Continuing the series (first response)(second response) of responses to an article about allegedly early veneration of Mary (link to original article), we now examine some alleged early prayers to Mary. I will quote the post author and then provide my additional comments.
1) Sub Tuum Praesidium
The Sub Tuum Praesidium petitions: “O Mother of God: do not despise our petitions in time of trouble: but rescue us from dangers, only pure, only blessed one.”
I certainly agree that the STP is an example of early Marian devotion. I don't agree with the idea that this prayer is particularly early. It uses the term "Theotokos," which was in popular use to describe Mary only after Nicaea. So, this is presumably a fourth century or later prayer. It's origin is not known, although it was eventually adopted for use in many otherwise orthodox churches (along with other inappropriate worship).
2) Anaphoras of Coptic/Egyptian Basil
The Anaphoras of Coptic/Egyptian Basil in its oldest Sahidic manuscript has the following within a Litany: “…the holy and glorious Mary, Theotokos (Mother of God), and by her prayers have mercy on us all…” This work is dated by Anglican scholars to be “at least three hundred years older” than the mid-seventh century (Cuming and Jasper 1990, 67) and “the early fourth century” by the most recent scholarly treatment of the subject. (Shoemaker 2016, 231)
As with the STP, this dates to the fourth century at the earliest. On top of that, it is puzzling why we would resort to a prayer of a church that is not orthodox by Orthodox standards.
3) Gospel of Bartholomew
The Gospel of Bartholomew contains a short prayer in an apocryphal context: “Bartholomew raised his voice and said thus: ‘O womb more spacious than a city, wider than the spreading of the heavens, that contained him whom the seven heavens contain not, but thou without pain didst contain sanctified in thy bosom!’” (4:17 in Vienna Manuscript)
This initially puzzled me, because the Gospel of Bartholomew is the name of a lost apocryphal work. It is, however, also an alternative name of the Questions of Bartholomew (not lost), from which the quotation comes. The work is (best scholarly guess) a fifth century Greek work. By then, of course, Marian veneration was flourishing in many places.
2) Grotto of Jerusalem Graffiti
The Grotto of Jerusalem has a graffiti that has survived the test of time which states, “Under the holy place of M[ary?] I wrote there the [names?], the image I adored of her.” One source states that “the grotto can be interpreted, according to Bagatti, as an indication of an image of Mary.” (Bigham 2004, 101)
This is the most obscure of the group. Bigham identifies the location as the Grotto of the Annunciation (which is in Nazareth). It's hard to date wall writing, but the floor is evidently dated to around the 5th or 6th century. I am not sure if any expert has opined on the date of the wall writing: Bigham doesn't seem to be interested in the precise date.
In short, however, none of these provide evidence of early Marian veneration.
The Questions of Bartholomew quotation is even worse, because it is manifestly obvious that it is a corruption in that particular (very late AFAICT) MS, being totally unconnected to the surrounding text and supported by no other manuscripts. I could charitably forgive conflating the actual date of the Sahidic manuscript of the liturgy (7th century) with the given estimates for the age of an urtext (which may or may not contain the Marian prayer), but it's hard to not see both failing to mention the aforementioned critical caveat on the QB quote and withholding the reference evidently used, which would provide it, as deliberately deceptive.
ReplyDeleteArians did not shy away from calling Christ either God or Lord (because the scriptures call him that); they simply differed in their interpretation of these terms when applied to him. Theotokos is a Coptic term, rejected by Assyrians.
ReplyDeleteCan you address Stephan Shomaker's argument for an early dating of Bartholomew? Can you address who used this Coptic Liturgy and if there is ant reference or evidence for how widespread it was?
ReplyDelete