MACARIUS THE GREAT. - Also called the Egyptian or the Elder. Palladius speaks of him (Hist. Laus., 17; ed. C. Butler, I, Cambridge 1899, pp. 43, 5 ff.) and Rufinus (Hist. monach., 28). Neither of them knows anything of any literary activity of his, but many believe that a letter, attributed in Latin and in Syriac to M. and addressed "Ad filios Dei" (PG 34, 406-10), is an authentic work of M.
A critical edition of the Latin text was given by A. Wilmart: La lettre de Macaire, in Revue d'ascétique et de mystique (1 [1920], pp. 58-83). The assertion of authenticity is based on Gennadius (De vir. ill., X), who knows the letter of a M. "ad iuniores professionis suae" (v. L. Marriott, Isaac of Ninive and the writings of Macaire of Egypt; id., Gennadius of Marseilles on Macarius of Egypt, both in Journ. of theol. studies, 20 [1919], pp. 345-49). But on the other hand the content of the letter corresponds completely to the ideas of the homilies of Pseudo-Macarius.
Thus H. Dörries came in his book Symeon von Mesopotamien ([Texte und Untersuchungen, 55, 1], Leipzig 1941) to the conclusion (p. 378 f., against P. Resch, La doctrine des premiers maîtres égyptiens, Paris 1931, p. 39 f., and M. Viller - K. Rahner, Aszese und Mystik in der Väterzeit, Freiburg 1939, p. 96 f.) of the non-authenticity of the letter. This fact can perhaps be granted to Dörries; yet it still remains to be explained how, of the whole great apocryphal literature of the Homilies of Pseudo-Macarius, only this letter was preserved in Latin. 50 Greek Homilies of M. were contained in the first edition of Giovanni Picus (1559, reprinted in PG 34, 449-822; some additions by H. I. Floss are also found in Migne); G. L. Marriott added from an Oxford manuscript of 57 homilies of M. another 7 homilies (51-57; v. Macarii Anecdota [Harvard theol. studies, 5], Cambridge 1918). A large part of the tradition of the homilies of M. in Greek (a translation also exists in Georgian: v. J. Karst, Littérature georgienne chrétienne, Paris 1934, p. 54) was collected and studied by H. Dörries (op. cit.) while the Syriac and Arabic translation was studied by W. Strathmann, Die arabische Makariustradition (Göttingen 1934).
A critical edition of the text of the homilies of Pseudo-Macarius was prepared by E. Klostermann for the CSEL. On the methodological principles for this difficult edition v. E. Klostermann, Symeon und Makarius (Berlin 1944). From the Arabic translation it emerges that the true name of the author of these homilies is a certain Simeon, an ascetic who lived in Mesopotamia. The attribution of the homilies to M. the Great was perhaps meant to facilitate the introduction of homilies of a heretical character into an orthodox milieu. Moreover the Messalians, among whom the origin of the homilies must be sought, boasted of walking in the footsteps of Anthony and M. (Histoire Nestorienne: PO 5, 279 and Theodore bar Koni, Liber scholiorum). The origin of the homilies in a milieu of Messalians (v.) is beyond doubt (of the contrary opinion is only W. Völker, in Theol. Literaturzeitung, 68 [1943], pp. 129-36); the proof was given by L. Villecourt, La date et l'origine des homélies spirituelles attribuées à Macaire (in Comptes rendus des séances de l'Académie des inscriptions et belles lettres, Paris 1920, pp. 250-58). However the particular studies of H. Dörries have shown that this is a question of an attenuated Messalianism: the author polemicizes not rarely against the position of radical Messalians. On the other hand it is seen from the history of the text how corrections were made in it to eliminate overly evident heresies (an example in E. Klostermann, loc. cit., p. 24). For this reason the study of the history of the text is indispensable for the evaluation of the individual ideas, and a unification of the collection of 64 homilies (represented by Vat. gr. 694) and of the collection of 50 homilies does not appear possible (v. the stemma of E. Klostermann, loc. cit., p. 6). The interest of H. Dörries is the reconstruction from the homilies of the "Asceticon" of the Messalians which would have been at the basis of the condemnation at the Council of Ephesus (431) following the action of Amphilochius of Iconium. However this reconstruction remains hypothetical. A study to place historically the ideas and the vocabulary of the homilies of M. does not yet exist. It is certain, however, that the author knew the apocryphal Acts of the Apostles, and not only the Acts of Thomas but also the Acts of Peter; moreover he knows extra-canonical sayings of Jesus and in his vocabulary has contacts also with the pseudo-Clementine literature. Perhaps he comes from a milieu of Encratites in Mesopotamia and this would also explain the kinship of the mysticism of (divine) light between Pseudo-Macarius and the Encratites. It can be said that the homeland of this asceticism and mysticism was Christian Mesopotamia.