyptian dragon was swallowd”. “The grudge has died and the dispute was buried along with it”, “No one hereafter will compel his friend to blaspheme. Where are those who said that God was crucified? God will never be crucified, but he who was crucified was the man Jesus Christs “. He continued, “Let therefore be silent those who give suffering to the Godhead”!!!!!.(35)
It is a shame indeed on the part of Theodoret to accuse St. Cyril by saying that the latter maintained “that God did not take a human nature but he was altered into flesh and that the Incarnation of our Saviour was by fancy and not real, and that the union was effected as a result of mixture and confusion between the Divine nature and the form which does this, and that the Godhead of Christ which does neither suffer nor alter, had suffered, was crucified and died” !!!!
Theodoret maintained that there are “two persons and two natures for Christ, ” and believed in the “Temple and in him who dwells in it”, and called our Lady “The mother of God and the mother of man”, and distinguished the miracles as belonging to the Godhead, and the sufferings and death as to the manhood.(36)
Theodoret proceeded to Rome where he attracted its bishop Leo to Nestorianism, and made him to issue his famous Tome(37) which is full of Nestorian views. For example, he says: “Really will come Christ who is two, God and man, the first did the wonderful miracles and the second was thrown to the insults”, as if the operator in Christ is not one. Theodoret was the first to confirm it.(38) But the second Council of Ephesus which was convened in 449 by the order of the Emperor Theodosius II under the presidentship of St. Dioscorus of Alexandria ignored Leo’s Tome and excommunicated Hiba, Theodoret, Domnus of Antioch and a few other Syrian orthodox bishops, and Flavianus of Constantinople, for siding with Nestorius.
13- ITS POSITION CONCERNING THE COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON
Theodosius II died in 450. His death altered at once the state of affairs. The new rulers Pulcheria and Marcian (who was elevated to the throne by marrying her), were as partial to Leo as they were hostile to Dioscorus, according to Dr. John Gieselr. Particularly, Marcian was an intimate friend and follower of Nestorius. Hence a new general council was held at Chalcedon in 451 at the request of Leo. This council accepted Hiba and Theodoret as members in it, without condemning their above mentioned writings, and declared as orthodox after his death Theodore bishop of Mopsuestia, master of nestorius and the founder of his heresy, and considered the Tome of Leo as the basis of the doctrine. Such was the failure of the orthodox doctrine which was victorious in the third Ecumenical Council of Ephesus in 431 A.D.
The council of Chalcedon acknowledged, besides that, the Ecumenical Councils of Nicea, Constantinople and Ephesus, and the two letters of Cyril to Nestorius and the Easterns. Our remarks concerning this , are the following : –
1- It is well known that the Nicene Creed and the Tome of Leo are contrary to each other. For the Creed has attributed the mighty and humble deeds of Jesus Christ to one who is the incarnate Word of God by saying : “Real God of Real God…. descended from heaven and was incarnate …. crucified and he suffered, died, and was buried, he arose and ascended to heaven…..” . But the Tome has attributed the mighty deeds to the Godhead and the humble ones to the manhood. On this basis itself the council refused to maintain that One of the Holy Trinity suffered and was crucified, while St. Paul himself attributed the shedding of blood on the cross to God(40) and called the crucified “The Lord of glory”.(41) The council of Chalcedon by this act was confirming the teachings of Nestorius who maintained that the crucified was merely a man and not God.
This resolution encouraged the Jewish people to declare in the street a statement directed to Marcian, saying that all in the past accused our forefathers as having crucified God and not a man, but now as the council of Chalcedon has declared that they crucified a man and not God, hence we request you to give us back our synagogues.”.(42)
2- It is also clear that the Formula of the Council of Ephesus maintained one nature for Christ after the union whereas the council of Chalcedon maintained two natures for Christ. Besides, it is evident that the council of Chalcedon refused the doctrine concerning the suffering and crucifixion of one of the Holy Trinity. Regarding the expression of Theotokos it was temporarily accepted, since it remained for about a hundred years as a subject of discussion between its followers. For example, in 468 the Emperor Leo I issued an edict, through which he ordered that our Lady must be called Theotokos and her name must be included in the “Deptecha”. This edict was opposed by Martyr the Chalcedonian Patriarch of Antioch. Some Antiochene monks proceeded to Constantinople where they complained against him to the Emperor , who deposed him.(43) In the following century Agabit, Pope of Rome, was ready to cancel her commemoration, and to remove her picture from the church,(44) but his death stopped him from doing so.
