Full download John of damascus: more than a compiler scott ables pdf docx by Education Libraries

John of Damascus: More Than a Compiler Scott Ables

Visit to download the full and correct content document: https://ebookmass.com/product/john-of-damascus-more-than-a-compiler-scott-ables/

More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant download maybe you interests ...

John of Damascus: More Than a Compiler Scott Ables (Editor)

https://ebookmass.com/product/john-of-damascus-more-than-acompiler-scott-ables-editor/

More than a Companion Rose Pearson

https://ebookmass.com/product/more-than-a-companion-rose-pearson/

MORE THAN I COULD Locke

https://ebookmass.com/product/more-than-i-could-locke/

More than a Governess: A Regency Romance Rose Pearson

https://ebookmass.com/product/more-than-a-governess-a-regencyromance-rose-pearson/

More Than Marriage: Forming Families after Marriage Equality John

G. Culhane

https://ebookmass.com/product/more-than-marriage-formingfamilies-after-marriage-equality-john-g-culhane/

I'm More Dateable than a Plate of Refried Beans Ginny Hogan

https://ebookmass.com/product/im-more-dateable-than-a-plate-ofrefried-beans-ginny-hogan/

A John Wyndham Checklist Philip Stephenson-Payne (Compiler)

https://ebookmass.com/product/a-john-wyndham-checklist-philipstephenson-payne-compiler/

A Discursive Perspective on Wikipedia: More than an Encyclopaedia? Susanne Kopf

https://ebookmass.com/product/a-discursive-perspective-onwikipedia-more-than-an-encyclopaedia-susanne-kopf/

More than a Governess (Ladies on their Own: Governesses and Companions #4) Rose Pearson

https://ebookmass.com/product/more-than-a-governess-ladies-ontheir-own-governesses-and-companions-4-rose-pearson/

JohnofDamascus

TextsandStudies inEasternChristianity

ChiefEditor

KenParry(MacquarieUniversity)

EditorialBoard

AlessandroBausi(UniversityofHamburg)–MonicaBlanchard (CatholicUniversityofAmerica)–MalcolmChoat(MacquarieUniversity)

PeterGaladza(SaintPaulUniversity)–VictorGhica(mfNorwegianSchool ofTheology,ReligionandSociety)–EmmaLoosley(UniversityofExeter)

BasilLourié(StPetersburg)–JohnMcGuckin(Columbia University)–StephenRapp(SamHoustonStateUniversity) DietmarW.Winkler(UniversityofSalzburg)

volume26

TextsandStudiesinEasternChristianityisintendedtoadvancethefieldofEasternChristian Studiesbypublishingtranslationsofancienttexts,individualmonographs,thematiccollections, andtranslationsintoEnglishofsignificantvolumesinmodernlanguages.Itwillcoverthe EasternOrthodox,OrientalOrthodoxandEasternCatholictraditionsfromtheearlythrough tothecontemporaryperiod.TheserieswillmakeavaluablecontributiontothestudyofEastern Christianitybypublishingresearchbyscholarsfromavarietyofdisciplinesandbackgrounds. ThedifferenttraditionsthatmakeuptheworldofEasternChristianityhavenotalwaysreceived theattentiontheydeserve,sothisserieswillprovideaplatformfordeepeningourknowledgeof themaswellasbringingthemtoawideraudience.Theneedforsuchaserieshasbeenfeltfor sometimebythescholarlycommunityinviewoftheincreasinginterestintheChristianEast.

Thetitlespublishedinthisseriesarelistedatbrill.com/tsec

JohnofDamascus

MoreThanaCompiler

Editedby ScottAbles

TheLibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationDataisavailableonlineathttps://catalog.loc.gov lcrecordavailableathttps://lccn.loc.gov/2022050940

TypefacefortheLatin,Greek,andCyrillicscripts:“Brill”.Seeanddownload:brill.com/brill‑typeface.

issn2213-0039

isbn978-90-04-52642-6(hardback) isbn978-90-04-52686-0(e-book)

Copyright2023byScottAbles.PublishedbyKoninklijkeBrillnv,Leiden,TheNetherlands. KoninklijkeBrillnvincorporatestheimprintsBrill,BrillNijhoff,BrillHotei,BrillSchöningh,BrillFink, Brillmentis,Vandenhoeck&Ruprecht,Böhlau,V&RunipressandWageningenAcademic. KoninklijkeBrillnvreservestherighttoprotectthispublicationagainstunauthorizeduse.Requestsfor re-useand/ortranslationsmustbeaddressedtoKoninklijkeBrillnvviabrill.comorcopyright.com. Thisbookisprintedonacid-freepaperandproducedinasustainablemanner.

Preface vii

ListofMapsandFigures viii

Abbreviations ix

NotesonContributors xii

Maps xv

Introduction1 ScottAbles part1 TheDamascene’sSources,Life,&Context

1 TheGreekLivesofStJohnDamascene:CommonInformation, Differences,andHistoricalValue17 RobertVolk

2 NewEvidencefortheSourceoftheArabicLifeofJohnDamascene andtheArabicTranslationoftheExpositiofidei 40 HabibIbrahim

3 ThePurposeoftheAnti-ManichaeanPolemicofJohnofDamascus65 ScottAbles

4 ‘ὩςθεῖοςἔφηΔιονύσιος’—JohnDamascene’sReceptionand InterpretationoftheCorpusAreopagiticum 86 VassilisAdrahtas

5 TheOrderingofKnowingandtheAcquisitionofKnowledge intheExpositiofidei 106 PeterSchadler

6 ‘SupposedlyEncounteredanArianMonk’:JohnofDamascus ontheOriginofIslam116 NajibGeorgeAwad

