Catalin-Stefan Popa, Gīwargīs I. (660–680).
Ostsyrische Christologie in frühislamischer Zeit
Lucas
Van Rompay
(Emeritus, Duke University) 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands
Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute
George A. Kiraz
James E. Walters
TEI XML encoding by
James E. Walters
Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute
2018
Volume 21.1
For this publication, a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
license has been granted by the author(s), who retain full
copyright.
https://hugoye.bethmardutho.org/article/hv21n1prvanrompay
Lucas Van Rompay
Review of: Gīwargīs I. (660–680).
Ostsyrische Christologie in frühislamischer Zeit
https://hugoye.bethmardutho.org/pdf/vol21/HV21N1PRVanRompay.pdf
Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies
Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute, 2018
vol 21
issue 1
pp 231–235
Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies is an electronic journal dedicated to the study
of the Syriac tradition, published semi-annually (in January and July) by Beth
Mardutho: The Syriac Institute. Published since 1998, Hugoye seeks to offer the
best scholarship available in the field of Syriac studies.
File created by James E. Walters
Catalin-Stefan Popa, Gīwargīs I. (660–680).
Ostsyrische Christologie in frühislamischer Zeit, Göttinger
Orientforschungen, Syriaca 50 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2016). Pp. viii +
166; € 48.
As the fourth catholicos of the Church of the East since the rise of Islam
(following Ishoʿyahb II [628–645], Maremeh [646–649], and Ishoʿyahb III
[649–659]), Gewargis I played an important role in giving his church a new
voice under Islam. Submitted as a doctoral dissertation at the Theological
Faculty of the University of Göttingen, Catalin-Stefan Popa’s study of this
pivotal but often overlooked historical figure makes a significant
contribution to the field. It critically presents and contextualizes the
available information on Gewargis’ life and elucidates his position as a
theologian of the Church of the East. The book is well documented, well
presented, and well written. It consists of two parts. The first part deals
with Gewargis’ biography and recounts the synod that was held under his
leadership on the island of Dirin (nowadays part of Bahrain) (pp. 15–56);
the second part offers a detailed analysis of Gewargis’ Letter to Mina (pp. 59–141), a significant
theological exposition in which we encounter Gewargis as an individual
author, preacher, and pastor.
Thomas of Marga’s Book of Governors is our
main source for Gewargis’ biography. Hailing from Kafra, in Beth Garmai,
Gewargis entered the famous monastery of Beth ʿAbe at a young age, perhaps
shortly before 630, where he met and befriended, in a master-disciple
relationship, (the later catholicos) Ishoʿyahb III. Gewargis became
Ishoʿyahb’s successor, first as metropolitan bishop of Adiabene (in 649)
and, following Ishoʿyahb’s death in 659, as catholicos. Gewargis faced two
rivals for the patriarchal see. The way in which he was able to silence
their claims and maintain power as the sole legitimate catholicos attests,
according to the author, to his sense for reconciliation and compromise (p.
29).
The Synod of Dirin held in 676 – undoubtedly a highlight in Gewargis’
twenty-year long tenure as catholicos – was the concluding part of a
visitation that he undertook to the region of Beth Qaṭraye, on the Persian
Gulf. As recounted in several letters of Ishoʿyahb III, a revolt had erupted
in the middle of the century among the bishops of this region, setting the
backdrop for this visitation. Even though the details remain unknown, the
synod seems to have succeeded in mitigating the simmering conflict. The
elevation of Beth Qaṭraye to the status of a metropolitan bishopric, as
attested in the synodal acts, may have been part of the solution
(pp. 43–44). It is probable that the synod had a local scope, limited to
Beth Qaṭraye (p. 45).
The short report of the synod, followed by a list of nineteen canons, is
preserved in the Synodicon Orientale of the
Church of the East (ed. J.-B. Chabot, 1902, 215–226). The first canon urges
the bishops and teachers to instruct the faithful in the “healthy faith,”
particularly on Sundays and holidays, so that they may stand firm in
confronting heretics (heresiyoṭe). The
following canons are principally concerned with organizational matters and
aim at raising the disciplinary and moral standards of lay people and
clergy. Warnings are issued against Christian women who consider marriage
with pagans (ḥanpe – a term which includes
Muslims, pp. 48–52) as well as against men hastening to drink wine in Jewish
taverns after the liturgy.
Gewargis’ Letter to Mina, “priest and
chorbishop in the land of the Persians,” written a few years after the
synod, in 678/9, follows the report and the canons in the Synodicon (ed. Chabot, 227–245) and thus must have
obtained an authoritative status. While Gewargis offers his reader a very
broad outline of the theological positions of his Church, the focus is on
the Incarnation and its Christological implications. Gewargis hints at
heretical views which might have planted some doubt in Mina’s mind.
