Verbum Crucis, Virtus Dei: a Study of Theopaschism from the Council of Chalcedon (451) to the Age of Justinian
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Verbum Crucis, Virtus Dei: A Study of Theopaschism from the Council of Chalcedon (451) to the Age of Justinian by Dana luliana Viezure A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Centre for Medieval Studies University of Toronto © Copyright by Dana luliana Viezure, 2009 Library and Archives Bibliotheque et 1*1 Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de I'edition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 OttawaONK1A0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-55692-4 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-55692-4 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, preter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans le loan, distribute and sell theses monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non support microforme, papier, electronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la these ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation. without the author's permission. In compliance with the Canadian Conformement a la loi canadienne sur la Privacy Act some supporting forms protection de la vie privee, quelques may have been removed from this formulaires secondares ont ete enleves de thesis. cette these. While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires aient inclus dans in the document page count, their la pagination, il n'y aura aucun contenu removal does not represent any loss manquant. of content from the thesis. 1+1 Canada Abstract Verbum Crucis, Virtus Dei: A Study of Theopaschism from the Council of Chalcedon (451) to the Age of Justinian Dana Iuliana Viezure Doctor of Philosophy Centre for Medieval Studies, University of Toronto, 2009 This dissertation examines the history of Theopaschite discourse between 451 and 533. While in its extreme forms Theopaschite discourse brought upon its proponents legitimate accusations of introducing suffering into the divine nature, it was also used in more moderate formulations for the purpose of emphasizing the unity of subject in Christ and the paradoxical nature of the mystery of the Incarnation. Cyril of Alexandria and his followers were fond of this type of discourse. The Antiochians, however, criticized Theopaschite discourse and mocked the paradoxes on which its legitimacy was bound to rely. The period leading up to the Council of Chalcedon (451) witnessed numerous conflicts on this subject. In the immediate aftermath of Chalcedon, however, Theopaschism nearly dissapeared from the stage of Christological controversy. The first generation of anti-Chalcedonians manifested great reservations in promoting Theopaschite discourse, despite the fact that, to them, it was the most appropriate type of discourse on the Incarnation. This reticence was most likely due to the fierce controversies in which this discourse had been involved before Chalcedon. In the late 460s Theopaschism re entered the stage of doctrinal debates through the liturgy: the anti-Chalcedonians of Antioch were successful in adding to the Trisagion hymn "Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal, have mercy on us" the Theopaschite phrase "who was crucified for us." Theopaschite discourse thus ii became more widely spread throughout the Eastern Empire. Imperial attitude favored this development. Theopaschite discourse then became progressively detached from the liturgical context and, through certain formulas that were used as battle cries, by anti-Chalcedonians at first and later by neo-Chalcedonians as well, it became more seriously embedded in the Christological controversies of ca. 490-520. It was eventually taken into the canon of orthodoxy of the Imperial Church under emperor Justinian. iii Table of Contents Abstract ii Acknowledgments vi Introduction 1 Chapter 1: Theopaschism in the Aftermath of the Council of Chalcedon 11 1. The Historical context 13 1.1. The Reception of the Council of Chalcedon 13 1.2. Timothy of Alexandria's Ecclesiastical Career 15 2. The Canon of Orthodoxy: Early Evidence for a Neo-Chalcedonian Position 29 3. Theopaschism in the Aftermath of Chalcedon 36 3.1. Theopaschism in the Works of Timothy Aelurus 39 3.1.1. Theopaschism in Timothy's Writings against the Dyophysites 39 3.1.2. Theopaschism in Timothy's Writings against the Phantasiasts 46 3.2. Echoes in Dyophysite Writings 54 Chapter 2: 469-482: The Prehistory of the Late Fifth- and Early Sixth-Century Controversies over Theopaschism 65 1. Theopaschism in Antioch: 451-471 66 1. 