3- We do not know how the council of Chalcedon acknowledged the orthodoxy of St. Cyril of Alexandria, while it accused him indirectly to have maintained “one mixed nature for the manhood and Godhead of Christ, and the suffering of the Divine nature”, just as Nestorius, Hiba and Theodoret did before, whereas it is well known that this is the teaching of a heretic called Eutyches, who appeared after the death of St. Cyril and defended his teachings, but failed to follow him in the true path. It is true that St. Cyril maintained that the person who was crucified and who suffered was the incarnate Word of God, that is, one of the Holy Trinity in manhood. Dr. John Gieseler says : “Cyril too, for the purpose of sparing the Egyptians, was declared orthodox”. “How little convinced the prevailing party of Cyril’s orthodoxy is clear from the fact that Gennadius, Patriarch of Constantinople after 453, wrote against his 12 anathemas”.(39) Really, they were not convinced of Cyril’s orthodoxy. That is why Calandiun, the Chalcedonian Patriarch of Antioch, called him in his letters “Foolish”.(45) Morevoer, Emperor Justinian I himself failed in the following century, while trying with the help of the famous theologian Leontius to reconcile between the doctrine of Cyril and that of the council of Chalcedon.(46)
From this we can summarise that the members of the council of Chalcedon not only failed to reject the heresy of Nestorius but they also succeeded in acknowledging it, though they pretended to have excommunicated its master. Had Nestorius not died before the council he would have attended it (47) like his relatives and followers Hiba of Edessa and Theodoret of Cyrus. That is why Stephanus I, the Chalcedonian Patriarch of Antioch, the Euphemius of Constantinople were afterwards enthusiastic towards Nestorianism,(48) and Macdon of Constantinople celebrated annually Nestorius feast along with a thousand monks of the monasteries of Constantinople who were accustomed to read the writings of Diodore and Theodore.(49) So also Paul, the Chalcedonian Patriarch of Antioch, celebrated nestorius’ feast.(50)
Although the council acknowledged the teachings of Nestorius it agreed with Cyril’s teachings concerning the one compound person. But its followers in the following centuries neglected them and maintained only one Divine and simple person in Christ.
14- OUR CHURCH’S APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION
The Syrian Orthodox Church, as well as the majority of the vast province of the Holy See of Antioch, rejected from the very beginning the council of Chalcedon. This caused the resignation of Patriarch Maximus in 455, and the fall of the Chalcedonian Patriarch Martyr (51) and the installation in 468 of Peter II who is known as Fuller. This Church called those who were separated from her in accepting the council of Chalcedon, “MELKITES” which means in Syriac “the followers of the king”. Our scholar Bar Ebraya calls them “Melkite Syrians”. (52) Our Church maintains firmly one person and one nature for Christ after the union, and the crucifixion of god, and the expression of Theotokos or God-bearer, after the example of St. Cyril of Alexandria and the third Ecumenical Council of Ephesus. Its Holy Fathers emphasised these teachings against both the Chalcedonians and Nestorians.
