DOCSLIB.ORG

2 1. the Perpetual Virginity of Mary the Doctrine of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary Expresses the Virgin Mary's

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2 1. the Perpetual Virginity of Mary the Doctrine of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary Expresses the Virgin Mary's 1. The Perpetual Virginity of Mary The doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary expresses the Virgin Mary’s “real and perpetual virginity, even in the act of giving birth to Jesus the Son of God made Man.” According to the doctrine, Mary was ever-virgin (Greek: ἀειπάρθενος aeiparthenos) for her whole life, making Jesus her only biological son, whose conception and birth are held to be miraculous. By the fourth century, the doctrine was widely supported by the Church Fathers, and by the seventh century it had been affirmed in a number of ecumenical councils. The doctrine is common amongst many Christian sects, including Catholicism, so we will not dwell on it very long. (Interestingly enough, Sura 19 in the Qur’an also declares that Jesus was born of a virgin (verses 20-22).) Fathers of the Church Church Fathers from at least the fourth century spoke of Mary as having remained a virgin throughout her life: • Athanasius (Alexandria, 293-373); • Epiphanius (Palestine, 315?-403); • Jerome (Stridon, present day Yugoslavia, 345?-419); • Augustine (Numidia, now Algeria, 354-430); • Cyril (Alexandria, 376-444); • and others. Teaching of the Universal Church A large number of ecumenical councils discuss Mary as “ever-virgin,” including: • the Council of Constantinople II (553-554), who referred to Mary as “ever- virgin” twice; • The Lateran Council of 649; • The sixth ecumenical council in 680; and • Documented in the Catechism of the Council of Trent in 1566. 2 Protestant Reformers The protestant reformers affirmed their belief that Mary, while remaining every- virgin, was truly the Mother of God. Here are only a few examples: Martin Luther (1483-1546): In this work whereby she was made the Mother of God, so many and such great good things were given her that no one can grasp them. … Not only was Mary the mother of him who is born [in Bethlehem], but of him who, before the world, was eternally born of the Father, from a Mother in time and at the same time man and God.1 Luther wrote on the Virginity of Mary: It is an article of faith that Mary is Mother of the Lord and still a virgin. ... Christ, we believe, came forth from a womb left perfectly intact.2 John Calvin (1509-1564), a French reformer, also held that Mary was the Mother of God, and wrote: It cannot be denied that God in choosing and destining Mary to be the Mother of his Son, and granted her the highest honor. … Elizabeth called Mary Mother of the Lord, because the unity of the person in the two natures of Christ was such that she could have said that the mortal man engendered in the womb of Mary as at the same time the eternal God.3 Calvin also up held the perpetual virginity of Mary, as did the Swiss reformer, Ulrich Zwingli (1484-1531), who wrote: I firmly believe that Mary, according to the words of the gospel as a pure Virgin brought forth for us the Son of God and in childbirth and after childbirth forever remained a pure, intact Virgin.4 1 Excepted from Weimer’s The Works of Luther, English translation by Pelikan, Concordia, St. Louis, v. 7, p. 572. The specific text is titled On the Divine Motherhood of Mary. 2 Ibid. v. 11, pp. 319-320; v. 6. p. 510. 3 Calvini Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Braunschweig-Berlin, 1863-1900, v. 45, p. 348, 35. 4 Zwingli Opera, Corpus Reformatorum, Berlin, 1905, v. 1, p. 424. 3 Objections There are some very common objections to the belief that Mary remained a virgin after the birth of Jesus. 