1. Antioch between 451 and 469: the historical background of the conflict over the Theopaschite addition to the Trisagion 66 1.2.469-471: The conflict over the Theopaschite Trisagion 72 1.2.1. Antioch between 469 and 471: preliminary remarks 72 1.2.2. The main player: Peter the Fuller 75 1.2.3. The main theme: a brief history of the Trisagion; origins, uses, and early controversies 76 1.2.4. The conflict over the interpolated Trisagion: the course of events and interpretation 79 1.2.5. Preliminary conclusions 87 2. The Encyclical and the Henoticon: orthodoxy redefined (475-482) 88 2.1. The Encyclical 89 2.2. Martyrius of Jerusalem's /Ipcxr^pcuvrp-ic' 99 2.3. The Henoticon 101 Chapter 3: 482-518: Theopaschism After the Publication of the Henoticon 114 iv 1. Alexandria in the aftermath of the publication of the Henoticon 114 2. The Trisagion Controversy in Antioch: 482-485 121 2.1. Philoxenus of Mabbug and the Theopaschite Trisagion in the 480s 122 2.2. The Theotokos - an argumentative parallel to the Trisagion in Philoxenus 129 2.3. The Dyophysites and the Trisagion controversy in the 480s 131 2.4. The controversy over the Trisagion and the monastic milieu 133 2.5. Theopaschism and Christological controversy 135 2.6. Other positions on Theopaschism in Antioch 139 3. Beyond Antioch 141 3.1. Theopaschism in Jerusalem 141 3.2. Theopaschism in Constantinople 147 3.2.1. The fights over the theopaschite Trisagion in Constantinople (511-512) 147 3.2.2. Contemporary reception and interpretation of the events of 511-512 150 3.2.3. Neo-Chalcedonian promotion of Theopaschism in Constantinople 155 Chapter 4: 518-520: The Theopaschite Controversy 161 1. History of the Conflict 166 1.1. In Constantinople 167 1.1.1. Guests in Constantinople: the Scythian monks, the papal legates, and Vitalian 167 1.1.2. The ordination in Antioch 169 1.1.3. The negotiations 173 1.1.4. The Scythians go to Rome: an embroilment of character references 176 1.2. In Rome 180 2. Origins of the Theopaschite controversy 187 2.1. The Scythian heritage 187 2.2. The Constantinopolitan influence 192 2.3. An influence from the patriarchates of Antioch and Jerusalem? 198 Epilogue: The Permanent Legitimization of the Theopaschite Formula under Justinian 203 Bibliography 215 v Acknowledgments I was a fairly inexperienced disciple of Late Antiquity when Professor Patrick Gray generously agreed to sacrifice part of his upcoming retirement to supervise my doctoral work. For six years he has guided me continuously through the intricate puzzles of fifth- and sixth-century history and Christology, and has taught me precious lessons in life, academic or otherwise. His suggestions and criticisms improved my study at all stages. Patrick patiently assisted me in finding my own path. His gentle encouragements assuaged the inherent apprehension that accompanied various stumbling blocks in my research. I feel very fortunate to have had Patrick as my thesis supervisor. I thank Professor Robert Sinkewicz and Professor Pablo Argarate for serving on my thesis committee and reading various drafts of this study. I am grateful to them for the valuable comments they provided, as well as for the career advice they offered. The Syriac classes of Professor Amir Harrak and Professor Emmanuel Papoutsakis were of tremendous help in my research. Professor Geoffrey Greatrex shared valuable insights into the history of the fifth and sixth centuries in personal discussions. He also kindly offered me copies of his unpublished work. Discussions of great interest with George Bevan, David Michelson, and Volker Menze helped me clarify many of my ideas. My best friend and loved companion, Vlad, encouraged me continuously for the past four years. His composed view on life, values, and academic success helped me overcome stress and frustration at various times, and is a perpetual source of inspiration to me. vi For the past seven months my mother and my mother-in-law allowed me to finish my work by lovingly taking care of my daughter Ellen. There are not enough words to express my gratitude toward my parents. They have instilled in me a love for books and learning. Their help was always unconditional and often came with many sacrifices. This dissertation was completed with the help of a doctoral fellowship from the University of Toronto between 2003 and 2009. Welcome help also came from the Prudence Tracy Memorial Fund Scholarship, the CMS student travel grant program, and the Byzantine Studies Conference graduate student travel stipend program. vii Introduction The two decades separating the Council of Ephesus (431) from the Council of Chalcedon (451) witnessed a series of deep Christological controversies between Cyril of Alexandria and his followers, on the one side, and the Antiochian party, on the other.