Methods of Instructing Syriac-Speaking Christians to Care for the Poor: A Brief Comparison of the Eighth Mēmrā of the Book of Steps and the Story of the Man of God of Edessa.
Nancy A.
Khalek
Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute
George A. Kiraz
James E. Walters
TEI XML encoding by
html2TEI.xsl
Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute
2005
Vol. 8, No. 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/hv8n1khalek
Nancy A. Khalek
Methods of Instructing Syriac-Speaking Christians to Care for the Poor: A Brief Comparison of the Eighth Mēmrā of the Book of Steps and the Story of the Man of God of Edessa.
https://hugoye.bethmardutho.org/pdf/vol8/HV8N1Khalek.pdf
Hugoye: Journal of Syriac Studies
Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute,
vol 8
issue 1
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.
Syriac Studies
Book of Steps
Man of God of Edessa
homily
hagiography
File created by XSLT transformation of original HTML encoded article.
This essay is a brief comparison of the
renunciation of material possessions in the eighth
mēmrā of the fourth-century Book of Steps
(Liber Graduum) and the sixth-century Story of the
Man of God of Edessa. The figures of the Upright and the
Perfect in the anonymous Book of Steps exhibit striking
correlations with the characters presented in the Story of
the Man of God. Analysis of this homily and hagiography
provide insight as to the pedagogical mechanisms within, and
instructional usefulness of each text.
[1]
Instructing Christians to care for the poor is a common theme
in the Syriac tradition.
An extended version of this essay was written for a
seminar on Poverty and Charity in Late Antiquity instructed by
Peter Brown at Princeton University. Credit and special thanks
are also due to Professor Robert Doran of Amherst University
for all of his extremely helpful comments on many aspects of
this paper.
Texts in the form of homilies,
poems, or hagiographies employ various pedagogical strategies
for the purpose of preaching, expounding upon, or demonstrating
the value of charity. Two sources which represent the didactic
qualities of such instruction are the sixth-century Story
of the Man of God of Edessa and the eighth
mēmrā of fourth-century Book of Steps
(Liber Graduum), which is titled “On One Who
Feeds all of His Possessions to the Poor.” The former is
a hagiographical text while the latter is one short portion of
the well-known anonymous collection of thirty
mēmrē.
It is worth mentioning at the outset that while I
shall not address the issue here, discussions of the Book of
Steps usually include analysis of the debate over whether there
is a Messalian affiliation with the text. For a concise summary
of this debate, see Columba A. Stewart, Working the Earth
of the Heart: The Messalian Controversy in History, texts and
Language to AD 431, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991).
References to the eighth mēmrā of the Book
of Steps in this essay are to the M. Kmosko 1926 critical
edition in PS III. For the sake of convenience, I shall also
use Kmosko’s system for division of the text of
mēmrā 8 into five sections. All references
will cite the mēmrā number, followed by the
column number and line numbers. A complete English
translation of and introduction to the Book of Steps by R.A.
Kitchen ad M.F.G. Parmentier is forthcoming from Cistercian
Publications. For the purposes of excerpts cited here, I
use my own working translation.
By comparing these ostensibly
disparate sources, it is possible to find striking correlations
in their instructions to care for the poor.
[2] I have
chosen to compare these two texts for simple and
straightforward reasons. First, it is well known that the
anonymous author of the Book of Steps divides the Christian
community into two main groups, the Upright
(kēnē) and the Perfect
(gmīrē).
On the division of the Christian community into
these categories, see R.A. Kitchen, “Conflict on the
Stairway to Heaven: The Anonymity of Perfection in the Syriac
Liber Graduum,” (Symposium Syriacum VII, Uppsala
1996; Orientalia Christiana Analecta 256, 1998)
211-220. See also Daniel Caner, Wandering, Begging Monks:
The Promotion of Monasticism in Late Antiquity, (The
Transformation of Classical Heritage 33; Berkeley: University
of California Press, 2002) esp. 106-112 and finally, Antoine
Guillaumont, ‘Situation et signification du
« Liber Graduum » dans la
spiritualité syriaque’ in Symposium
Syriacum 1972, 311-322.