1. The Bible frequently speaks of the “brothers” and “sisters” of Jesus. First it is important to note that the Bible does not say that these “brothers and sisters” of Jesus were children of Mary. Secondly, the word for brother (or sister), adelphos (adelpha) in Greek, denotes a brother or sister, or near kinsman. Aramaic and other Semitic languages do not distinguish between a blood brother or sister and a cousin. Hence, John the Baptist, a cousin of Jesus (the son of Elizabeth, cousin of Mary) would be called “a brother (adelphos) of Jesus.” In the plural, the word means a community based on identity of origin or life. Additionally, the word adelphos is used for: a) male children of the same parents (Mt 1:2); b) male descendants of the same parents (Acts 7:23); c) male children of the same mother (Gal 1:19); d) people of the same nationality (Acts 3:17); e) any man, a neighbor (Lk 10:29); f) persons united by a common interest (Mt 5:47); g) persons united by a common calling (Rev 22:9); h) mankind (Mt 25:40); i) the disciples (Mt 23:8); and j) believers (Mt 23:8).5 2. A second objection to Mary’s virginity arises from the use of the word heos in Matthew 1:25: “He (Joseph) had no relations with her at any time before (heos) she bore a son, whom he named Jesus.” The Greek and the Semitic use of the word heos (until or before) does not imply anything about what happens after the time indicated. In this case, there is no necessary implication that Joseph and Mary had sexual contact or other children after Jesus. 3. A third objection to the perpetual virginity of Mary arises from the use of the word prototokos, translated “first-born” in Luke’s gospel. But the Greek word prototokos is used of Christ as born of Mary and of Christ’s relationship to His Father (Col 1:25). As the word does not imply other children of God the Father, neither does it imply other children of Mary. 5 From Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, Thomas Nelson, Publisher. 4 The term “first-born” was a legal term under the Mosaic Law (see, e.g., Ex 6:14) referring to the first male child born to Jewish parents regardless of any other children following or not. Hence when Jesus is called the “first- born” of Mary, it does not mean that there were second– or third-born children. 5 2. Mary, Mother of God As Catholics, we firmly believe in the incarnation of our Lord; Mary conceived Him by the power of the Holy Spirit (see Lk 1:26-38 and Mt 1:18-25). Through her, Jesus Christ, the second person of the Holy Trinity, one-in-being (consubstantial) with the Father, and true God from true God – entered this world, taking on human flesh and a human soul. Jesus is true God and true man; in His person, a divine nature and a human nature are united. Mary did not create the divine person of Jesus, who existed with the Father from all eternity. “In fact, the One whom she conceived as man by the Holy Spirit, who truly became her Son according to the flesh, was none other than the Father’s eternal Son, the second person of the Holy Trinity. Hence the Church confesses that Mary is truly ‘Mother of God’ (Theotokos).”6 As St. John wrote, “The Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us, and we have seen His glory: The glory of an only Son coming from the Father filled with enduring love” (Jn 1:14). For this reason, sometime in the early history of the Church, our Blessed Mother was given the title “Mother of God.” St. John Chrysostom (d. 407), for example, composed in his Eucharistic Prayer for the Mass an anthem in honor of her: “It is truly just to proclaim you blessed, O Mother of God, who are most blessed, all pure and Mother of our God. We magnify you who are more honorable than the Cherubim and incomparably more glorious than the Seraphim. You, who without losing your virginity, gave birth to the Word of God. You who are truly the Mother of God.” In the fifth century, an objection to the title “Mother of God" arose because of confusion concerning the mystery of the incarnation. Nestorius, the Bishop of Constantinople (428-431), incited a major controversy by stating that Mary gave birth to Jesus Christ, a regular human person, period. To this human person was united the person of the Word of God (the divine Jesus). This union of two persons – the human Christ and the divine Word – was “sublime and unique,” but merely accidental. The divine person dwelt in the human person “as in a temple.” Following his own reasoning, Nestorius asserted that the human Jesus died on the cross, not the divine Jesus. As such, Mary would not be the “Mother of God,” but simply the “Mother of Christ” – the human Jesus. This might be confusing, but is the result of splitting Christ into two people and the denial of the incarnation. St. Cyril, the Bishop of Alexandria (d. 440) refuted Nestorius, asserting that “It was not that an ordinary man was