The Monastic Debate: The Letter to Theodore and Mar Saba’s Library

The discovery of the Letter to Theodore by Morton Smith in 1958 has sparked continuous debate about its authenticity and provenance. Central to this discussion is the belief held by key figures at Mar Saba monastery that the manuscript was part of their library long before Smith arrived. This post explores the perspectives of Elder Seraphim and Father Kallistos Dourvas, who were deeply involved in the monastery’s affairs during and after the time of Smith’s discovery.

Elder Seraphim’s Stand

Elder Seraphim, a monk at Mar Saba since 1939, was a central figure in the monastery for many decades. His reaction to the manuscript’s discovery and subsequent attempts to move it provides significant insights into its perceived authenticity and rightful ownership.

In 1976, when scholars attempted to transfer the manuscript to the Jerusalem Patriarchate for preservation, Seraphim vehemently opposed the move. His fierce protectiveness over the manuscript suggests he genuinely believed it was a rightful part of Mar Saba’s collection. David Flusser’s account emphasizes Seraphim’s determination, stating that Seraphim demanded the manuscript be returned to Mar Saba, which Flusser interpreted as a belief that the manuscript belonged to the monastery. This reaction is telling—if Seraphim had thought the manuscript was a recent forgery or did not belong to Mar Saba, his vehement opposition to its transfer would be inexplicable.

Father Kallistos Dourvas’s Perspective

Father Kallistos Dourvas, the librarian of the Greek Patriarchate of Jerusalem from the 1970s until around 1990, also believed that the manuscript was a long-standing part of Mar Saba’s collection. Kallistos’s understanding was influenced by Seraphim’s passionate defense of the manuscript’s ownership and his own examination of the handwriting, which he believed matched 18th-century scripts found in other manuscripts at Mar Saba.

Kallistos’s testimony, recorded in Quentin Quesnell’s notes, indicates that he thought the manuscript reflected the historical presence of heretical texts at Mar Saba. His belief that the manuscript predated Smith’s arrival aligns with Seraphim’s actions and attitudes, reinforcing the notion that the manuscript was considered an integral part of the monastery’s heritage.

The Separation and Return of the Manuscript

A critical point of inquiry is why the manuscript was separated from its accompanying book. One plausible explanation is that the separation was a strategic move to ensure the manuscript’s return to Mar Saba. Given the monastery’s chaotic state, as described by both Flusser and Kallistos, it is conceivable that the manuscript was detached to be cataloged and preserved separately, with the intention of ultimately returning the book to its rightful place.

Conclusion

The perspectives of Elder Seraphim and Father Kallistos Dourvas provide compelling evidence that the Letter to Theodore was considered part of Mar Saba’s library long before Morton Smith’s discovery. Their beliefs and actions underscore a deeply rooted conviction in the manuscript’s authenticity and rightful ownership. While debates about the letter’s origins and authenticity continue, the monastic testimonies offer a crucial dimension to understanding the complex history of this enigmatic manuscript.