Collectively, the
mēmrē in the Book of Steps enumerate the
duties and character of these groups with respect to many
issues, among them poverty and charity.
Mēmrā eight is one homily which exclusively
addresses Christians who renounce material wealth to varying
degrees. It also lays emphasis on the voluntary aspect
of giving away material possessions for the sake of the Lord.
Our second text, The Story of the Man of God of
Edessa, is a parable enjoining Christians to care for the
poor and glorifying the example of a saint whose most
significant deed was the fact that his severe poverty
was voluntary. Set in the late fourth and early fifth century,
this hagiography likewise conveys the import of maintaining the
needs of the poor and indigent, this time in the form of a
moral lesson. Searching these sources for common motifs,
especially in relation to poverty and charity, yields useful
information for increasing our understanding of each text.
The Book of Steps, Mēmrā Eight
[3]
According to the Book of Steps, how a community member
functions depends upon whether or not one is Upright or
Perfect. Put simply, the Perfect are characterized by a
total renunciation of material wealth and a complete reliance
upon the charity of others for material sustenance. Charity in
the Book of Steps thus has two dimensions: it is favorable to
give charity as an act of benevolence (which simultaneously
constitutes a renunciation of a portion of one’s wealth),
and it is favorable to receive charity if the
condition under which one receives it is the pursuit of
Perfection. Provision of such charity is, in turn, the
obligation of the Upright.
D. Caner, Wandering, Begging Monks,
108-109, n 111.
In return for giving the Perfect
their sustenance, the Upright benefit from the teaching and
prayers of the Perfect, who comprise a valuable spiritual asset
for the community as a whole. References to this symbiotic
relationship are numerous in the Book of Steps.
For another discussion of the exchange of actual
for spiritual merchandise, see Adam Becker, “Anti-Judaism
and Care for the Poor in Aphrahat’s Demonstration
20,” Journal of Early Christian Studies, 10
(2002) esp. 311-12.
The eighth
mēmrā, which is short and seemingly
non-descript, provides a simple formula for activities
incumbent upon the Upright on the basis of Matthew 25:35-36;
feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, giving drink to the
thirsty, healing the sick and visiting the imprisoned. Wealth
is permitted for the Upright only if they use it for the
welfare of others. Put simply, the Upright maintain the
social needs of others.
A. Guillaumont, ‘Situation et
signification’ 311-322.
That the Perfect are in need of support is
a theme throughout the Book of Steps.
Mēmrā eight concisely summarizes the
circumstances under which the Perfect retains no possessions,
and “has no place on earth to lay his
head.”
8: 193, 20-21.
Instead he “contemplates what is in the
heavenly Jerusalem, and is focused there on the
Lord.”
8: 193, 6-7.
[4] Daniel
Caner’s recent work illustrates that the instruction to
care for the masses of the poor which is directed towards the
Upright in the Book of Steps also refers to assisting the
impoverished Perfect. A system of reciprocity between Upright
and Perfect, whereby material support is exchanged for the
spiritual assets conferred upon the community by the Perfect is
clear elsewhere in the Book of Steps.
Caner, Wandering, Begging Monks, 109. On
the parallels between the relationship of the Upright and the
Perfect and that of the Manichaean “Elect” and
“Auditor” see Jason Beduhn’s The
Manichaean Body, (The Johns Hopkins University Press,
2000) especially pp. 27ff. Beduhn cites the Latin Tebessa
Codex which expounds upon these categories in Manichaean
doctrine and states: “These two grades…support
each other and whoever has abundance of anything shares it with
the other; the Elect with the Auditors from their heavenly
store... and the Auditors with the Elect [from their
terrestrial wealth].”