7 TheologyforthePublic:AspectsofJohnofDamascus’Theological DiscourseinHisHomilies133

PetrosTsagkaropoulos

part2

8 TheUnderstandingoftheSacramentsinJohnofDamascus’ Theology153 VassaKontouma

9 ImagoDei:TheFunctionalityoftheDivineImageinJohn ofDamascus172

BrendaMarianaMéndez-Gallardo

10 TheConceptofMatterinStJohnDamascene’sAnti-Manichaean TheologyofCreation189 TheocharisS.Papavissarion

11 PhilosophyasBothanInstrumentandaStructuralPrinciple ofTheologicalDiscourseinJohnDamascene208 AnnaZhyrkova

12 JohnofDamascus’ViewofUniversalsandParticularsinLight oftheChristologicalDebate223 JohannesZachhuber

13 TheHistoricityofPersonalBeing:ADialogueinAbsentiabetweenJohn DamasceneandMartinHeidegger240 SmilenMarkov

Appendix:Expositioetdeclaratiofideicpg8078:Introduction andEnglishTranslation255 HabibIbrahim

IndexofModernAuthors272

IndexofNamesandSubjects275

IndexofAncientSources278

Preface

In2009IcontactedVassaKontoumaafterreadingher1995articleonPs.Cyril ofAlexandria.1LeonardPrestigehadarguedthatPs.Cyrilwasthe6thcentury theologianwhomigratedtheChristologicaltermperichōrēsisintoTrinitarian thought,whichwassubsequentlyadoptedbyJohnofDamascus.2 However, KontoumaarguedthatPs.CyrilwasnotasourceofJohnbutacompilationof John,soitwasJohnhimselfwhowasresponsibleforTrinitarianperichōrēsis.3I metKontoumainParis(2010)andOxford(2015)todiscussJohn.Awareofher interestinnurturingagrowingnetworkofscholarsonJohn,despiteherlong habitofsummeringinGreece,in2018IpersuadedhertoparticipateinaworkshoponJohnthefollowingsummer.Kontoumawonkeyfinancialsupportfrom Labexresmed(ReligionsandSocietiesoftheMediterraneanWorld).Zachary Keith,whomImetthroughSidneyGriffithwhileatDumbartonOaksinspring 2015,agreedtohelpaswell.WiththeirhelptheJohnofDamascus:Morethan aCompilerworkshopmetatthexviiiInternationalConferenceofPatristic Studies,Oxford,20–21August2019.ItonlyremainsformetothankKenParry andmembersoftheeditorialboardofBrill’sTextsandStudiesinEasternChristianityforacceptingthisvolumeintheseries.

ScottAbles

Portland,Oregon,USA

1 VassaConticello(1995)‘Pseudo-Cyril’sDess.Trinitate:ACompilationofJosephthePhilosopher’,OrientaliaChristianaPeriodica61:117–129.RepublishedinVassaKontouma(2015):John ofDamascus:NewStudiesonhisLifeandWorks(Farnham,Surrey/Burlington,VT:Ashgate).

2 G.L.Prestige(1964)GodinPatristicThought(2ndedn.;London:spck):284,291,294–299.

3 Conticello(1995):125.SeealsoAndrewLouth’sassessmentofKontouma’sanalysis,‘herargumentsseemtomeabsolutelycompelling’inAndrewLouth(2002)St.JohnDamascene:TraditionandOriginalityinByzantineTheology(Oxford:oup),87.

Maps,Figures,andTables

1 Terminology:Generalcorrespondancesinchs.81–86(English)159

2 Terminology:Generalcorrespondancesinchs.81–86(Greek)159

3 Adoptionaspresentedinch.81160

4 Adoptionbygraceaccordingtoch.82161

5 Complementsbroughtbych.83162

6 Crossaspraxisandlogosaccordingtochs.82and83164

7 Mysteriaaccordingtoch.86166

3 ThedevelopmentofthemodesofreceptionofthecabytheDamascene102

Abbreviations

WorksofJohnofDamascus

JohnofDamascus,eds.BonifatiusKotter,Robert.Volk,etal.,DieSchriftendes JohannesvonDamaskos,8Vols.(pts7;12;17;22;29;60–66/1;68;74–78;Berlin: DeGruyter,7:1969,12:1973,17:1975,22:1981,29:1988,60(6/1):2006,61(6/1):2009, 68:2013,74–77:2018,78:2019).

Aceph. Denaturacompositacontraacephalos.OntheCompositeNature,Against theAcephali(cpg8051):Kotteriv[pts22],409–417. BarlaamHistoriaanimaeutilisdeBarlaametIoasaph.TheStoryofthePractical LifeofBarlaamandJoseph(cpg8120):Volkvii/ii[pts60–61],ii:1–406.

Barb. Laudatios.Barbarae.PraiseofStBarbara(cpg8065):Kotterv[pts29], 256–278.

Chrys. Laudatios.JohannisChrysostomi(cpg8064):Kotterv[pts29],359–370.

Dial Capitaphilosophica(Dialectica).(cpg8041):Kotteri[pts7],47–146.

Dorm.i–iii Indormitionemorationestres(cpg8061–8063):Kotterv[pts29],483–500,516–540,548–555.

Expos. Expositiofidei.OntheOrthodoxFaith(cpg8043):Kotterii[pts12],7–239. FicusHomiliainficumarefactam.HomilyontheFig-Tree(cpg8058):Kotterv [pts29],102–110.

FidesDefidecontraNestorianos.OntheFaith,AgainsttheNestorians (cpg8054):Kotteriv[pts22],238–253.

Haeres. Liberdehaeresibus.OnHeresies(cpg8044):Kotteriv[pts22],19–67.

Hypap. SermoinhypapantenDomini.HomilyontheMeetingoftheLord (cpg8066):Kotterv[pts29],381–395.

Ieiun. Desacrisieiuniis.OntheHolyFasts(cpg8050):pg95,col.64–77.

Imag.i–iii Contraimaginumcalumniatoresorationestres.ThreeTreatisesAgainst ThoseWhoAttacktheIcons(cpg8045):Kotteriii[pts17],65–200.[aka OnImages,thustheabbr.Imag.]

Instit. Institutioelementaris.ElementaryIntroduction (cpg 8040):Kotteri [pts7],19–26.

Jacob. ContraJacobitas.AgainsttheJacobites(cpg8047):Kotteriv[pts22],109–153.

