A Commentary on the Hymn to the Theotokos
The hymn in Greek is:
Ἄξιόν ἐστιν ὡς ἀληθῶς,
μακαρίζειν σε τὴν Θεοτόκον,
τὴν ἀειμακάριστον καὶ παναμώμητον
καὶ μητέρα τοῦ Θεοῦ ἡμῶν.
Τὴν τιμιωτέραν τῶν Χερουβεὶμ
καὶ ἐνδοξοτέραν ἀσυγκρίτως τῶν Σεραφείμ,
τὴν ἀδιαφθόρως Θεὸν Λόγον τεκοῦσαν,
τὴν ὄντως Θεοτόκον,
σὲ μεγαλύνομεν.
One translation of the hymn goes as follows:
It is truly right to bless thee, O Theotokos,
thou the ever blessed, and most pure, and the Mother of our God.
Thou the more honorable than the cherubim,
and beyond compare more glorious than the seraphim,
who without corruption gavest birth to God the Word,
thou the true Theotokos, we magnify thee.
Of the above hymn honoring the Theotokos, I have heard a question arise concerning the phrase, “who without corruption gavest birth to God the Word.” The question is over what is meant by: “without corruption.” In Greek the phrase is: τὴν ἀδιαφθόρως Θεὸν Λόγον τεκοῦσαν. The key term is τὴν ἀδιαφθόρως. But, beyond “corruption,” “stain,” or defilement,” what does this term mean to say? In short, it means that in some sense Mary herself was not corrupt in giving birth to the God the Word. Yet this doesn't answer the question of in what sense she was ἀδιαφθόρως.
For example, to illustrate the question, if I receive the word of one person and then deliver it to another, and if my memory is incorrupt, then I deliver this word without corruption. If I am without corruption in delivering the message, then what is precisely not corrupted is the message, not me. In other words, I am not the primary referent, whereas the purity of the message is. Praising the purity of the message is the true praise of the deliverer of said message, and so the praise of the deliverer is in this sense indirect. In other words, I deliver the message purely and without any diminution, and so my personal purity is not what is at question (though it could be), for the whole issue is not precisely “about me,” but about the message. The lack of corruption is not, then, primarily referring to my memory, or even to my delivery, per se, but to the purity of the message delivered. It is the message which is ultimately what is delivered incorrupt.
Now, in reference to the hymn in question, could this be the case regarding the Theotokos? Is her incorruption not, say, a reference to her act of giving birth, to the act of delivery in and of itself, or even to her own purity, per se, but to the Word’s complete entry into humanity, an entry in which He is not diminished in any way? Of course, it is affirmed that Mary is without sin, but the question as I see it is whether this particular verse of the hymn is concerned with affirming this fact of her personal purity at this particular point.
One reason the question is important is that some have said that Mary’s act of birth was not defiled by her personal sin, and that it is a reference to her being pure in herself in the act of giving birth to God the Word. Now, I believe she was sinless in giving birth to God, but I think if this hymn is made to be a reference to this her purity, in this particular way, then it could lead to some problems regarding birth, the purity of women in childbearing, etc. It could be taken to mean that giving birth in some sense could defile a person, and that in Mary’s case it happened that she was not defiled in giving birth. But now we have to answer why giving birth would involve defilement, which is absurd, and so probably not what the hymn is referring to. It could then be pushed back to a critique of holy matrimony, where the act of having children is said to be the source of some corruption, and so Mary is said to be “pure” and “incorrupt” in giving birth simply because she did not have marital relations, which then opens the door to all kinds of problems about the nature of marriage and the act of having children, but we know that Paul in Hebrews 13:4 says the marriage bed is undefiled(ἀμίαντος).
So, in what sense is the verse from the hymn under discussion referring to the Theotokos as ἀδιαφθόρως? Well, there are a couple clues. The first is the deceptively simple observation that the hymn never actually speaks of “Mary” by name. The hymn is to the Theotokos, to the “bearer of God.” The significance is found in that Theotokos is generally understood to be the result of Christological reflection, not Mariological reflection. It is not primarily a reference to Mary, but is primarily a reference to Christ via Mary. It is an affirmation that Mary fully bore God the Word, and not just a human nature. As such, the hymn to the Theotokos is a hymn praising Christ through Mary as Theotokos. It is not a hymn of praise to Mary’s personal piety and purity, per se, but to the Mystery of God’s taking on of human nature.
The second clue is that in this hymn the God-bearer is said to be “more honorable than the Cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim.” Why? How can she be said to be greater than these exalted beings? Well, the following words of the hymn indicate an answer, but before looking at them it would help to first reflect on the matter. In a very simple sense, what do angels do? Among other things, angels deliver God’s Word and communicate God’s will. The Theotokos, however, did not merely speak the words of the Person of God, as angels do, nor did she merely communicate God’s will and intention to human beings, as angels also do, but was a conduit for the Person of God Himself, which is an action categorically superior to that of the angels. It is therefore not mere hyperbole that says the Theotokos is more honourable than the Cherubim and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, for the statement of praise is simply one of theological fact: the Theotokos did something that angelic beings simply cannot do, and so her status relative to the angels is truly “beyond compare.”