That the Perfect could
resemble the everyday poor is a theme in
mēmrā twenty, where one such Christian is
described as “begging food and clothing like a poor
person.”
ibid. 110, n 120.
The relation between Upright and Perfect as
one of giving and receiving charity is explicit in
mēmrā three, which reports that the Upright
must also support “those who have no possessions or
profession, who apply themselves wholly to the teaching of our
Lord.”11 Thus, when we read the term “the
poor” in the Book of Steps, we should bear in mind both
types of recipients of charity. Corresponding to each category
of recipient, charity in the Book of Steps thereby has both an
inherent and a potentially reciprocal value.
[5] In
keeping with this hypothesis and therefore in spite of
its title, the actual masses of the poor make no substantive
appearance in this mēmrā, which primarily
communicates the difference between the Upright and the Perfect
while assuring the Upright of their salvation and encouraging
the pursuit of perfection through daily spiritual advancement.
In this sense the eighth mēmrā is both a
presentation of a scheme and an exhortation. While the station
of the perfect is stressed as vastly superior to that of the
Upright, the mēmrā contains numerous
reminders of the dignity of the Upright, who are always assured
of their status, their eventual salvation and impending reward.
In the first section of mēmrā eight we read:
“If you know the Truth, that Truth will set you
free”; even though the free are not perfect, as soon as
they know the truth they are liberated from lying and
enslavement to sin and they shall become Upright, and they
shall not come into judgment.”
8:192, 7-12, cf. John 8:32.
The first section
also outlines what was noted above as characteristic of the
active ministry of the Upright: feeding the hungry, giving
drink to the thirsty, welcoming the stranger, clothing the
naked, and visiting the sick and the imprisoned. This is the
only mention of society’s have-nots in the entire
mēmrā. They serve only to illustrate the
basic duties of the majority of the members of the community.
The relative status of the Upright is noted at the end of this
section, where the author notes that the Upright are on a path
to salvation and that through daily persistence they may attain
the Perfection that is beyond acts of charity.
[6] In this
opening section of the mēmrā, we are also
confronted by an apparent contradiction. The Apostle Paul
claims that giving up all worldly possession is of no benefit
if one does not possess love, yet Jesus tells his apostles that
the reward of one who gives even a cup of water to another
shall not be lost. The entire homily serves to reconcile these
two views by imposing the scheme of “Upright versus
Perfect” onto the text. Paul was referring to the formula
for Perfection, while Jesus was expounding on the active
aspects of Christian ministry performed by the Upright. The
author reconciles this contradiction in the following excerpt
from section two:
But how did the Apostle say that these things are
nothing?
Here “these things” refers to
charitable deeds.
He also said, “If I should give
my body to be burned and love is not in me, I am
nothing.”
1Cor13:3.
For what indeed is that thing which is
better than all things for which the Apostle longs? The Lord
said “Whoever gives his cheek to the one who strikes
him and is patient, he shall come to Perfection, if he loves
and prays for whoever strikes him.” Is it that the
Apostle negates the words of our Lord? God forbid! No, he
does not negate them. Rather, he builds upon them. The
Apostle does not say that the words are not fitting, rather,
something great he puts there.
Meaning, he gives the words a greater
meaning.
Namely [the Apostle
is talking about]
I have inserted this phrase in square
brackets, as it is my best rendering of the meaning of this
section where we see a continuation of the theme of differences
between the Upright and the Perfect. What follows is a long
list of attributes of the one who possesses “humble
love”, (the Perfect) which in turn is personified, adding
a degree of vagueness to the description.
one who feeds all he has to the poor
for the sake of God, and is emptied out as He commanded him,
and he renounces all things but that humble love is
not in him, who is compassionate to his murderers and who
washes the feet of his enemies and who considers all people
as if they are greater than he,
Cf. Phil 2:3. In general, this excerpt
recalls themes in Phil. 2:5-8, where Christ humbled Himself as
he took on the “form of a servant, and was made in the
likeness of men.”
and who gazes upon the
heavens and not the earth, and in his mind contemplates what
is in the heavenly Jerusalem, and is focused there on the
Lord.