Interestingly, the letter as it was sent to Mina was written “in the Persian
language, which is easy (pshiq) for you,”
and Mina was encouraged to have it read before him “many times” (ed. Chabot,
244–245). Regardless of whether in the Synodicon we are dealing with the Syriac translation of a text
originally written in Persian, or with the Syriac draft from which the
Persian translation was made, the Letter –
with its theological concepts and specific terminology – is fully embedded
in the East Syriac tradition, which to a large extent was based on the
writings of Theodore of Mopsuestia and was shaped and transmitted in the
East Syriac schools.
Even though the Letter to Mina has
received some attention from modern scholars (most recently D. W. Winkler,
in Journal of Eastern Christian Studies 60
[2008], 293–311), the author provides here the most extensive study to date
(pp. 69–141). He successively discusses: (1) the doctrine of God; (2) the
Trinity; (3) creation, including the important aspect of divine pedagogy;
(4) the righteous and prophets of the Old Testament as signposts, or
“Hinweisfiguren” (p. 98), on the path to Christ (Abel, Enoch, and Elijah;
Noah; Abraham and Jacob; David; Isaiah, Micah, and Malachi); (5)
Christology: Christ’s two natures; the concept of “indwelling,” exemplified
in John 2:19–22; the union of the two natures; refutation of heretical
views, wherein Gewargis insists that the two natures remain separated, that
Christ as Savior must be fully human and fully divine, and that, given human
hopelessness and bondage to sin, no other way of renewal and salvation would
have been possible. Throughout the exposition, Gewargis cites biblical
verses from both the Old and New Testament as prooftexts, and he concludes
the Letter with a short florilegium
demonstrating that the orthodox faith, as preserved in its purity
exclusively in the Church of the East, originally belonged to the universal
church.
In the Letter, as the author observes,
Gewargis intended to summarize the faith accessibly and concisely (as Mina
had requested), avoiding technical details and not wanting to make an
original contribution to the theological tradition of his Church. It is
interesting to see, e.g., that in spite of the letter’s Christological
focus, Gewargis does not discuss the “two qnome” in Christ (which led to so much controversy in the time of
Babai and Ishoʿyahb II). He simply takes the two qnome for granted in his use of the expression “two hypostatic
natures,” or “zwei qnōmische Naturen” (p. 120: kyane qnomaye). In addition to the Letter’s reader-friendliness, Gewargis also frequently uses the
pronouns of the first and second person (“I” and “you”), thus intimating
that he and his (possibly wavering) correspondent both stand, and should
stand, firm in the same community of faith. This faith needs to be defended
against different enemies: the Jews, who have an incomplete understanding of
God, the ḥanpe (a moniker here for the
Muslims), who are “without God,” and those Christians who have such
blasphemous ideas about Christ and the Incarnation that they may be said to
be “without God” as well (pp. 127–128). The Miaphysites are doubtless
included within this last group. Gewargis’ letter thus stands in the long
tradition of rivalry between the Syriac Orthodox and the Church of the East,
which started in the early sixth century under the Sasanians and continued
into the early Islamic period.
The author brings many valuable insights to this important text. With an
abundance of references he situates the text within the East Syriac
tradition. With regard to Gewargis’ sources, it is worth noticing that T.
Jansma, in his study of Narsai’s homily no. 34 (“On the creation,” ed.
Mingana, II, pp. 168–180), was so impressed with the similarity between this
homily and a long section in Gewargis’ Letter, that he regarded the latter as a prose rendering of
Narsai’s verse homily, “basé … sur les mêmes idées, et rédigé dans presque
les mêmes termes” (“Études sur la pensée de Narsaï,” L’Orient Syrien 11 [1966], 425–429). One wonders
whether among the many parallel texts adduced by the author (in which Narsai
features prominently), some special connection between Narsai and Gewargis
could be detected.
Biblical commentaries appear to be an underrepresented genre among the
sources listed by the author, particularly in the discussion of Gewargis’
treatment of the Old Testament. The only reason why Jansma refrained from
assuming a direct relationship between Narsai and Gewargis was the quotation
of Job 38:7 (in the context of the creation of the light), which is found in
Gewargis’ Letter and, in a similar context,
among the Syriac fragments of Theodore’s Commentary on Genesis edited by E. Sachau (1869), but is absent
from Narsai. The same quotation, however, is found in the Diyarbakır Commentary on Genesis (CSCO 483 / Syr. 205,
1986, p. 4). Consultation of this commentary – which may have been composed
only a few decades after the Letter to Mina
– might have helped the author in his somewhat convoluted discussion of Job
38:7 in Gewargis’ Letter (pp. 84–87). The
same commentary could have shed light on the discussion of the primordial
creatures. Gewargis and the Diyarbakır commentator (ed., p. 7) agree that
“in the beginning” seven creatures were created in silence: heaven, earth,
fire, water, air, darkness, and the angels (for Narsai, see
Jansma, 416–417). I believe that the author’s analysis of this question –
suggesting a possible discrepancy between Gewargis and the rest of the East
Syriac tradition (p. 80) – needs correction.
These minor issues do not affect the overall very fine quality of the book.
The author’s deep and well-informed reading and study of the original
sources should be welcomed as a major contribution to our knowledge of an
important period in the history of the Church of the East.