Manich ContraManichaeos.AgainsttheManichaeans=DialogagainsttheManichaeans(cpg8048):Kotteriv[pts22],351–398.

Nestor. AdversosNestorianos.AgainsttheNestorians (cpg 8053):Kotteriv [pts22],263–288.

Parall.4–5Sacra (spuria)(cpg 8056):TobiasThumandJoséDeclerckviii/4–8 [pts74–78].Parall.orHieraSeealso,Sacraparallela.Hiera.(cpg8056): pg95,col.1040–588,96col.9–442.

PaulCommentariiinepistulasPauli.CommentaryontheEpistlesofPaul (cpg8079):Volkvii[pts68],21–538.

Rect. Derectasententialiber.OnRightThinking(cpg8046):pg94,1421–1432. [nb:KotterabbreviatesSentent.]

Sabbat. Homiliainsabbatumsanctum.HomilyforHolySaturday(cpg8059):Kotterv[pts29],121–146.

Sarac. DisputatioSaracenietChristiani.DisputebetweenaSaracenandaChristian(cpg8075):Kotteriv[pts22],427–438.

Transfig. Homiliaintransfigurationemdomini.HomilyontheTransfigurationofthe Lord(cpg8057):Kotterv[pts29],436–459.

Trisag EpistuladehymnoTrisagio.LetterontheTrisagionHymn(cpg8049):Kotteriv[pts22],304–332.

Volunt. DeduabusinChristovoluntatibus.OntheTwoWillsinChrist(cpg8052): Kotteriv[pts22],173–231.

OtherAbbreviations

aw AthanasiusWerke

bhg Bibliothecahagiographicagraeca,3rded.,3vols.,ed.FrançoisHalkin,SubsidiaHagiographica8a(Brussels:1957)

bz ByzantinischeZeitschrift(Munich/Leipzig,1892–)

ccsg Corpuschristianorumseriesgraeca

cpg Clavispatrumgraecorum,7Vols.(Turnhout:Brepols,1974–2010)

csco Corpusscriptorumchristianorumorientalium

cshb Corpusscriptorumhistoriaebyzantinae(Bonn,1828–1897)

gcs DiegriechischenchristlichenSchriftstellerderersten[drei]Jahrhunderte

gno GregoriiNysseniopera

jecs JournalofEarlyChristianStudies

jts JournalofTheologicalStudies

LampeLampe,G.W.H.,PatristicGreekLexicon(Oxford:ClarendonPress,1995).

msr Mélangesdescienceréligieuse

gcsnf DiegriechischenchristlichenSchriftstellerdererstendreiJahrhunderte, publ.Berlin—BrandenburgischeAkademiederWissenschaften,Berlin. NeueFolge1(1995)

ocp Orientaliachristianaperiodica

oup OxfordUniversityPress

abbreviations xi

pg Patrologiagraeca.Ed.Jacques-PaulMigne.162vols.(Paris:1857–1866).

pl Patrologialatina.Ed.Jacques-PaulMigne.217vols.(Paris:1844–1864).

pmbz ProsopographiedermittelbyzantinischenZeit,Abt.1(641–867),6vols.(de Gruyter:Berlin,1999–2002)

pts PatristicheTexteundStudien

sc Sourceschrétiennes

spb Studiapatristicaetbyzantina(Etall:Buch-Kunstverlag) StPStudiapatristica

tu TesteundUntersuchungenzurGeschichtederaltchristlichenLiteratur

tlg Thesauruslinguaegraecae:ADigitalLibraryofGreekLiterature

VigChrVigiliaechristianae

ZKgZeitschriftfürKirchengeschichte

NotesonContributors

ScottAbles

Lecturer,OregonStateUniversity,DPhil(2016,Oxford,‘ThePurposeof PerichōrēsisinthePolemicalWorksofJohnofDamascus’).HeresearchesthehistoryofChristologicalcontroversyinLateAntiquitybuthasinterestsinpostmodernconstructivetheologyaswell.

VassilisAdrahtas

UniversityofWesternSydney,Australia,teachesIslamicStudies.HisspecializationandresearchincludeEarlyChristianity,Patristics,ByzantinePhilosophy,AncientGreekReligion,andIndigenousAustralianReligions.HisinvolvementwiththestudyofJohnDamascenegoesbacktohisMPhilthesis‘The UseofLogicintheWorkofJohnDamascene:Approachesto FonsScientiae’ (2001).

NajibGeorgeAwad

ProfessorofChristiantheologyandEasternChristianthought,HartfordSeminary, ctusa.HisresearchinterestsincludeArabicChristianity,ChristianMuslimrelations,comparative,interreligiousandcontextualtheologies,and theContemporaryMiddleEast.HepublishesinbothArabicandEnglish,including UmayyadChristianity:JohnofDamascusasacontextualexampleof identityformationinEarlyIslam (2018);and After-Mission,BeyondEvangelicalism:TheIndigenous‘Injīliyyūn’intheArab-MuslimContextofSyria-Lebanon (2020).

HabibIbrahim

PhD(2016,ephe-Paris,‘JeanDamascènearabe:éditioncritiquedesdeuxtraités ContrelesNestoriens’).HeisaresearchassociateattheUniversityStJoseph— BeirutandAssistantProfessoratLebaneseUniversity.Hewrotehisthesison JohnofDamascus’twotreatisesagainsttheNestorians.Heworksondifferent projectsconnectedtothestudyofChristianArabicliterature.

VassaKontouma

Dean,ReligiousStudies,ÉcolePratiquedesHautesÉtudes,psl,Paris,France, andPrésidentedel’Institutfrançaisd’Étudesbyzantines.PhD(1996,Paris-4 Sorbonne)thesis:‘La“Sourcedeconnaissance”deS.JeanDamascène:traductionannotéedeslivresi(Dialectica)etiii(Expositiodefideorthodoxa).’She researchesJohnofDamascus,ByzantineandPost-Byzantinetheology,Ortho-

doxdogmatic,Post-Byzantinemanuscripts,DositheusiiofJerusalem,andthe GreekDiasporainOttomantimes.