8: 192, 15-8:193, 9.
[7] Thus the
explanation of this apparent paradox is that “the thing
for which the Apostle longs” is to attain a state of
spiritual advancement whereby one loves and prays for
one’s enemies. It is in this section that we first
encounter the term
“msārrqūţā”,
‘emptying out.’ This is designated as a great
commandment, and indicates the complete renunciation of wealth,
stability, and family life. In order to perfectly fulfill the
great commandment, msārrqūţā must
be accompanied by makkīkūţā,
‘humility.’ Without “humble
love”, renunciation is not meaningless, but it is
insignificant when compared to the fulfillment of the great
commandment as performed by the Perfect Christian.
Interestingly, Perfect love is personified in the remainder of
this section, in an elaborate description of what a Perfect
should embody.
[8] The
disparity between Upright and Perfect is reiterated in the
beginning of section three, which is also the section that best
highlights the difference between material renunciation and
interior spiritual advancement. The author notes that it
is possible to renounce all possessions on behalf of the Lord
and still not achieve perfect humility:
For it is possible that men give all they possess
and become needy on earth for the sake of the Lord, yet not
arrive at that humility. For they love as much as they
are loved, and they are humble to some men and they are not
humble to everyone. And on account of that they are much less
than one who comes to complete love. For he who does not
become humble, is not being perfected, and he who is not
humbled is much less than the Perfect ones.
8:196, 1-10.
[9] Thus
this sermon summarizes, in a simplified form, the Book of
Step’s schematic for levels of spiritual advancement as
effected by gradations of the renunciation of wealth. The
Upright do charitable works, and the Upright who are advancing
towards Perfection renounce possessions, but with varying
degrees of humility and love for others. Once those degrees are
surpassed, the Upright achieves Perfection, and is humbled to
all. Overcoming obstacles to perfect humility is the process by
which one is perfected. In section five, we read a
summation of the relative worthiness of the Upright and the
Perfect:
And also there are those men who left behind all they
possessed for the sake of the Lord and who love Him, and are
compassionate towards Him, but there is not in them that love
that loves God and Human Beings. And because they loved the
Lord, He reveals to them the mysteries that are in the
heavens, and all knowledge of faith, yet they do not
understand the height and the depth and the latitude and the
longitude that (perfect) love comprehends. Rather, they
understand the mysteries and all the knowledge that is in
faith.
8:197, 18-8:200, 1.
[10] In
the passages presented thus far, the key issue is the voluntary
nature of the renunciation of wealth. In the proto-monastic
world of the Book of Steps, neediness alone could not comprise
Uprightness. The volition with which one became needy and the
degree of his accompanying humility determined the status of
the believer. Caner aptly observes that “the Book of
Steps describes not so much a monastic community or even a
single, unified ascetic elite as a reciprocal relationship that
loosely binds spiritually advanced ascetics to other
Christians.”
Caner, Wandering, Begging Monks,
111.
The excerpt above elucidates an aspect of
such spiritual advancement in a manner typical of the Book of
Steps: while it points towards those who “left
everything,” that is who renounced wealth for the sake of
the poor, it is nonetheless a reference to the Upright and
not to the Perfect, as the mēmrā
goes on to clarify that Perfection is characterized by complete
humility and abasement in addition to the renunciation of
wealth.
In this mēmrā we read
that the Perfect “reckons sinners greater than he, while
he is not anxious all day, and does not have a place to prop
his head on the earth.” See 8: 193, 19-21.
The lines cited above, which open the
concluding section of the mēmrā,
simultaneously reassure and encourage the Upright.