In 476 a general council was held at Constantinople by the order of the Emperor Basiliscus. Five hundred bishops took part in it under the presidentship of the above-mentioned Patriarch Peter II of Antioch and Timotheos II of Alexandria (477+) and condemned the council of Chalcedon and restored to the Church the same doctrine maintained formerly by it. (53) Consequently, the Emperor issued a significant edict concerning this fact signed by 700 bishops under the leadership of the Patriarchs of Antioch, Alexandria and Jersualem. (54) This council was followed by another in 482 which was convened by the Emperor Zeno. In the following year Zeno issued his famous Henoticon, against the Formula of the Council of Chalcedon, (55) which was confirmed by all the bishops in the East, under the leadership of the Patriarchs : Peter II of Antioch, Peter Mongos of Alexandria, Acacius of Constantinople and Anestas of Jerusalem. In 488 Patriarch Peter II of Antioch died and he was succeeded by Palladius who was succeeded by Flavian in 498. In 508 Emperor Anestas convened a council at Constantinople which condemned the council of Chalcedon and burned its original decision along with the Tome of Leo of Rome. (56) When Flavian inclined to the Chalcedonians, a council was held in Sidon in 512 by the order of Anestas which excommunicated Flavian and elected St. Severius the Great in his place. In his time all the province of Antioch with its Archbishops and bishops (except three) (57) and the faithful were against the council of Chalcedon. In the autumn of 518, only after the demise of Anestas, the adherents of this council appeared on the stage. It was then that Emperor Justin I stirred up a persecution against the Syrian Orthodox Church and exiled about forty bishops. (58) Severius, its Patriarch, moved to Egypt on 25th of September to continue, with his utmost strength , the work for the welfare of the faithful and the elevation of the truth, and the preservation of the church and deliverance of its trampled honour. In 519 Justin appointed Paul in Severius” place, whom the Antiochians surnamed “the Jewish”. (59) When his Nestorianism was disgraced and the Emperor realized his crimes against the unity of the Church he deposed him in 521, (60) and appointed Auphrosius, son of Mallah, who died accidently on 29th of May 526, during the dreadful earthquake which turned Antioch to ruins. (61) He was buried under the ruins. In the following year the Chalcedonians appointed Ephraim, the ex-governor of Antioch to succeed him. (62)
These three chalcedonian patriarchs assumed the throne of Antioch while St. Severius the legitimate patriarch was still alive in Egypt. On Feb. 8, 538 he passed away. The Divine Providence elected and encouraged St. Yacoub Burdaana one of the heroes of the Church, to defend the persecuted Church. In 543 he was consecrated a Metropolitan of Edessa in Constantinople by Theodosius of Alexandria in response to the desire of the Queen Theodora, who was a Syrian, and Hareth, son of Jabla, the Arab king of the Ghassanites.(63) In the same year he was declared as Ecumenical Metropolitan and was authorised to look after the affairs of all the presecuted orthodox Churches in Asia and Africa and to furnish the widowed dioceses with bishops and clergymen according to their need. In 543 itself he consecrated with the cooperation of some bishops, Sergis, as a Patriarch for Antioch. After the death of Sergis he consecrated Paul II in 550. (64) In the same time he visited most of the churches in Asia and Africa and consecrated for them 27 bishops and more than one hundred thousand priests and deacons (65) and a Catholicos for the East called Ahodemeh in 559. (66) Hence, the orothodox Church which obtained through him its triumph came to be unjustifiably called by its enemies “Jacobite” after his name. It is also called “Monophysite” by its opponents.
In this connection, it is important to distinguish between the teaching of St. Cyril concerning the nature of Christ “in one incarnate nature or one compound of Divine and human natures”, without their qualities’ mixture or confusion or change, and that of Eutyches in one mixed, confused and changed Divine nature. The Syrian Orthodox Church maintained, as we mentioned above, the teaching of Cyril and not that of Eutyches. It accepted the Henoticon of Zeno which contained a clear condemnation to Eutyches and his heresy, defending it through her Patriarchs Peter II and Severius the Great, and her Scholars : Mar Ishac the Antiochian, Mar Philoxenus of Maboug, Mar Peter the Kurgian, Mar Yacoub of Sroog, Mar Simon of Arsham, Mar Zakaria the Rhetorician and others. (67) Further, the council of Antioch, which was convened and presided over by the above-mentioned Peter II in 485, clearly excommunicated Eutyches and his adherents. (68) this Patriarch ordered that the Nicene Creed should be read in the Church during the Holy Eucharist in order to oppose both Eutyches and the Council of Chalcedon. (69)
The other denominations also admit that our Church not only has no connection with the heresy of Eutches, but also it condemns it along with its master. (70) It is true that a small group from Constantinople, Alexandria and Palestine sided with Eutyches at the beginning but that vanished after a short period due to the influence of the orthodox scholars.