SmilenMarkov

AssistantProfessorinChristianPhilosophy,UniversityofVelikoTurnovo,Bulgaria.PhD(UniversityofCologne,2010),thesis:‘TheMetaphysicalSynthesis ofJohnDamascene:historicalinterconnectionsandstructuraltransformations’,publishedas DiemetaphysischeSynthesedesJohannesvonDamaskus: HistorischeZusammenhängeundStrukturtransformationen,Brill,2015.HisresearchinterestsincludeByzantinephilosophy,Orthodoxtheology,dialogue betweenByzantiumandIslam,andurbanism.

BrendaMarianaMéndez-Gallardo

ProfessorofMedievalPhilosophyandPhilosophyofReligion,JesuitIberoAmericanUniversity,MexicoCityandWesternInstituteofTechnologyand HigherStudies,Guadalajara,Mexico.Sheresearchespatristic,ancientand medievalphilosophy;thephilosophyofartandaesthetics(withparticular interestinspiritualthoughtinthevisualarts);aestheticandapophatictheology,andthephilosophyofreligion.Sherecentlypublished Lavisióndelo invisible.ElconceptodeimagenenlaExpositiofideideJuanDamasceno(2020).

TheocharisS.Papavissarion

National&KapodistrianUniversityofAthens.PhD(Athens,2019),thesis:‘St JohnDamascene’sTeachingonMatter.TheKtisiologicalFoundationofhis Anti-ManichaeanTheology’.HeisanOrthodoxtheologianspecializinginpatristics.HefocusesonJohnDamascene,thecontinuityoftheecclesiastictradition,andManichaeanandByzantinetheologyandphilosophy.Hehaspublishedarticlesinencyclopediasandjournalsexaminingcertainsubjectsof patristicliterature.

PeterSchadler

AssistantProfessor,DickinsonCollege,Carlisle,Pennsylvania,USA.DPhil(Oxford,2011),whichformedthebasisofhisrecentbook: JohnofDamascus andIslam:ChristianHeresiologyandtheIntellectualBackgroundtoEarliest Christian-MuslimRelations(Brill,2018).HeiscurrentlyresearchingthenarratologyinhagiographyandstorytellinginByzantiumandbeyond.

PetrosTsagkaropoulos

KingsCollegeLondon,England.PhD(King’s,London,2019),thesis:‘TheHagiographicHomiliesofJohnofDamascus:AStudyinByzantineHomiletics’.His

researchspecializesinByzantineliteratureandhistory,includingliteraryanalysisandinterdisciplinaryhermeneuticalapproachesthroughinsightfullydevelopingnewresearchmethods.

RobertVolk

BavarianAcademyofSciencesandHumanities,Munich.DrPhil(Munich, 1987),thesis:‘DermedizinischeInhaltderSchriftendesMichaelPsellos’,publishedunderthesametitle(Munich:1990).Hisresearchiscenteredonthe philologyandpublicationofthewritingsofJohnofDamascus.Heiscurrently preparingthepublicationofseveralofthemanyLivesofStJohnDamascene.

JohannesZachhuber

ProfessorofHistoricalandSystematicTheology,UniversityofOxford.Hehas publishedwidelyonEasternpatristicthoughtincludingHumanNatureinGregoryofNyssa:PhilosophicalBackgroundandTheologicalSignificance(1999)and TheRiseofChristianTheologyandtheEndofAncientMetaphysics:PatristicPhilosophyfromtheCappadocianFatherstoJohnofDamascus(2020).

AnnaZhyrkova

JesuitUniversityIgnatianum,Cracow,Poland.PhD(CatholicUniversity,Lublin,2002),thesis:‘PhilosophyofJohnDamasceneintheLightofthe“Pege Gnoseos”’.HerresearchinterestscenteronByzantinephilosophyandPatristic theology.

Maps

Acknowledgement

ThemapswereoriginallyproducedbyDavidA.Michelson,mapeditor,and IanMladjou,cartographer,forTheSyriacWorld,DanielKing,ed.(Routledge, 2019).Thefivemapspresentedhereareasubsetoffourteenmapsoriginally produced.Michelsonprovidesanexcellentdiscussionofthedataaswellas pointerstoInternetbasedresourceswithbibliography(TheSyriacWorld,xxvii–xxxiii).Michelsongraciouslyprovidedourprojectwiththemapsunderacreativecommonslicense,andwehavechosentopresentthefivethatcoverSyria, Palestine,andtheEgyptianterritorymostgermanetothestudyofJohnofDamascus.

Maps1–5Copyrightccby-sa

map1 NearEastaftertheIslamicConquest(L)

map2 NearEastaftertheIslamicConquest(R)

map3

map4

map5 EgyptandPalestine

Introduction

ScottAbles

Overview

BornoutofaworkshoponJohnofDamascusandexpandedwithinvitedessays, thisvolumeaimstocontributetotheresearchonJohnthatprovidesevidence fortheoriginalityofhisthought,challengingthecommonplacethathewasno morethanacompileroftradition.John’sbiographysuffersfromrelatedproblems.SolittlewasknownofJohnthatrisinginterestinhisworkrequiredthe inventionofalifeworthyofcelebration.IwillbrieflycoverJohn’sbiography notonlytoplacehimincontext,butalsotopreparethegroundforthephilologicalworkofoneofJohn’scurrenteditors,RobertVolk,whowilladdressthe complexityofthemanyLivesofJohnofDamascusinourfirstchapter.After thatIwillbrieflysketchthebackgroundofthisstillcommonassessmentof Johnthatconsidershimnomorethanacompileroftradition,anunoriginal thinkerwhohadnothingofhisowntosay.Finally,whileoutliningourmethodologicalframework,Iwilltouchonsomeoftheresearchcontributionsofour internationalcontributorsthatprovidesclearevidencethatJohnwasanoriginalthinkerwhowasmorethanamerecompileroftradition.