born first of the Holy Virgin, on whom afterwards the Word descended; what we say is that, being united with the flesh 6 CCC, No. 495 6 from the womb, (the Word) has undergone birth in the flesh, making the birth in the flesh His own…” On June 22, 431, the Third Ecumenical Council convened in Ephesus to settle this matter. The Council declared “If anyone does not confess that the Emmanuel is truly God and therefore that the holy Virgin is the Mother of God (Theotokos) (since she begot according to the flesh the Word of God made flesh), anathema sit.”7 Therefore, the Council officially recognized that Jesus is one person with two perfectly united natures – human and divine.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The First Eight General Councils and Papal Infallibility
    THE FIRST EIGHT GENERAL COUNCILS AND PAPAL INFALLIBITY BY DOM JOHN CHAPMAN, O.S.B. LONDON CATHOLIC TRUTH SOCIETY 69 SOUTIIWARK BRIDGE ROAD, S.E. 1906 PREFACE These pages are simply a lecture delivered on May 15, 1906 before the Society of St. Thomas of Canterbury, "Students of the West." In accordance with the title of this Society, its members inquire into the views of others. After the lectures which are given at their invitation, a discussion follows. It is not to be presumed that members of the Society agree with what they hear. The Catholic Truth Society has kindly under taken to publish my lecture at my own request, as I hope that the historical' data I have put together may be found useful in this compact form. I am conscious that the subject was far too large for a single lecture, and that some of the views put forward may seem crude without more elaborate justification than a few references and notes. The part which deals with Dr. Dollinger and the Old Catholic movement was added by special request, and it may perhaps be regarded as somewhat of an excrescence. JOHN CHAPMAN, O.S.B. Erdington Abbey, Birmingham. CONTENTS I'AGF. Introduction 7 I. Nic.ia 9 II. Constantinople 13 III. Ephesus 16 IV. Chalcedon 22 V. Constantinople (II) 44 VI. Constantinople (III) 60 VII. Nic^a (II) 68 VIII. Constantinople (IV) 77 , IX. The Vatican Council and History . .84 5 The First Eight General Councils and Papal Infallibility The councils which we accept to-day as oecumeni cal are divided by a broad line into two great groups : the first eight councils are Greek, the rest are Latin.
    [Show full text]
  • Santa Maria Antiqua: the Amalgamation of Identity in Early Medieval Rome
    Pursuit - The Journal of Undergraduate Research at The University of Tennessee Volume 6 Issue 1 Article 7 April 2015 Santa Maria Antiqua: The Amalgamation of Identity in Early Medieval Rome Cayce Davis University of Tennessee, Knoxville, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/pursuit Part of the Architectural History and Criticism Commons, and the Historic Preservation and Conservation Commons Recommended Citation Davis, Cayce (2015) "Santa Maria Antiqua: The Amalgamation of Identity in Early Medieval Rome," Pursuit - The Journal of Undergraduate Research at The University of Tennessee: Vol. 6 : Iss. 1 , Article 7. Available at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/pursuit/vol6/iss1/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Volunteer, Open Access, Library Journals (VOL Journals), published in partnership with The University of Tennessee (UT) University Libraries. This article has been accepted for inclusion in Pursuit - The Journal of Undergraduate Research at The University of Tennessee by an authorized editor. For more information, please visit https://trace.tennessee.edu/pursuit. Pursuit: The Journal of Undergraduate Research at the University of Tennessee Copyright © The University of Tennessee PURSUIT trace.tennessee.edu/pursuit Santa Maria Antiqua: The amalgamation of Identity in Early Medieval Rome CAYCE DAVIS Advisor: Dr. Gregor Kalas The intent of this investigation is to frame an identity for the church of Santa Maria Antiqua and the urban condition of Rome during the sixth through eighth centuries. Coupling topographical and semiotic information with larger geographic issues, this study interrogates the church and specific individuals associated with it as a way of more comprehensively understanding Santa Maria Antiqua as a visual medium of cultural change and political propaganda.