For a discussion of the possibility of an
Upright attaining Perfection with respect to those stations in
terms of Adam and the Fall, see Aleksander Kowalksi,
Perfezione e Giustizia di Adamo nel Liber Graduum
(Rome: Orientala Chrsitiana Analecta 232, 1989).
[11] The
fifth and final section of this mēmrā
reiterates the theme of having knowledge of faith without
comprehending perfect love. It exhorts the Upright to seek
perfection by emphasizing the vast superiority of that station
to all others, but likewise continues to stress that the life
of the Upright is not without its reward.
[12] In
this short, at first non-descript homily, some essential themes
of this unique strand of earliest Syriac asceticism are
encapsulated. It is above all an instructional text, reminding
the community of its obligations, its character, and its
impending salvation. It is aimed primarily at the Upright who
are involved in an active, practical ministry aimed at serving
the needs of the indigent Perfect, while it idealizes the
Perfect whose inner life and spiritual advancement surpass the
ordinary world of giving and taking. It remains to see the
Upright Christian who ministers to the poor in action, as a
character in an inspiring and motivational story. The Story
of the Man of God of Edessa provides precisely that sort
of motivational parable.
The Man of God of Edessa
[13] The
history of this hagiographical text is complicated and somewhat
convoluted. The Story of the Man of God, a
sixth-century anonymous saint’s life became conflated
with the Life of Saint Alexis in the early Middle
Ages.
See Arthur Amiaud. La légende
syriaque de saint Alexis, l’homme de Dieu, (Paris:
Bibliothèque de l'Ecole des hautes etudes, 1889) and
forthcoming from Cistercian Publications, a comparison
of the Syriac and Greek versions of the story of the Man
of God in an essay by R. Doran.
In 1889, Arthur Amiaud published his research
on Syriac manuscripts relating to Saint Alexis, whereupon the
Man of God narrative was shown to be an earlier story
to which the material relating to Saint Alexis was
added. My hypothesis is that the story of The Man of
God is a parable aimed at encouraging devotional behavior
in a manner which is thematically consonant with the Upright
Christian’s as outlined in the Book of Steps. It is not a
typical hagiography, however, in that it is sparing in its use
of miracles to embellish the narrative, and is essentially
unadorned by extensive biblical quotation, even in cases where
obvious references virtually spring to mind. As such, the story
is a clear and simple pedagogical tool, which must have
resonated in its function as a parable for those to whom it was
read.
Dr. Doran has kindly provided me with a
manuscript of his upcoming publication on the issue of the life
of The Man of God as a parable, where he explores some of these
issues in greater detail.
[14] The
Syriac version of the narrative of the Man of God is set during
the lifetime of the Bishop Rabbula, who presided over the
Church in Edessa from 412-436 CE. The manuscript dates to
the sixth century, whereas the story itself bespeaks an earlier
milieu. The basic plot of the Story of the Man of God
is that the son of wealthy parents rejects the ostentatious
life, and wife, that his noble birth afford him. He
leaves home on his wedding day and boards a ship headed for
Edessa where he proceeds to live as an anonymous and pious poor
person, devoted to nearly constant prayer and refusing to
reveal his identity until compelled to do so by an oath made by
a church custodian.
In his forthcoming publication, cited above,
Robert Doran also notes similarities between the Man of
God narrative and the life of John Calybite.
This kind of uprooting and dislocation is
an essential aspect of the story, in that it is the main cause
of the deep fissure between the Man of God’s past and his
ascetic life. Upon discovering the worldly nobility of the Man
of God, the custodian wishes to reveal the secret, and promises
not to only at the urgent request of the Man of God. The
protagonist then falls ill and passes away in a hospital for
the poor. After his death, the custodian notifies Bishop
Rabbula and divulges the Man of God’s true identity.
Seeking his remains in a cemetery for the poor, the Bishop and
the custodian are only able to find the rags worn by the old
man.