Biography

JohnofDamascusremainsthemostsignificanttheologianoftheeighthcenturyforthosechurchesofbothEastandWestthatacceptedtheCouncilof Chalcedon.Althoughtheprecisedatesofhisbirthanddeathareunknown,his lifespanwasroughlycontemporaneouswiththeUmayyadCaliphate(651–750). Unfortunately,verylittleisknownabouthim,andwhatisputforthiscomplicatedbyoveradozenlatefictionalvitae.Themostprominentforthetradition istheLifeofourholyFather,JohnDamascene(bhg884).Nevertheless,some detailsofJohn’slifeareconsistent,butaglanceatthetraditionisimportantas itinformstherecentdebateonJohn’soriginality.

AccordingtothetraditionalaccountsofJohn’slife,largelybasedonbhg884, hereceivedaclassicaleducationfromamonk,Kosmas,anItalianprisonerof war,freedfromtheArabsbyJohn’sfather.And,althoughrisingtohighrankin thecaliphaladministration,ArabpersecutionconvincedJohntorenouncehis positiontobecomeamonkoftheMonasteryofStSabassometimebetween

717–725(scholarsvary)wherehewritesiconophiletreatisesindefenseoficons andlatertheExpositiofidei(akaOntheOrthodoxFaith),hisclassicdogmatic work,eventuallydyinginthatmonasteryabout749.Thistraditionisproblematic,however,notleastbecausebhg884islateandofdisputedauthorship; nevertheless,itiscommonlyminedfordetailsbymodernbiographers,perhaps bestrepresentedbythebiographyTheLifeofourHolyFatherJohnDamascene publishedbyMigne.1

Unfortunately,thereisearlierevidencewhichsuggestsJohnwasnotresidentorperhapsevenassociatedwiththeMonasteryofStSabasoreventhat heleftserviceunderduress.2Further,thebiographiesbasedontheselateLives proposechronologiesthathingeonthatofByzantineIconoclasm,failingto accountforthevastmajorityofJohn’soeuvre,whileimplyinguntenablythat itwasundertakenwhileincaliphalserviceorsolateandinaremotemonastic contextsoastobecompressedintothelasttwentyyearsofhislife.Muchof thistraditionalaccountisunderminedbyearlierdata,somuchsothatVassa Kontoumaconsidersthistraditiona‘legendaryportrait’.3Nevertheless,wedo knowafewthingswithsomewhatmorecertainty.

JohnwasbornandraisedatcourtinDamascusunderIslamtoaprosperous andpowerfulfamily,theManṣūrs.ThisisnotaGreekname,butalocalone, whetherSyrianorArabisunclear.John’sgrandfatherwascommissionedby theByzantineemperorMaurice(reigned582–602)tocollectthetaxesforthe entireregionofSyria;thiscommissionwasrenewedundertheemperorHeraclius(reigned610–641),afterabriefperiodofPersianoccupation(614–628) underwhichitwasalsomaintained.John’sfamilywassomehowinvolved— accountsvary—inthesurrenderofDamascustotheArabs(in634)andamong thosewhoconsideredthistreachery,thetaintonthefamilynamewaslong rememberedevenbymembersoftheirownsectarianparty,theMelkites,e.g. byEutychius,MelkitebishopofAlexandria,writinginthetenthcentury.4John’s fatherretainedhispositionandisevenreportedtohavebeenaveryclosefriend ofthecaliphʿAbdal-Malik(reigned685–705).Educatedtoelitelevels,JohnfollowedhisfatherintotheArabadministration.Nevertheless,Johnalsobecame amonkandapriest.Helefttheadministration,andasaclosefriendofthe

1 pg 94.429–489.Forexample,seethefollowingbriefarticlesonJohnofDamascus,which summarizehislifeintermsofbhg884,evenwhileacknowledgingitslegendarycharacter: KazhdanandTalbot(1998),Berardino(2000),Volk(2000),andDöppandGeerlings(2000).

2 Marie-FranceAuzépy(2015:399,408).

3 Kontouma(2015:I,2).KontoumahassuggestedthatonbalanceJohnprobablyleftDamascus andjoinedinthereestablishmentofthepatriarchateofJerusalemin705.Ihavewrittenin supportofthisview,initiallyinAbles(2016)andlaterinAbles(2019).

4 Breydy(1985:116–117,Germantrans.).

PatriarchofJerusalem,Johnv(ca.705–735),hemovedtoJerusalemtoparticipateinthere-foundingofthepatriarchateleftvacantbyArabpolicyafterthe obscuredeathofthepreviouspatriarch,Sophronius.John’sinitialfamegrew asaneloquentpreacherinJerusalem.Hishymnsandsermonsareallliturgical,hispolemicanddogmaticworkshavebeendescribedascatechetical,and hispolemictaughtChalcedonianmonkspersuasiverhetoricusefulintheologicaldebateallintheserviceofdevelopingpatriarchalpolicyinthestrongly sectarianJerusalemoftheearlyeighthcentury.HewasthelastsignificantChalcedoniantheologiantowriteinGreekinSyro-PalestinebeforeArabicbecame dominant.5

John’sfamebegantospreadoutsideofPalestinewiththreeimpassioned orationsindefenseoftheliturgicaluseoficons,whichpittedhimagainstthe ByzantineiconoclastsandresultedinhiscondemnationattheiconoclastcouncilofHierain754.Nevertheless,evenbeforethedemiseoficonoclasm,John’s worksbegantocirculateinConstantinopleandRome,andJohnwassoon knownforhisdogmaticworks,especiallytheFountofKnowledge.6Thesedogmaticworkssoeffectivelysummarizedtheearly(Greek)churchfathersthat theLatinWestusedthemasanepitomeofthosefathers,andtheirsubsequent translationintoLatininthetwelfthcenturyandusebyPeterLombard,Thomas Aquinas,andothersensuredawidedisseminationintheWest.Infact,John’s pervasiveinfluenceintheWesteventuallyresultedinPopeLeoxiiielevating himtoa‘DoctoroftheChurch’onAugust9,1890.ThelastGreektheologianto besohonoredintheWest.