    [Show full text]
  • Saint Maximus the Confessor and His Defense of Papal Primacy
    Love that unites and vanishes: Saint Maximus the Confessor and his defense of papal primacy Author: Jason C. LaLonde Persistent link: http://hdl.handle.net/2345/bc-ir:108614 This work is posted on eScholarship@BC, Boston College University Libraries. Boston College Electronic Thesis or Dissertation, 2019 Copyright is held by the author, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise noted. Love that Unites and Vanishes: Saint Maximus the Confessor and his Defense of Papal Primacy Thesis for the Completion of the Licentiate in Sacred Theology Boston College School of Theology and Ministry Fr. Jason C. LaLonde, S.J. Readers: Fr. Brian Dunkle, S.J., BC-STM Dr. Adrian Walker, Catholic University of America May 3, 2019 2 Introduction 3 Chapter One: Maximus’s Palestinian Provenance: Overcoming the Myth of the Greek Life 10 Chapter Two: From Monoenergism to Monotheletism: The Role of Honorius 32 Chapter Three: Maximus on Roman Primacy and his Defense of Honorius 48 Conclusion 80 Appendix – Translation of Opusculum 20 85 Bibliography 100 3 Introduction The current research project stems from my work in the course “Latin West, Greek East,” taught by Fr. Brian Dunkle, S.J., at the Boston College School of Theology and Ministry in the fall semester of 2016. For that course, I translated a letter of Saint Maximus the Confessor (580- 662) that is found among his works known collectively as the Opuscula theologica et polemica.1 My immediate interest in the text was Maximus’s treatment of the twin heresies of monoenergism and monotheletism. As I made progress
    [Show full text]
  • Working on the Minutes of Late Antique Church Councils a Methodological Framework
    E-ISSN: 1754-517X; Journal DOI: https://doi.org/10.18573/issn.1754-517X Journal website: https://jlarc.cardiffuniversitypress.org Volume 13, 2019, 42-59; Volume DOI: https://doi.org/10.18573/jlarc.v13 Working on the Minutes of Late Antique Church Councils A Methodological Framework Tommaso Mari Article DOI : https://doi.org/10.18573/jlarc.112 Date Accepted: 15 December 2019 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC-BY-NC-ND). https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc- nd/4.0/ © Tommaso Mari TOMMASO MARI 42 WORKING ON THE MINUTES OF LATE ANTIQUE CHURCH COUNCILS: A METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK Tommaso Mari, University of Cambridge Abstract The minutes of church councils from late antiquity provide us with an unparalleled amount of first-hand information about late antique history and language. However, they present issues of different kinds that need addressing. In this paper I wish to suggest a methodological framework to work with conciliar minutes. First of all, one has to consider the question of the reliability of the minutes, which in turn raises the questions of their thoroughness and genuineness. In order to assess these, one has to establish how and under what circumstances the minutes were produced and transmitted; this is not always easy, for details about minute-taking surface only occasionally. Comparison of different versions of the minutes can also help understand if editing took place and to what extent it has affected the reliability of the minutes as historical evidence. In the minutes we obviously find factual information of a kind that can also be found in the works of ancient historians.
    [Show full text]
  • Saint Gayane Church
    Masarykova univerzita Filozofická fakulta Seminář dějin umění Saint Gayane Church Bakalárska diplomová práca Autor: Michaela Baraničová Vedúci práce: prof. Ivan Foletti, MA, Docteur es Lettres Brno 2020 ii Prehlasujem, že som svoju bakalársku diplomovú prácu vypracovala samostatne a uviedla všetkú použitú literatúru a pramene. .............................................................. Podpis autora práce iii iv On the ancient peak of Ararat The centuries have come like seconds, And passed on. The swords of innumerable lightnings Have broken upon its diamond crest, And passed on. The eyes of generations dreading death Have glanced at its luminuos summit, And passed on. The turn is now yours for a brief while: You, too, look at its lofty brow, And pass on! Avetik Isahakyan, “Mount Ararat”, in Selected Works: Poetry and Prose, ed. M. Kudian, Moscow 1976. v vi My first sincere thanks belong to my thesis’ supervisor, prof. Ivan Foletti, for his observations, talks and patience during this time. Especially, I would like to thank him for introducing me to the art of Caucasus and giving me the opportunity to travel to Armenia for studies, where I spent five exciting months. I would like to thank teachers from Yerevan State Academy of Arts, namely to Gayane Poghosyan and Ani Yenokyan, who were always very kind and helped me with better access of certain Armenian literature. My gratitude also belongs to my friends Susan and colleagues, notably to Veronika, who was with me in Armenia and made the whole experience more entertaining. To Khajag, who helped me with translation of Armenian texts and motivating me during the whole process. It´s hard to express thanks to my amazing parents, who are constantly supporting me in every step of my studies and life, but let me just say: Thank you! vii viii Content Introduction.........................................................................1 I.