15- THE VICTORY OF ITS DOCTRINE
The Syrian Orthodox Church, even in the intensity of persecutions, was armed with the power of truth in conducting discussions with its persecutors, and thus achieved its goal. On the 15th and the 26th of March 533 Emperor Justinian issued two edicts explaining his point of view in the controversy regarding the one or two natures. He emphasised the one-ness of the person of our Lord Jesus Christ and maintained the expression ” Theopaschits”, the suffering of God. These edicts were examined and approved by John II the Pope of Rome. (71) In 544 Justinian issued another edict against the “Three Chapters” the writings of the Nestorian leaders – Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret of Cyrus and Hiba of Edessa – whom the Council of Chalcedon declared Orthodox without condemning their teachings and writings. This edict was signed by the Chalcedonian Patriarchs, Mina of Constantinople, Zwilas of Alexandria, Ephraim of Antioch and Peter of Jerusalem. (72) He boldly declared that “Dioscorus did not commit any error in the faith”. Such declaration was made by Anatoliusa, Patriarch of Constantinople, in 451 in the fifth session of the Council of Chalcedon. The Emperor, after issuing this edict, convened a local Council in Constantinople, in which those three “Chapters” were condemned. Among those who signed the decision was Vigilius, Pope of Rome, who was in Constantinople due to the plague in Italy. The Western bishops considered this as a step against the Council of Chalcedon. In 553 Justinian convened in Constantinople the fifth general Council under the presidentship of Eutyches, the Patriarch of Constantinople, and by the approval of Vigilius of Rome. This Council condemned the above-mentioned Nestorian leaders and their writings and those who accepted or may accept them and passed the following article:
“He who separates God the Word who made miracles from Christ who suffered, or says that God the Word is with Christ who was born of a woman, or he is in and the Word of God who was incarnate and became man is one and the miracles are His and He Himself suffered in manhood willingly, is anathematized.” (73)
This article was a stab to the heart of the Council of Chalcedon on one hand and a victorious triumph for the Doctrine of The Syrian Orthodox Church on the other.
16- ITS PRESENT SITUATION (prior to 1980s)
It is clear, from what we have explained, that the Syrian Orthodox Church is the most ancient one in the whole of Christendom and that its Patriarch of Antioch once ruled over the entire Christian East including various nations of different nationalities and languages and had outstanding accomplishments in many fields by the efforts of the inspired leadership provided by its patriarchs, even when they had to pass through trials and persecutions. It is clear also that the Church in the Middle East met with hard circumstances, which resulted in the Emigration of its children in thousands to North and South America and to Europe, especially to Germany, Sweden, France, and Australia. Hence the position of its Patriarchate was disturbed by moving from one country to another. At last Damascus became the Headquarters. Such was also the case with its Archdioceses. Some of them ceased and new ones were established in other countries. By the Grace of God, we are the Patriarch of Antioch and all the East and the Supreme Head of the Universal Syrian Orthodox Church. We have at present about two and a half million followers, most of whom are in India and the rest are in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Turkey, Europe and north and South America. We have also a Catholicos in India whom we consecrated in 1964 whose title is the “Catholicos of the East”. There are also 22 Archdioceses in the Middle East, India and North America. In India we have many missions which preach the Gospel among the Heathen. At present, many of our followers are university graduates and are highly educated. Our boys and girls in the Middle East receive their primary and secondary education in our own schools and continue their higher study either in government or in Western private colleges. But in India we have our own colleges. We have two major theological Schools to educate our clergy; one of them is in Lebanon and the other in India. Recently we have started a few Social Welfare institutions. We are very glad to say that we have received some aid from the Evangelical Churches in Germany. Our vision of the fraternity of Christendom and of all mankind led us in 1960 to join the World Council of Churches which we consider a hopeful sign for the future of Christianity and the mankind at large. Although the number of the followers of our Church is reduced due to the dreadful calamities and severe persecutions which befell our Church, we are very proud of our Church , of its Syriac (Aramaic) language which is the mother tongue of our Lord Jesus Christ, and of its many activities. We are also proud that we are the descendents of the Martyrs.