Background:MoreThanaCompiler

IthaslongbeenacommonplacethatJohnofDamascuswasnomorethan acompileroftraditionsayingnothingoriginal.Thisperceptionmaystemin partfromJohn’sownrepeatedclaimtosaynothingnew.7Uponcloserinspection,however,wefindthatJohnisemployingamodestytoposcommontothe

5 Syriac,ofcourse,remainedtheliteraryandliturgicallanguageofthoseWestandEastSyrians whorejectedtheCouncilofChalcedon.

6 AtripartiteworkcomprisedoftheDialectica(cpg8041),Dehaeresibus(cpg8044),andthe Expositiofidei(cpg8043),thislastisalsoknownasOntheOrthodoxFaith

7 Forexample,‘I,sinfulandwretched,openmymutteringstutteringlips’JohnofDamascus, Instit.1(20,8–9Kotter1969):ἀνοίγωτὰμογγίλαλακαὶβραδύγλωσσαχείληὁἁμαρτωλὸςκαὶτάλας ἐγώ,or‘AsIhavesaidIwillsaynothing,butwithgreatcaregatheringintoonethatofthemost eminentteachers,asmuchasIamable,Iwilldraftabrieftreatiseyieldingtoyourcommand inallthings.’Dial.Proem.(53,60–63Kotter):Ἐρῶδὲἐμὸνμέν,ὡςἔφην,οὐδέν,τὰδὲτοῖςἐγκρίτοις

rhetoricofwell-educatedByzantineauthors.8And,ononesignificantoccasion, Johnapologizesforhishighstyle,whileacknowledginghisrhetoricaltalent, andoffersarevisedtreatisewritteninalowerregisterforapopularaudience.9 Further,itmaybethattherecognitionofJohnasakeybridgefiguremediatingtheGreekChurchFatherstotheLatinWestledtotheassessmentthatJohn contributedlittlebutthefaithfultransmissionoftheGreektradition,soasnot toraisequestionsaboutthefaithfulnessofhisepitomeoftheGreektradition. John’sworkhadbecomeaproxyfortheGreektraditionintheWestwhich mayhaveledtotheconflationofhisworkwiththattradition.ThiswasperhapsinpartbecausetheideathatJohnmighthavesaidsomethingofhisown becamesynonymousforsomewiththeideathathemayhavetamperedwith orsomehowmodifiedthattradition,whichwasunthinkable,especiallyfor thosewithconfessionalcommitmentstotheconceptofanoriginaldoctrinal depositfaithfullytransmitted.Consequently,becauseofthislastingimpression,whetherpreciselyforthereasonsoutlinedorothers,hewasthoughtto benomorethanacompileroftraditionsayingnothingnew,sohehimselfhas remainedunderstudied.TheaimoftheOxfordworkshopandtheessayspresentedhereistosuggestwaysinwhichthisassessmentismistaken.Johnis ratheracreativeandoriginalthinker,whomadehissourceshisown,preservingandtransmittingtraditionwhileshapingandpresentingittheologically andliturgicallyinlocallyrelevantways.But,Ispeakprolepticallyoftheessays hereinwhichmustspeakforthemselves.Next,Iturntothebackgroundofthe commonassessmentthatJohnwasentirelyderivativebydesignbeingnomore thanacompileroftradition.

ThestudyofJohnofDamascuscanbedividedintothreeperiodsrelatedto theproductionofmoderncriticaltexts,whichhavefinallysetthestagefora reevaluationofJohn’sbodyofwork.Theseincludetheperiodpriortothecriticaltexts,thatleadingtotheirpublication,andthatbasedonthem.

Phase1:ResearchPriortotheCriticalTexts

IntheearliestperiodopinionwaseventuallysummarizedbyAdolfvonHarnack.ButtherewerepreviousformativestatementsleadingtohisownassessmentlikethatofF.Perrier(1862),whoafterstudyingthelifeandworkofJohnof Damascus,concluded,‘Hisexaggeratedrespectforthewritingsandopinionsof theauthorswhoprecededhimstifledeverygermofindependenceandindivid-

8 OnJohn’suseofthetopos,seeAlexakis(2004),andmoregenerally,seeKazhdan(1991).

9 JohnofDamascus,Imag.ii,1(2.1–31Kotter).ForEnglishtranslationseeLouth(2003:59–60).

uality.Thissamefeelingalsopreventedhimfrombeingoriginalandmadehis workacleverandconscientiouscompilation.’10Or,thatofJ.Lupton(1882),who wrote,‘Iamnotawareofanymoreseriouschargethatcanbebroughtagainst himthan…atendencytoover-credulityandsuperstition.’11And,finally,shortly afterthePope’selevationofJohnin1890,Harnackfiresbackinhisinfluential HistoryofDogma(1894):

InmanyrespectsthewholehistoricaldevelopmentofDogmafromthe fourthcenturytoJohnofDamascusandTheodoretheStuditewassimplyavastprocessofreduction,selection,anddefinition.IntheEastwe arenolongercalledupontodealinanyquarterwithnewandoriginal matter,butalwaysratherwithwhatistraditional,derivative,and,toan increasingextent,superstitious.12

And,laterHarnackconcludes:

Ifwecompare,e.g.,GregoryofNyssawithJohnofDamascusitiseasyto seethattheformerstillreallythinksindependently,whilethelatterconfineshimselftoeditingwhatisgiven.Itisaboveallclearthatthecritical elementsoftheologyhadbeenlost.13

Phase2:ResearchLeadingtothePublicationoftheCriticalTexts

Harnack’sassessmentwouldinfluencetheconsensusforgenerationsandis perhapsstillnotwithoutinfluence.Nevertheless,researchonthecriticaltexts nuancedthisview.ThissecondperiodisdominatedbythoseauthorsaffiliatedwiththeByzantineInstituteoftheScheyernAbbey,Germany,publishingbetween1951and1964:J.M.Hoeck,B.Studer,B.Kotter,K.Rozemond,and G.Richter.14TheInstitutecontinueditsresearchandbeganpublicationofthe criticaltextsofJohnofDamascus,startingin1969(ed.BonifatiusKotter).These scholarsinitiallyreinforcedtheconsensusviewofthepreviousperiod.Perhaps,

10 Perrier(1862:33).‘Sonrespectexagérépourlesécritsetlesopinionsdesauteursquil’ont précédéaétoufféenluitoutgermed’indépendanceetd’individualité.Cemêmesentiment l’aaussiempêchéd’êtreoriginal,etafaitdesesouvragesunesavanteetconsciencieuse compilation.’F.A.Perrier, JeanDamascène:Savieetsesécrits(Strasbourg:Universitéof France,1862),33.