    [Show full text]
  • Saint Sophronius of Jerusalem
    Saint Sophronius of Jerusalem SAINT OF THE DAY 11-03-2021 The humble theologian and patriarch Saint Sophronius of Jerusalem (c. 560-638), who had the great merit of denouncing the Monothelite heresy and stood by his flock during the Islamic invasion of the Holy City, was born in Damascus, where early on he showed his talent in his studies. He travelled extensively from his early youth and soon met Giovanni Mosco, a Byzantine writer and monk, who became his great friend and spiritual guide. Around 580 they travelled together to Egypt, where Sophronius led an ascetic life, studied philosophy and began to have serious eye problems, from which he recovered thanks to the intercession of the Alexandrian martyrs Cyrus and John. Out of gratitude he compiled a collection of 70 miracles attributed to the two saints. He became a monk in the monastery of St. Theodosius, not far from Bethlehem, and lived there for some time. He then devoted himself to various missions between Asia Minor and North Africa to combat Monophysitism (the heresy that attributed only divine nature to Jesus) and to teach the correct doctrine on the two natures - human and divine - existing in the one person of Christ, solemnly defined at the Council of Chalcedon in 451. Because of the advance of the Persians into Palestine and Egypt, the saint sought refuge in Rome with John Moschus, who died there some years later, in 619, and asked him to bury his body on Mount Sinai or in the Holy Land. Sophronius thus returned to the East and buried his friend at the monastery of Saint Theodosius, during a historical and religious era that was becoming increasingly intricate.
    [Show full text]
  • Theological Significance of Mary's Virginity Eamon R
    Marian Studies Volume 13 Article 10 1-9-1962 Theological Significance of Mary's Virginity Eamon R. Carroll Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.udayton.edu/marian_studies Part of the Catholic Studies Commons, Christianity Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Carroll, Eamon R. (1962) "Theological Significance of Mary's Virginity," Marian Studies: Vol. 13, Article 10, Pages 122-151. Available at: https://ecommons.udayton.edu/marian_studies/vol13/iss1/10 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Marian Library Publications at eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Marian Studies by an authorized editor of eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Carroll: Theological Significance of Mary's Virginity THE THEOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF MARY'S VIRGINITY The opportunities for examination on this topic are almost unlimited. Of many possibilities, the eschatological significance of Mary's virginity has been selected. I note at once that here I use "eschatological" in the sense that Christian mysteries, such as the Incarnation, the divine maternity, and virginity, are eternal in their effects. Every vocation in Christian life looks forward to the life of heaven; Christian virginity presages the future in its own special way. The theological considera­ tions here developed are eschatological in the sense of seeking to illustrate the bond between Mary's virginity on earth and fulfillment of the divine plan of salvation in the world to come. This delimitation does not deny other senses of "eschato­ logical" which might also be properly applied to Mary's vir­ ginity.
    [Show full text]
  • Third Council of Constantinople
    The Church in Crisis: A History of the General Councils: 325-1870 CHAPTER 6. The Third General Council of Constantinople, 680-81 What this sixth of the General Councils achieved was to reconcile the churches of the East with the Roman See, and to condemn a heresy. And yet again was the adage warranted that once a General Council meets the unlikeliest things may happen--for this sixth council was to treat a pope as the fifth had treated the Three Chapters. The sixth General Council was, in the intention of the emperor who called it, a “peace conference” that terminated sixty years of grave disorders. And, yet once again, those responsible for the beginnings of the disorder had been conscious rebels in part only. As had happened with Justinian, what had moved a seventh- century emperor to act as a theologian--and had he not so acted the heresy would never have had any importance outside the schools of theology-- was the hope of uniting his people to fight, this time, for the empire’s very life against an all-victorious enemy, the Persians. This seventh-century heresy is traditionally called Monothelism: the heresy that Christ our Lord did not possess a human will, or ever act with a force -- an “operation” -- that was human, but that, in Him, all that in us comes from our wills came from His being God. If this were true, then Christ was not really a man. It was the Monophysite claim all over again, and the theory was the outcome of the strongly felt need to tempt the Monophysites back to the spiritual unity from which they had been separated now nearly two hundred years.
    [Show full text]
  • “And How, If You Are a Christian, Can You Hate the Emperor?”
