In interpreting Jacob of Serug's expression that Mary was "without blemish," we are cautioned that
When we read carefully the
original text, we understand that an interpretation of this text in favour of
Mary’s exclusion from original sin is not plausible. There is no ambiguity in
the Syriac text in this respect. Mary is spoken of as humble, pure, limpid and
“without blemish" (Jacob of Serugh, On the Virgin, ET by M.
Hansbury, 23) It is the Syriac expression, dlo mumo, that is translated
as immacolata in Italian and “without blemish” in English. J. Payne
Smith gives the following meanings for dlo mumo lit: flawless, faultless
and unblemished (J. Payne Smith, A Compendious Syriac Dictionary, 258).
Hence the textual evidence is far from the truth in assuming even “implicitly”
her exception from original sin and the taking for granted that it corresponds
to the concept of the Immaculate Conception. (James Puthuparampil, Mariological
Thought of Mar Jacob of Serugh (451-521) [MŌRĀN 'ETH'Ō Series 25; Kerala,
India: St. Ephrem Ecumenical Research Institute, 2005], 84-85)
Elsewhere, we read of the overwhelming evidence from Jacob of
Serugh’s own writings against the Immaculate Conception:
Many modern scholars try to see, in the writings of the early
Church Fathers, the concept of the Immaculate Conception. This attempt seems to
be quite arbitrary. For instance, when Mar Jacob spoke about the holiness of
Mary, he did not use the same concept as in the dogma of the Immaculate
Conception. Mar Jacob’s understanding of her holiness can be delineated as 1)
her holiness is in comparison with the rest of humanity, 2) this is in
connection with her divine motherhood 3) the basis of her holiness is her
cooperation to God’s grace. . . . The Dogma of the Immaculate Conception
differs from Mar Jacob’s understanding of Mary’s holiness in two aspects. The
first is that he did not speak about Mary as being preserved immune from all
stain of original sin. Instead, he presented her as the most pleasing one
before God: “how exalted and pure from evil, nor stirs in her an impulse
inclined to lust” (Jacob of Serugh, On the Virgin, ET by M. Hansbury, 23).
Mar Jacob further describes how Mary had prepared herself so as to be the most
pleasing one before God:
And she allows no thought for luxury,
nor worldly conversation which causes cruel harm.
Desire for worldly vanity does not burn in her,
nor is she occupied with childish things. (Jacob of Serugh, On
the Virgin, ET by M. Hansbury, 23)
The second difference is that her
holiness is presented as a result of the exercise of Mary’s free will. Mar
Jacob presented Mary as the one who pleased God with her life. We quote three
passages which point to the perfection that she achieved as a result of her
free will.
This is beauty, when one is
beautiful of one’s own accord; glorious graces of perfection are in her will.
However great be the beauty of
something from God, it is not acclaimed if freedom is not present. (Jacob of
Serugh, On the Virgin, ET by M. Hansbury, 25)
She was most fair both in her
nature and in her will, because she was not sullied with displeasing desires.
From her childhood, she stood firm
in unblemished
uprightness;
she walked in the way without
offenses.
Her original nature was preserved
with a will for good things because there were always tokens of virginity in
her body and
holy things in her soul. (Jacob of
Serugh, On the Virgin, ET by M. Hansbury,24)
He chose for himself a virgin who
was betrothed and
preserved;
she was holy, modest, and
vigilant.
He descended and dwelt in the
blessed one, most fair;
her womb was sealed, her body was
holy, and her soul was
limpid.
(Jacob of Serugh, On the Virgin, ET by M. Hansbury, 44)
We may sum up the difference
between the Dogma and Mar Jacob’s understanding in the following way: the dogma
emphasizes Mary’s immunity from the stains of sin from the moment of her
conception in her mother’s womb, while Mar Jacob presents Mary as the most
faithful daughter of God who pleased God by her obedience to the Law. For he
writes:
She did not turn aside from the
justice which is in the Law,
and neither carnal nor bodily
desire disturbed her. (Jacob of Serugh, On the Virgin, ET by M. Hansbury, 24)
Mar Jacob spoke about the personal
integrity of Mary in that she as a wife, mother and virgin, was holy. The
descent of the Holy Spirit upon Mary, according to Mar Jacob, was “to let loose
from her the former sentence of Eve and Adam.” (Jacob of Serugh, On the
Virgin, ET by M. Hansbury, 34) Mary’s purification was necessary for the
Son of God to assume a body without sin. Mar Jacob’s exegesis of Luke 1:35
makes a distinction between the “Spirit” and the “Power of God.” The Holy
Spirit had “sanctified” her and “purified” her in order that “He might take
from her a pure body without sin.” (Jacob of Serugh, On the Virgin, ET
by M. Hansbury, 35) Let us listen to Mar Jacob’s own words:
He sanctified her, purified her
and made her blessed among
women;
He freed her from that curse of
sufferings on account of Eve,
her mother.
[...]
The Spirit freed her from that
debt that she might be beyond transgression when He solemnly dwelt in her.
He purified the Mother by
the Holy Spirit while dwelling in
her,
that He might take from her a pure
body without sin.
Lest the body with which He
clothed Himself according to
nature be sullied,
He purified the Virgin by the Holy
Spirit and then dwelt in
her.
The Son of God wanted to be
related to her,
and first He made her body
without sin.
The Word had descended that He
might become flesh; on this
account,
by the Spirit He purified the one
from whom He had become
flesh,
so that He might become like us in
everything when He
descended, except for this: that
his pure body is without sin. (Jacob of Serugh, On the Virgin, ET by M.
Hansbury, 34-35)
The above passage is Mar Jacob’s
explanation of “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most
High will overshadow you; [...]” (Lk 1:35). Mary had achieved in her life all
the perfection, and holiness that one can achieve through one’s effort, of
which he says: “She rose up to this measure on her own, until the Spirit, that
perfecter of all came to her" (Jacob of Serugh, On the Virgin, ET
by M. Hansbury, 38). He believed that Mary had achieved perfection before the
angel came to her. The following lines make this clearer:
He [God] searched her and found
humility and holiness in her,
and limpid impulses and a soul
desirous of divinity.
And a pure heart and every
reckoning of perfection,
because of this He chose her, the
pure and most fair one. (Jacob of Serugh, On the Virgin, ET by M.
Hansbury, 23)
Mar Jacob, through this passage
illustrates that Mary was holy even before the angel brought God’s message to
her. Mary is an ordinary human being, whom the Father deemed worthy, on account
of what she was. Hence her holiness becomes the spiritual aspect of her
virginity. (Ibid., 177-81)
With respect to the phrase "“He might take from her a pure
body without sin," we read the following in a footnote:
In
the sense of purification Mar Jacob uses different Syriac words: mrāq, zalal,
and dekya. The word mrāq gives the meaning of
purifying, polishing and cleansing. Cf. J. Payne Smith, A Compendious
Dictionary, 303. In the Pael form, zālel means to draw from the
lees, to fine, free from the dross etc. Cf. J. Payne Smith, A Compendious
Dictionary, 478. Dekya in pael form means to cleanse, purify,
pronounce clean according to the ceremonial law. The Syriac word used for
sanctification is qādeš. In Pael form qādeš means to keep or
render holy, to hallow, sanctify, consecrate, to set apart for holy use, to
celebrate holy rites, to give in marriage; to chant the Tersanctus cry ‘Holy,
Holy, Holy.’ Cf. J. Payne Smith, A Compendious Dictionary, 491. (Ibid.,
179 n. 84)
Jacob of Serugh is another patristic witness against the Immaculate
Conception being apostolic in origin.