[15] In
remorse mixed with inspiration, the Syriac version of the story
relates Rabbula’s resolution to care for the poor, with
the added warning that one could never be sure that precisely
such a holy person was not in their midst. Rabbula
asks, “Who knows whether there are many like this saint,
who delight in abasement, nobles to God in their souls, but not
recognized by humans because of their physical
abasement?”
Amiaud, La légende syriaque,
appendix, 9.
Rabbula thus demonstrates a particular
response to the presence of the poor and indigent. It is noted
that he subsequently suspended all other activities and
building projects to devote himself completely to the care of
the needy. The potential presence of such hidden treasure
troves of spiritual excellence is explicitly acknowledged by
Bishop Rabbula. As such, poor people like the Man of God
provided the community, which in turn is represented in the
story by the figures of the Bishop and the custodian, with a
clear mechanism for Christian action in the form of
charity.
It is well worth remembering that the
Life of Alexander Akoimetos tells us that before he
was a Bishop, Rabbula gave up all material possessions and
devoted himself to a life of severe asceticism. See
Caner’s appendix in Wandering, Begging Monks,
261-263.
[16] Thus
the Story of the Man of God is both a parable and a
story about tests, and as a pedagogical tool it thereby serves
two instructional purposes. First, those who hear the
story should be inspired by the hero’s bravery, devotion
and pious behavior. Second, like Rabbula, they should be
inspired to modify their own behavior towards the
poor. The performance of such charitable acts is,
according to The Story of the Man of God, informed by
the two sentiments expressed by Bishop Rabbula: a desire to
help the poor and indigent, and a suspicion that a holy man in
the guise of a beggar was always in one’s midst. This
theme obviously alludes to the words of Christ in Matthew
25:35-36, the same verses that open our
mēmrā in the Book of Steps.
On the relationship between the Man of God
legend and the Life of Rabbula, see Hans Drijvers,
“The Man of God of Edessa, Bishop Rabbula, and the Urban
Poor, Church and Society in the Fifth Century,”
JECS 4 (1996) 235-248. The argument put forth by
Drijvers asserts that both texts are propaganda tracts aimed
against Rabbula’s rival and successor, Hiba.
[17]
Parallels between the Perfect and the Man of God are also
evident. For example, the Man on God was an heir to great
wealth, but rejected it. He was “joyfully separated from
his country, for he yearned and was pressing in his position to
be enrolled and recognized in the Jerusalem which is
above.”
Amiaud, La légende syriaque,
appendix, 2.
The Perfect likewise “contemplates what
is in the heavenly Jerusalem, and is focused there on the
Lord.”
8: 193, 8-9.
Both opt for a life of severe poverty, and
rely upon others for material support. Both represent a
spiritual asset for the Christian community, as the Book of
Steps makes clear and as Rabbula explicitly states at the end
of The Story of the Man of God.
Whether this asset is exploited for
political purposes is another matter, see Drijvers, op.
cit. 248.
The similarity
between the Perfect and the Book of and the Man of God is
ultimately bolstered by the similitude of both figures as
pedagogical characters. We should remember that perfection is
an ideal to which Upright Christians aspire. When Bishop
Rabbula and the custodian marvel at the remarkable sacrifices
made by the Saint in his life of voluntary poverty we have two
parallels for Upright Christians on the path to perfection. For
example, our author tells us:
From then on, that custodian, although he had been doing his
work, improved himself through severe practices. He trained
his body more than previously until even his appearance bore
witness to his practices, as he told himself, “If that
one who lived in great luxury does these things, what should
we wretches do to receive our redemption?”
Amiaud, La légende syriaque,
appendix, 7.
[18] The
custodian and Bishop Rabbula are as impressed by the austerity
of the life of the Man of God as they are by the voluntary
renunciation of wealth and physical abasement undertaken by the
Man of God. If we wish to round out our understanding of
Upright Christians aspiring towards or transitioning into a
life of Perfection, the examples of Rabbula and the custodian,
on account of their reflection and reactions, are useful
models.
