5. Salutary precepts, addressed to the monk Nicholas, and showing how to lead a Christian life, and especially how to restrain anger and fleshly lusts. Ascetic exercises are rejected as a means, and looking to Jesus is recommended as pre-eminently the way to virtue and true Christianity. Annexed is a reply from Nicholas, returning thanks for this counsel.
6. Brief reflections of a pious and mystical character, generally bearing on some passage or expression of the Scriptures, treated in the freest style of allegorical interpretation. A state of mystical ecstasy, in which the soul is lost to all created things, and in an ecstasy of love is wholly absorbed in God, is characterized as the most exalted spiritual condition, and ascetic duties are accorded only a secondary value. Another tract, upon the subject of fasting, is wanting in the older editions, and was first published in 1748 by Remondini. It possibly formed a part of 6, which closes abruptly.
7. General questions of Christian morality; a disputation with a jurist as to the possibility of reconciling capital punishment with Christian principles, and a discussion of the nature and use of prayer, of the various ways to honor God, of the desire to please men, etc.
8. A mystical dialogue between the soul and spirit concerning sin and grace, chiefly remarkable because of its decided rejection of the doctrine of original sin, and of its clear and pointed statement of the doctrines of the Greek fathers respecting sin and human freedom. We are to seek the source of our sinfulness neither in Satan, Adam, nor other men. No power can compel us to good or evil, but rather the condition of every person is that which he has chosen from the time of his baptism. The same passions which seduced Adam and Eve still exist in human nature, and produce a like result in every soul that, in the exercise of its freedom, submits to their control. The conflict with sin is therefore a struggle against our own will, in which Christ aids us when we keep his commandments to the extent of our power.
9. Christ's relation to Melchisedek. This tract is directed against a class who regarded Melchisedek as a divine being; probably the Origenistic sect founded in Egypt by Hieracas, who were said to regard Melchisedek as the holy Spirit or an incarnation of the Spirit. While combating such views, the tract reveals a tendency to Monophysitism, in ascribing to the human nature of Jesus all the attributes of the Godhead. These tracts of Marcus Eremita reveal to us the memorials of a partly ascetic, partly ecstatic mysticism, which was especially cultivated among the Egyptian monks, and which aimed to spiritualize the practices of Monachism. In its excess of pious feeling over dogmatic conceptions, it contained the seeds of many diverse systems of dogmatics and ethics. Monophysitism had essentially its root in the mysticism of the Egyptian monks; and in these writings are found, in curious juxtaposition, Pelagianism and Augustinism, the strongest assertion of human freedom and of the sole efficiency of grace in the work of salvation, the evangelical view of justification by faith and the Roman Catholic doctrine of works. Hence Bellarmine and other Roman Catholics supposed that modern heretics had forged these writings, while Protestant writers have remarked their Pelagian cast. The tracts of Marcus were in the 17th century placed in the Index, as “caute legenda.” They are chiefly important as a connecting link between the mysticism of Macarius and that of the Areopagite and Maximus Confessor.
Eight of the above mystical treatises are (
ëüãïé ὀêôÜ
, “equal to the number of the universal passions.” A Latin version of all together was prepared by Joannes Picus (Paris, 1563, 8vo; later editions in Bibl. Patr.); a Greek version by Guillaume Morel, with the Antirrhetica of Hesychius of Jerusalem (Par. 1563, 8vo). Both versions were reprinted in the first volume of the Auctarium of Ducxeus (Paris, 1624, folio), in the eleventh volume of Bibl. Patrum (Paris, 1654, folio), and in the eighth volume of the Bibl. Patrum of Galland. Marcus Eremita was probably the author also of the tract
Ðåñὶ íçóôåßáò
, De Jejunio; Latin version by Zinus (Venice, 1574, 8vo). Two of Marcus's tracts — the first and second, viz.
Ðåñὶ íüìïõ ðíåõìáôéêïῦ
,, De Lege Spirituali, and
Ðåñὶ ôῶí ïἰïìÝíùí ἐî ἔñãùí äéêáéïῦóèáé
, Dejus quiputant se Operibusjustificari, were published together by Vincentius Opsopeous, with a Latin version (Haguenau, 1531, 8vo). The first was reprinted in the Alicro presbyticon (Basle, 1550), and in the Orthodoxographa (Basle, 1555). The tract De Jejunio. and another, De Alelchizedek, were first published by B. M. Remondinus (Rome, 1748). See Fabricius, Biblioth. Grceca, 9:267; Cave, Histor. Litt. ad ann. 401, 1:372; Oudin, De Scriptor. Eccles. i, col. 902 sq.; Tillemont, Memoires, 10:8)01; Galland, Biblioth. Patrum, Proleg. ad viii, c. 1; Smith, Dict. of Gr. and Rom. Biog. and Mythol. s.v.; and especially Wagenmann, in Herzog, Real-Encyk. 20:85-91. (G. M.)