REFERENCES
1 Eusbius of Caesarea, Denho Alohoyo (The Divine Revelation) 4:6.
2 Isaiah 45:1 – In Hebrew Meshiah from which the word “MESSIAH” in English is derived; from its Greek translation “CHRISTOS” the name “CHRIST” in English is derived, (See the New American Bible, Saint Joseph edition, 1970, P. 870).
3 Acts 11:26.
4 The pronounciation of (C) varies in different languages. This is the case, here, with the name of Cyrus. In some languages (C) is pronounced as (S); while in others it is pronounced as (K); just as is the case with the name of St. Cyril of Alexandria.
5 Manna, Eugene, Aramaic Dictionary, P. 488. Also, Philip Hitti, History of Syria, Vol. I, PP. 184-185.
6 Hitti, Philip, History of Syria, Vol. I, P. 63.
7 Jerome, Illustrious Men, Chapter I, Also Leo of Rome, Epistle to Anatolius of Constantinople, 451 A.D. Also Cardinal Baronius, Chronicle, concerning the years 42-43 A.D. Moreover, the Church of Rome celebrates on February 22, the festival of the establishment of St. Peter’s See in Antioch.
8 Neal, Patriarchate of Antioch, P. I. Also see our work; History of the Syrian Church of India PP. 25-27.
9 Survey of the See of Antioch at the end of the Sixth Century, attributed to the Melkite Patriarch Anastasius; the Syriac est. Version was found in the church of Basubrina, Turabdin, written in the middle of the seventh century A.D., a copy of which is preserved at the patriarchal library in Damascus. See also Ibid., History of the Syrian Church of India, P. 27.
10 Patriarch Aphraim I, Barsoum, al-Durar al-Nafisah (Church History) Vol. I PP. 340-341.
11 Patriarch Mar Michael the Great, History, PP. 321-322. Also Bar Ebraya, Ecclesiastical History, Vol. I, Cols. 220-233.
12 John Bishop of Ephesus: Lives of the Eastern Saints, Vol. 2, P. 479.,
13 Ibid, al-Durar al-Nafisah, PP. 568-569.
14 Abu Nasr Yahya Ibin Jrair of Tigrit, al-Murshid, chap. 54.
15 Al-Qalqashandi, Subhul-Aasha, Vol. I, P.139.
16 Chronicles of the (Unknown) Edessan, Vol. I. P. 182.
17 Some of the reliable sources stated that their number was more than 7000. See the Epistle of the Maphrian Maroutha of Tigrit to the Patriarch John II, in the History of Mar Michael the Great, P. 426, and the Ms Biography of St. Mathew, and the biography of St. Behnam in Vol. 2 of the (Acta, Martyrum Et Sanctorum) Paulaus Bedjan’s edition, and see also : Poem by Abi Nasr of Bartley concerning St. Mathew, and the testimony of Mar Michael the Great P. 489.
18 Patriarch Aphraim 1, Barsoum, Syriac Literature and Sciences, P. 509.
19 Chabot, J. B. (ed.) : Documento Syrorum PP. 209-224.
20 Patriarch Aphraim I, Barsoum, Lectures, at the American University of Beirut, 1933, P. 30. Also Gorum Vartabed’s the life of St. Mesrob.
21 Some of the historians regarded him as John III.
22 Ibid, Mar Michael the Great, P. 422, Also Unknown Edessan, Vol. I, PP. 263-264, Also Bar Ebraya, ibid., Vol. I, Col. 275.
23 Ibid., Syriac Literature and Sciences, P. 402.
24 Armalat, Ishaq: Melkites, P. 104, as stated in the Dictionary of the Holy Bible by Vigouroux, PP. 132-133.
25 See the sources of the Doctrine of the Church concerning the mysteries of the Incarnation and Redemption, in the History of the Syrian Church of Antioch by the Author, Vol. I. PP. 33\05-307.
26 Gieseler’s Compendium of Ecclesiastical History, Vol. I, P. 391.
27 Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th edition, Vol. 19, PP. 409-410.