On the figure of Rabbula as a
“paradigm of action” see Susan A. Harvey,
“The Holy and the Poor: Models from Early Syriac
Christianity,” in The Eye of a Needle:
Judeo-Christian Roots of Social Welfare, ed. Emily Albu
Hanawalt and Carter Lindberg (Clarksville: Thomas
Jefferson University Press, 1994) 43-66.
Conclusion
[19]
Throughout the Book of Steps, and in capsule form, in the
eighth mēmrā of that collection, the
position of the Upright with respect to the Perfect is clear.
They are to support the efforts of the elect who in turn
provide a spiritual asset for the community. A key aspect of
perfection in the Book of Steps is the combination of voluntary
poverty with extreme physical and social abasement. This
renders the Perfect identical to the masses of the poor, to
beggars, to precisely the persona we see adopted by the Man of
God. The Story of the Man of God is a hagiographical
manifestation of the intended message of this
mēmrā, with the Man of God in the role of
the Perfect Christian who voluntarily renounces all worldly
goods and who also resembles an anonymous poor person in spite
of his high spiritual and social status. In this hagiographical
text, through the figures of the custodian and Bishop Rabbula,
listeners were reminded that providing for the poor was
incumbent upon them in part because of the inherent value of
giving, and in part because of the potential greatness of the
recipient.
The author of the Liber Graduum makes
another reference to just such a possibility in 25.6, col. 745.
[20] The
Man of God himself was every man’s Christian hero. He
presented a challenge in that he represented the potentially
hidden member of the spiritual elect in the guise of a poor
person to whom someone like the Upright Christian should
minister. As a pedagogical tool, the figure of Man of God was,
in short, a benevolent boogeyman; ever-present in the back of
one’s mind, and lurking, as a test for those around him,
in every crowd of beggars huddled on the street. In these two
short, disparate and somewhat elusive texts, a comparison of
common motifs serves to flesh out and broaden our potential
understanding of each._______
Notes
11 ibid. 111, n 129.
_______
Bibliography
Amiaud, A., La légende
syriaque de saint Alexis, l'homme de Dieu, (Paris:
Bibliothèque de l'Ecole des hautes etudes, 1889).
Beduhn, Jason, The Manichaean
Body, (The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000)
Becker, Adam, "Anti-Judaism and Care
for the Poor in Aphrahat's Demonstration 20," Journal of
Early Christian Studies, 10 (2002) 305-327.
Caner, D., Wandering, Begging
Monks: The Promotion of Monasticism in Late Antiquity,
(The Transformation of Classical Heritage 33; Berkeley:
University of California Press, 2002).
Drijvers, Hans, "The Man of God of
Edessa, Bishop Rabbula, and the Urban Poor, Church and Society
in the Fifth Century," JECS 4 (1996) 235-248.
Guillaumont, A., 'Situation et
signification du « Liber Graduum » dans la
spiritualité syriaque' (Symposium Syriacum
1972) 311-322.
Harvey, Susan A, "The Holy and the
Poor: Models from Early Syriac Christianity," in The Eye of
a Needle: Judeo-Christian Roots of Social Welfare, ed.
Emily Albu Hanawalt and Carter Lindberg, (Clarksville: Thomas
Jefferson University Press, 1994) 43-66.
Kmosko, M., ed., Liber
Graduum (Patrologia Syriaca 3; Paris, 1926).
Kowalksi, Aleksander, Perfezione
e Giustizia di Adamo nel Liber Graduum, (Rome: Orientala
Chrsitiana Analecta 232, 1989).
Kitchen, R.A. "Conflict on the
Stairway to Heaven: The Anonymity of Perfection in the Syriac
Liber Graduum," (Symposium Syriacum VII, Uppsala 1996;
Orientalia Christiana Analecta 256, (1998)
211-220.
Stewart, C.A., Working the Earth
of the Heart: The Messalian Controversy in History, texts and
Language to AD 431, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991).