Mystik - Metapher - Bild - Oapen

St. Isaac of Nineveh and the Messalians
he criticizes the Messalians for not valuing the sacraments, he at least keeps them
in higher regard than what he perceives is the case with the Messalians. The question
that is difficult to answer is obviously if he keeps them in as high regard as his
critics.
Interesting is Isaac’s attitude towards authority. It is a feature of Isaac’s Weltanschauung
that he finds the exercising of power and the fact that some rule the others
deeply morally problematic. 37 This is also reflected in his views on monastic authority.
In his criticism of the Messalians he gives a kind of minimalist understanding
of what submitting to the church entails: to keep the rule set down by the
Church in regard to the number of services the solitary has to read, but not necessarily
regarding their content. Here the solitary should decide what is best in a particular
situation. There is however, a very striking text from Isaac that deals with
monastic authority explicitly.
If there is a solitary capable of this grace and who has received this gift from God, and one
of the abbots or heads of the coenobites hinders the solitary from practicing this gift, …
this one has to answer to God and stand before the trial of Christ. 38
Isaac is speaking of the gift of pure prayer. Even if Isaac is talking of “spiritual
matters” here, these are very bold words that must have been considered dangerous
by those in power. If we further keep in mind that the criticism against Isaac
implicit in the homily analyzed above seemed to focus on Isaac’s view of “continuous”
prayer, it is not too farfetched an idea to think that Isaac’s strong conviction
that spiritual experiences during prayer are more important than rules and
monastic authority could be considered dangerous by some, and therefore be
branded Messalian.
that realm which has no end.” This is exactly the sacramental theology associated with Theodore of
Mopsuestia and probably with the East Syrian Church of Isaac’s time.
In the Third Part, still only published in Italian (Isacco di Ninive, Discorsi ascetici. Terza collezione.
Edizioni Qiqajon, Commuita di Bose (2004)), however, we found a fairly long discourse devoted to
the Eucharist (TP XI). The actual content of this discourse is not really in conflict with the other
notes on the Eucharist that have been discussed above, but I am still unsure if this text can really be
regarded as genuine. It seems to come from a different context, and the writer seems to be much
closer to the Church than Isaac is. In this text there is talk of those that stand outside the community
of the Church, the heretics. TP XI, 9. This kind of language is not typical of Isaac. Finally there is a
short postscript to the text: “Here ends the discourse about the Holy Mysteries of our Saviour, the
work of the blessed mar Isaac, solitary and orthodox, who was bishop in the city of Nineveh.” TP
XI, 34. Many explanations to this postscript are possible. Chialà, the translator, suggests that it may
be the work of a copyist or an addition by a disciple of Isaac that has written down his dictation.
Since it is the only one of its kind in the Third Part it suggests at least that this text has originally been
transmitted separately. It is therefore not unreasonable to question if all the texts of the Third Part
actually go back to Isaac. The fact that this text does seem to stray a bit from Isaac’s usual style and
content suggests that this text may have been associated with Isaac only at a later point, perhaps in an
attempt to prove his orthodoxy when this was disputed.
37 For the discussion of this striking feature of Isaac’s thought I refer the reader to my forthcoming
thesis.
38 DS II, 44.
65