The reason for the comparison in the first place is that they both deliver God’s Word, but the Theotokos delivers without any diminution, for she delivers the entire Person of the Word God. This, I believe, is what is actually meant by ἀδιαφθόρως. Her delivery of God into humanity is truly without any corruption, and the taking on of flesh in no way diminishes the completeness and the fullness of God’s presence in human form, the form borne by the Theotokos. This, then, resolves the problem of trying to see Mary’s personal purity as being what is at stake in the hymn. It is not a reference to the act itself of giving birth, nor to the act of the marital conception of children, but to the utter fullness of God who took flesh through her.
The absence of corruption in the Theotokos is thus following upon the statement honouring and glorifying her beyond the angels, for their delivery of God’s word is necessarily partial whereas the Theotokos’ is anything but partial. She received the whole Person, and she gave birth to the whole Person. In other words, the giving of God flesh did not reduce Him in any way. Not then a reference to her exalted personal purity, the sense, therefore, in which she is said by the hymn to be “incorrupt” in giving birth to God the Word is made clear: She gave birth to nothing less than the whole Person of God the Word. And so the phrase can be read: “More honorable than the cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the seraphim, [for] without corruption you gave birth to [the whole Person of] God the Word [in the flesh]. True Theotokos we magnify you!”
Now, in reference to the hymn in question, could this be the case regarding the Theotokos? Is her incorruption not, say, a reference to her act of giving birth, to the act of delivery in and of itself, or even to her own purity, per se, but to the Word’s complete entry into humanity, an entry in which He is not diminished in any way? Of course, it is affirmed that Mary is without sin, but the question as I see it is whether this particular verse of the hymn is concerned with affirming this fact of her personal purity at this particular point.
One reason the question is important is that some have said that Mary’s act of birth was not defiled by her personal sin, and that it is a reference to her being pure in herself in the act of giving birth to God the Word. Now, I believe she was sinless in giving birth to God, but I think if this hymn is made to be a reference to this her purity, in this particular way, then it could lead to some problems regarding birth, the purity of women in childbearing, etc. It could be taken to mean that giving birth in some sense could defile a person, and that in Mary’s case it happened that she was not defiled in giving birth. But now we have to answer why giving birth would involve defilement, which is absurd, and so probably not what the hymn is referring to. It could then be pushed back to a critique of holy matrimony, where the act of having children is said to be the source of some corruption, and so Mary is said to be “pure” and “incorrupt” in giving birth simply because she did not have marital relations, which then opens the door to all kinds of problems about the nature of marriage and the act of having children, but we know that Paul in Hebrews 13:4 says the marriage bed is undefiled(ἀμίαντος).
So, in what sense is the verse from the hymn under discussion referring to the Theotokos as ἀδιαφθόρως? Well, there are a couple clues. The first is the deceptively simple observation that the hymn never actually speaks of “Mary” by name. The hymn is to the Theotokos, to the “bearer of God.” The significance is found in that Theotokos is generally understood to be the result of Christological reflection, not Mariological reflection. It is not primarily a reference to Mary, but is primarily a reference to Christ via Mary. It is an affirmation that Mary fully bore God the Word, and not just a human nature. As such, the hymn to the Theotokos is a hymn praising Christ through Mary as Theotokos. It is not a hymn of praise to Mary’s personal piety and purity, per se, but to the Mystery of God’s taking on of human nature.
The second clue is that in this hymn the God-bearer is said to be “more honorable than the Cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim.” Why? How can she be said to be greater than these exalted beings? Well, the following words of the hymn indicate an answer, but before looking at them it would help to first reflect on the matter. In a very simple sense, what do angels do? Among other things, angels deliver God’s Word and communicate God’s will. The Theotokos, however, did not merely speak the words of the Person of God, as angels do, nor did she merely communicate God’s will and intention to human beings, as angels also do, but was a conduit for the Person of God Himself, which is an action categorically superior to that of the angels. It is therefore not mere hyperbole that says the Theotokos is more honourable than the Cherubim and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, for the statement of praise is simply one of theological fact: the Theotokos did something that angelic beings simply cannot do, and so her status relative to the angels is truly “beyond compare.”
The reason for the comparison in the first place is that they both deliver God’s Word, but the Theotokos delivers without any diminution, for she delivers the entire Person of the Word God. This, I believe, is what is actually meant by ἀδιαφθόρως. Her delivery of God into humanity is truly without any corruption, and the taking on of flesh in no way diminishes the completeness and the fullness of God’s presence in human form, the form borne by the Theotokos. This, then, resolves the problem of trying to see Mary’s personal purity as being what is at stake in the hymn. It is not a reference to the act itself of giving birth, nor to the act of the marital conception of children, but to the utter fullness of God who took flesh through her.
The absence of corruption in the Theotokos is thus following upon the statement honouring and glorifying her beyond the angels, for their delivery of God’s word is necessarily partial whereas the Theotokos’ is anything but partial. She received the whole Person, and she gave birth to the whole Person. In other words, the giving of God flesh did not reduce Him in any way. Not then a reference to her exalted personal purity, the sense, therefore, in which she is said by the hymn to be “incorrupt” in giving birth to God the Word is made clear: She gave birth to nothing less than the whole Person of God the Word. And so the phrase can be read: “More honorable than the cherubim, and more glorious beyond compare than the seraphim, [for] without corruption you gave birth to [the whole Person of] God the Word [in the flesh]. True Theotokos we magnify you!”