11 Lupton(1882:199,209–210).J.H.Lupton(1882),St.JohnofDamascus(London:spck),199, 209–210.

12 Harnack(1972:vii–viii).

13 Harnack(1972:156).

14 Hoeck(1951),Studer(1956),Kotter(1959),Rozemond(1959),Richter(1964).

Studer(1956)sumsthemupwhenheconcludesJohnisamerecompilerplayingonlyamediatingrolebetweenEastandWest,andthus‘canbegrantedno greatplaceinthedevelopmentoftheology’.15

However,thereseemsalwaystohavebeenaminorityvoicethatheldJohn inhighesteem.FrederickChasepublishedwhatremainsthestandardEnglish translationoftheFontofKnowledge,comprisedofJohn’sOnHeresies,ThePhilosophicalChapters,andOntheOrthodoxFaith.Nowdatedbecauseitisnotbased onthecriticaltexts,yetitremainsthebestEnglishtranslationofJohn’smagnumopus.Nodoubtawareoftheconsensuspositionandtheearlysupportof itbytheByzantineInstitute,Chasenonethelesswasunequivocalinhispositive assessmentofJohnin1958:

MostauthoritiesareoftheopinionthattheDamascenesucceededquite wellinkeepinghispromisetoaddnothingofhisown,butthisisnot entirelytrue.TheFountofKnowledgenotonlycontainsmuchthatisoriginalandafreshviewpointonmanythingsbutisinitselfsomethingnew. ItisthefirstrealSummaTheologica.Eventhephilosophicalintroduction isnew,beingthefirstattempttopresentacompletemanualofphilosophytoserveasabasisforthestudyofChristiantheology.Thewholework isnotamerecompilation;itisanewsynthesis.Itmaybesaid,then,that althoughJohnofDamascuswasundoubtedlysincereinhispromiseto addnothingofhisown,hecouldnothelpinjectingsomuchofhimselfas tobevisibleonalmosteverypage.16

PerhapsintimeKotterrecalledthisassessment,butwhateverthecase,Kotter’s viewssoftenedintimeallowingforsomenuance.Althoughinitiallyconsistent withotherinstitutescholarswhenintroducingtheExpositiofideiin1973,by 1981hewaswillingtograntthatJohn’sargumentintheContraManichaeos,for example,wasamasterpieceoftheologicalthinkingthatexceededhissources especiallyonProvidence.17

15 Studer(1956:134).

16 Chase(1958:xxv–xxvi).

17 ComparetheearlyKotter(1973:xxvii),wherehetakesJohn’sstatementstosaynothing newatfacevalue,tothelaterKotter(1981:343–344),wherehesuggestsJohnintheContraManichaeos,forexample,hasprovideda‘masterpieceofseldomachieveddepth’that offers‘thelastwordontheproblemofevil’,goingwellbeyondhissourceswithboth newargumentsandthecompletereconsiderationoftheoldwiththeologicalthinking ‘incomparablydeeper,especiallyregardingProvidence.’Yetitisoftentheearlystatement regardingtheoftstudied Expos.thatisstillrepeated,notthatofthelaterlessstudied polemicalworks,whichisdoublyironic,sincetheExpos.wasnodoubtwrittenwellafter

Phase3:ResearchBasedontheCriticalTexts

ThepublicationsbytheByzantineInstituteofthecriticaltextsthemselves (published1969,1973,1981,1988,pickingupagainin2008)haveinspirednew research.18 Spaceconstraintswillallowonlythreerepresentativeexamples: Twombly(1992),Kontouma(1995),andGriffith(2006).19Twombly’s1992unpublisheddoctoratecitedbyLouth(2002)wasquietlyinfluential.20Bythetime ofitspublicationin2015overtwentyyearslater,Louthwouldwrite,‘St.John Damascenefamouslysaid,“Ishallsaynothingofmyown”,andmuchmodernscholarshiphastakenhimathisword.Yet,asCharlesTwomblyshows, JohnDamascenewasatrulyoriginaltheologian.’21JustasquietlyKontouma’s 1995article(Conticelloatthattime)reappropriatedforJohnthebrillianceof Trinitarianperichōrēsis,onceattributedtoPseudo-Cyrilforwhichhewassaid tobe‘anaccomplishedandtrulyprofoundthinker’,whichJohnappearedto adoptwholesale;Kontouma’sargumentmeantthatthatbrilliancewasJohn’s notasourceofJohn’s.22In2002herargumentwasconsideredbyLouth‘absolutelycompelling’,andremainsunchallenged(asfarasIknow);ithasbeen republishedinKontouma(2015).23Finally,thesedevelopmentshavenotgone unnoticedbythoseengagedininterdisciplinarywork,suchasSidneyGriffith, whohaslongarguedfortreatmentofJohnofDamascusinhislocalcontext:

Melkitetheologyfounditsfirstandmostauthoritativeexponentinthe personofStJohnofDamascus….Themostinstructivefeatureinthis connection…isthefactthattheoverallpatternofhisinterests…demonstratesthathisimmediatetheologicalandecclesiasticalnearhorizonwas verymuchthatofJerusalem….Hewasonlytangentiallyconcernedwith

thepolemicalworks,especiallytheManich.whichmanythinktobeamongJohn’searliest works.