28 See the references in the History of the Syrian Church of Antioch by the Author, Vol. 2, PP. 35-36.
29 Ibid., PP. 40-42; see also the 12 Anathemas of Cyril.
30 Ibid., PP. 44-50.
31 Ibid., PP. 52-56.
32 Ibid., P. 60.
33 Ibid., P. 60; see his two Epistles to Acacius Bishop of Malatia and Aulogius, Priest of the church of Constantinople.
34 Ibid., PP. 63-65. Also the Acts of the Second Council of Ephesus in Syriac. In these Acts is found the petition of the Church of Edessa against hiba, wherein it is said: “No one accepts him who is the friend of the Jews”.
35 Ibid., P. 80; also the Acts of the Second council of Ephesus.
36 Ibid., PP. 81-85; also the Acts of the Second Council of Ephesus.
37 Ibid., P. 106; also Chronicles of Zacharia the Rhetorician, Vol. I, P. 147.
38 Jerasimus Masarra, History of the Schism, Vol. I, P. 234.
39 Ibid., Gieseler’s compendium of ECC. History, Vol. I, P. 408.
40 Acts 20:28.
41 I. Cor 2 : 8.
42 Ibid., Mar Michael the Great, P. 218.
43 Ibid., Zacharia the Rhetorician, Vol. I, P. 185.
44 Ibid., John Bishop of Ephesus, Lives of the Eastern Saints, Vol. I, PP. 26-27.
45 Ibid., Zacharia the Rhetorician, Vol. I, P. 233.
46 Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, Vol. 8, P. 815, New York, 1915.
47 Ibid., Mar Michael the Great, P. 186.
48 Ibid., Zacharia the Rhetorician, Vol. 2, PP. 19-20. Also Mar Michael the Great. P. 253. See Also Yusuf al-Dibs, Maronite Bishop of Beirut, History of Syria, Vol. 4, PP. 314-315.
49 Ibid., Zacharia the Rhetorician, Vol. 2, PP. 39-40.
50 Epistle of Mar Philoxenos of Maboog to the Monks of Cenon Monastery.
51 Ibid., Zacharia the Rhetorician, Vol. I, P. 185.
52 Monrath Qudshe” (the Lighthouse of Mysteries) section 4, Part 6, Ch. 3.
53 Ibid, Jerasimus Masarra, Vol. I, P. 278, Beirut edition.
54 Ibid. Zacharia the Rhetorician, Vol. I, PP. 211-213.
55 Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, Vol. 8, P. 113, New York, 1915.
56 Ibid., Mar Michael the Great, PP. 259-260. Also Bar Ebraya, Ecc. History. Vol. I, Col. 187.
57 Epistle of Mar Philoxenos of Maboog to the Monks of the East as in Documenta Syrorum by J.B. Chabot, P. 260.
58 Ibid., Mar Michael the Great, PP. 266-267.
59 Epistle of Mar Philoxenos of Maboog to the monks of Cenun Monostery. See also Zacharia the Rhetorician, Vol. 2, P. 62, and Chronicles of John of Ephesus, Vol. 3, Bk. 1, Ch. 41.
60 Ibid., Zacharia the Rhetorician, Vol. 2, P. 62, and Chronicles of John of Ephesus, vol. 3, BK. I, Ch. 41.
61 Ibid., Zacharia the Rhetorician, Vol. 2, P. 76 and Mar Michael the Great, PP. 271-273.
62 Ibid., Yusuf al-Dibs, Vol. 4, PP. 432, 434.
63 Ibid., John of Ephesus: Lives of the Eastern Saints, Vol. 2, PP. 490, 499, 500, and 584.
64 Ibid., PP. 502-503.
65 Ibid., PP. 494, 504.
66 John of Ephesus: Chronicles, vol. III, P. 930. See also “Dafaqat al-Tib” by the Author, PP. 34-35.
67 Concerning this matter see the History of the Syrian Church of Antioch by the Author, Vol. 2, PP. 309-312.
68 Ibid., PP. 246-248. See also Zacharia the Rhetorician, Vol. I, PP. 233-235.
69 Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, Vol. 8, P. 813, New York, 1915.
70 Ibid., P. 814, See also Monophysitism of Severius by Fr. Joseph Lebon, and “al-Hujaj al-rahinat” by Bishop Clemis Yusuf Daoud, P. 155, and Nahj Wasim” by Bishop Gregorius Jirjis Shahein, Part I, PP. 17-18.
71 Asad J. Rustum, the Church of the city of God Great Antioch, Vol.I, P. 371.
72 Ibid., Yusuf al-Dibs, Vol. 4, P. 512.
73 Ibid., Mar Michael the Great, PP. 235, 238.
MORAN MOR IGHNATIUS YACOUB THE THIRD PATRIARCH OF ANTIOCH AND ALL THE EAST
1957-1980
Extracts from H.H.’s Biography
_ Was born in Bartley – Iraq on 12OCT1912, and was christened in the name Shaba.
_ At the School in Bartley he studied, Catachesim, Syriac Arabic and English languages.
_ In the year 1923 he joined St. Matai (Matthew) Seminary, St. Matai (Matthew) Monastery.
_ In the year 1924 he was ordained by Bishop John (Youhanna) Abaji as Reader.
_ On 06AUG1929 was ordained by H.H. Elias the Third as a Sub-Deacon or Aphodyacon (Syriac pronunciation).
_ In the year 1931 he joined the Syrian Orphanage and was appointed there as the Syriac and Catachesim teacher. During his stay in Lebanon he mastered the English, and studied the French languages.
_ On 20JUL1933 was ordained by H.H. Moran Mor Ighnatius Ephrem as a monk in Homs – Syria. He then was sent to Malabar (India) accompanied by H.E. Elias Koro the Apostolic Delegate to India.
_ On 19JAN1934 he was ordained as a Deacon by the Apostolic Delegate. And on 11MAR of the same year was promoted to the rank of Priest, and was appointed the Principal to Mor Ighnatius Theological School in addition to being the Secretary of the Apostolic Delegate. He undertook during the period of his stay in India some missionary work. He mastered MYLYALEM (one of the languages spoken in India by Our Syrian Orthodox Community), and was able to write several books in this language.
_ In the year 1946 was appointed by H.H. Moran Mor Ighnatius Ephrem the First as teacher and theological guide to the Seminary in Mosul, where he spent a year in the same seminary doing this job.
_ On 13DEC1947 was appointed as a member at the Church Court in Mosul – Iraq.
_ In Summer 1950 he was appointed as a Vicar for Beirut and Damascus Parish. On 17DEC of the same year was ordained as a Archbishop by H.H. Moran Mor Ighnatius Ephrem the First for the same parish with the name Mor Severius Yacoub, after the Syrian Orthodox Church Scholar Mor Severius Yacoub Al-Bartloyo (1241 +)
_ In the year 1956 he joined his brethren in ordaining the Celecia Catholichos for Armenian Church in Antelyas – Lebanon, as delegated by H.H. Patriarch Ephrem the First.
_ In the years 1956-1957 established Mor Severius Secondary School in Beirut – Lebanon.
_ On 23JUN1957 H.H. Patriarch Ephrem the First departed this world to the eternal life. On 27th October of the same year, Archbishop Severius Yacoub was elected as the next Antioch Patriarch, in the name Moran Mor Ighnatius Yacoub the Third.
_ As a Patriarch he visited all the Middle Eastern countries, Turkey, North and South America, and Europe.
_ He was able to include the Syrian Orthodox Church as a member in the World Council of Churches.
_ He visited Vatican, and met the Pope of Rome Paul the Sixth, and they both submitted a joint statement on the relationship between the two churches.
_ Worked hard to refresh the relationships between the churches of Antioch and Alexandria.
_ Recorded the Church Hymns (BEITH GAZO).
_ Transferred the Patriarchal SEE from Homs to Damascus.
_ Built several buildings for the church in different countries. Established three theological and social organizations in Atshaneh – Lebanon.
_ On 25JUN1980 he departed this world to the eternal life, and his body was buried in St. George’s yard, Damascus.
_ The church inherited several of his writings, either in the form of books, scrolls, either printed or handwritten. He also translated and published books in the Syrian heritage.
36