18 Unfortunately,virtuallynomonographsonJohnwerepublishedaftertheByzantineInstitutegrewsilent,buttherewasarayofhopeinLouth(2002),perhapsnotquitechallenging theconsensusview,hisaccessibilityenabledmanytostudyJohnforthefirsttime,and thusAndrewLouthisperhapsarguablyresponsiblemorethananyotherforinspiring newresearcherstoenterthefieldfocusedonJohn.Manyofus(ifnotall)owehimagreat debt.

19 Twombly’sresearchwaspublishedlaterasTwombly(2015)inwhichhemodifiedhispositiontoacceptKontouma’sconclusionthatPseudo-Cyrilwasinfactacompilationbased onJohnandnotasourceofJohn,evidenceofthegrowinginfluenceher1995articlehas hadovertime.

20 SeeLouth(2002:112n75).

21 Twombly(2015:volumeepigraph).

22 Prestige(1952:280).

23 Louth(2002:87).

…Byzantium….Failuretotakeseriouslytheimmediateintellectualand culturalhorizonofJerusalem,withinwhichStJohnactuallycomposed hisworks,isaseriouserrorofperspective….24

Thisvolume,andtheOxfordworkshopitisbasedon,arepartofthistrendin positivereassessmentofJohnofDamascustakinghiscontextualizationand contributionsseriously.Yetmoreworkisrequiredifthisminoritypositionisto becometheconsensus.

Methodology

TherecentchallengestoJohn’sbiographyandtheconsensusviewthatheis theologicallyderivativeandthusuninterestinghaveinvitedreconsiderationof John’swork,butthestandardbiographyandtheconsensusviewremainstubbornlyentrenched.Consequently,thefollowingessaysaimtoprovidefurther evidenceforJohn’screativity,originality,andconsequenttheologicalimportance.Theessayswerenotsolicitedintwogroups,butthesebroadgroupingsemergedasourprojecttookshape.Aftertheworkshop,theinvitedessays seemedtofitintothesetwocategoriesaswell,providingforabalancedpresentation.Unfortunately,theobviouslacunahereremainsthatofJohnofDamascusstudiesgenerally—thelackofliturgicalanalysis—;althoughJohnis reportedtohavewrittenlargeportionsoftheEasternliturgy,thedetailsremain obscure.25Nevertheless,herehissources,vitae,context,andtheologicalvision atleastareconsideredinpart,hopefullyinspiringfurtherresearch.

PartOne—TheDamascene’sSources,Life,andContext

RobertVolk,successortoBonifatiusKotteraseditorofJohnofDamascus, continuestheworkoftheByzantineInstitutenowundertheauspicesofthe BavarianAcademyofSciencesandHumanities.Inthespiritofthoseearly preparatorypublicationsoftheByzantineInstituteoftheScheyernAbbey, nearMunich,VolkoffersanassessmentoftheGreekvitaeofJohnashepreparestopublishmoderncriticaleditionsofthem.ComplementingVolk’sessay, HabibIbrahimoffersarareglimpseintonewevidencefromunpublishedAra-

24 Griffith(2006:191–192).ForrecenttreatmentofJohninhislocalcontext,seeAwad(2018).

25 AnotherlacunaisthatofcomparativeSyriacstudies:WasJohnindialogwithimportantSyrianOrthodoxcontemporaries,includingSeverusSebokht(d.666/7),Athanasius ofBalad(d.696),JacobofEdessa(d.708),andGeorge,bishopoftheArabs(d.724),for example?

bicsourcesofJohnbothwithanessayandwiththefirstEnglishtranslationof John’sExpositioetdeclaratiofidei(cpg8078).26

Withthethirdandfourthessays(AblesandAdrahtas),webeginlookingat John’ssourcesandhiscreativetheologicalappropriationintermssuggestiveof parttwobutlargelyfocusedontheinternaldevelopmentofJohn’stheological programtouchingonimplicationsforthedatingofJohn’swork.PeterSchadler thenexploresthepossibilityofmeaningintheorderingofborrowedmaterialsintheExpositio,whileNajibGeorgeAwadinvestigatesthesourceofthe ‘ArianMonk’whoisreportedtohaveinfluencedMuḥammadbyrecontextualizingthefigureoutofConstantinopolitansectariandebateintocontemporary interreligiousdebateinSyro-PalestineonceagainsuggestingthatJohnisbetterunderstoodwheninterpretedwithinhislocalSyro-Palestiniancontext.The finalessayinPartOne(Tsagkaropoulos)turnstoJohn’ssermonsasevidence forthe‘preservationofhistheologicalalertness’concludingthattheologywas nottheprivilegedconcernoftheelitealone,butthatJohnwas‘anambitious preacher’whoshapedhiscontemporarytheologicalpresentationtotheneeds ofhislocalaudience.PartOneisthusfocusedoncapturingJohnashewasand notaswhohewasreveredtobebytradition.

PartTwo—TheDamascene’sTheologicalVisionandPhilosophical Method

TheessaysinthesecondparttreatJohn’stheologicalvision(sacraments,imago dei,andtheconceptofmatter)andphilosophicalappropriation(integralto theologicalmethod,centraltodevelopmentoftheconceptoftheuniversal, andreinterpretedprovidesworthwhileanswerstomodernphilosophicalproblems)withthreeessaysoneach.AnnaZhyrkovaarguesthatforJohnphilosophywascentralpreciselybecauseitwasusefulintheserviceofhistheology. Itaffordedhimaprecisionthatallowedhimtoimproveuponhispredecessorsandaddresstheinconsistenciesheperceivedinhisinterlocutors.PartTwo beginswithVassaKontouma’sexaminationofthesacramentsinJohn,which entailspeelingawaytraditionalwesternreadingsofJohnthathaveobscured histheologicalproject.DrKontoumahasbeenresearchingandpublishingon Johnsince1995.AwareoftheByzantineInstitutes’publicationsandpositionon John,shehasbeensteadilypushingback,notleastwithherstudythatfound Pseudo-CyriltobealatecompilationbasedonJohnnotasourceofJohn(as notedabove).JustastheExpositiowasthefocusofKontouma’swork,soitis thesubjectofBrendaMarianaMéndez-Gallardo’sworkontheImageofGod.

ForthetranslationseetheAppendix.