    “And how, if you are a Christian, can you hate the emperor?”. Reading a seventh- century scandal in Carolingian Francia.1 Abstract A late ninth-century Latin manuscript, Paris BnF Lat. 5095, preserves the unique copy of Anastasius Bibliothecarius’s so-called ‘Collectanea’. This collection of texts documents the tribulations of Pope Martin and Maximus the Confessor, put on trial by the emperor in Constantinople in 655. This chapter considers the connections between the criticisms of (Byzantine) imperial power presented by these texts, translated into Latin by Anastasius, and the treatment of Carolingian rulers that the Paris manuscript also presents. It suggests that the juxtaposition was made by Hincmar, deposed as bishop of Laon in 871, as part of his determined campaign for reinstatement, resulting in a qualified success in 878. The value of cross-cultural comparison for investigating themes such as the criticism of rulers is increasingly apparent to modern historians. But was it also appreciated in the early Middle Ages? This paper takes as its focus a late ninth-century manuscript now in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris, Paris BnF lat. 5095, which suggestively combines seventh-century Byzantine and ninth-century Carolingian texts that present different forms of ruler criticism. Was this an early medieval exercise in cultural comparison, or something else? To evaluate the purpose of this manuscript dossier, a plausible context for its compilation, and its place in early medieval traditions of ruler criticism, we must first examine its contents; I shall begin with those texts that relate to Byzantium, and more specifically, to the monothelite crisis and its victims.
    [Show full text]
  • The Christology of Theodoret of Cyrrhus: the Question of Its Development
    Marquette University e-Publications@Marquette Dissertations, Theses, and Professional Dissertations (1934 -) Projects The Christology of Theodoret of Cyrrhus: The Question of Its Development Vasilije Vranic Marquette University Follow this and additional works at: https://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu Part of the Religion Commons Recommended Citation Vranic, Vasilije, "The Christology of Theodoret of Cyrrhus: The Question of Its Development" (2012). Dissertations (1934 -). 182. https://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu/182 THE CHRISTOLOGY OF THEODORET OF CYRRHUS: THE QUESTION OF ITS DEVELOPMENT by Rev. Vasilije Vranic, M.A., MPhil. A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School, Marquette University, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Milwaukee, Wisconsin May 2012 ABSTRACT THE CHRISTOLOGY OF THEODORET OF CYRRHUS: THE QUESTION OF ITS DEVELOPMENT Rev. Vasilije Vranic, M.A., M.Phil. Marquette University, 2012 The Christological opus of Theodoret of Cyrrhus remains somewhat controversial due to his involvement in the Nestorian and Monophysite controversies as the champion of the Antiochene milieu. Although the recent scholarship is increasingly benevolent in the considerations of his Christology, still certain doubts are present about the constancy of his teaching. In this dissertation, I argue that the Christology of Theodoret of Cyrrhus remains consistent and unchanged throughout his life. The analysis of both his early and mature Christological output, as evidenced in the Expositio rectae fidei and the Eranistes, shows that the main theological concepts and terminology remain unaffected by the many years of fierce theological debates. Theodoret’s Christology is constructed around the key concept of sharp distinction between the uncreated and created orders of existence, to which the divine and human natures of Christ respectively belong.
    [Show full text]
  • The Interpreter of the Popes
    Central European University THE INTERPRETER OF THE POPES. THE TRANSLATION PROJECT OF ANASTASIUS BIBLIOTHECARIUS PhD dissertation in Medieval Studies by RÉKA FORRAI Budapest, Hungary CEU eTD Collection 2008 I, the undersigned Réka FORRAI, candidate for the PhD degree in Medieval Studies declare herewith that the present dissertation is exclusively my own work, based on my research and relies only on such external information as properly credited in notes and bibliography. I declare that no unidentified and illegitimate use was made of the work of others, and no part of the dissertation infringes on any person’s or institution’s copyright. I also declare that no part of the dissertation has been submitted in this form to any other institution of higher education for an academic degree. Budapest, March 26, 2008 ___________________________ signature CEU eTD Collection TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables iii Abbreviations iv Acknowledgements v PROLEGOMENA 2 Introduction 2 Review of literature 10 Anastasius: Life and Portrait 15 The political and cultural landscape: Rome, Byzantium and the Franks 25 The Sacred Nectar of the Deceitful Greeks. Perceptions of Greekness in the Ninth Century West 30 THE TRANSLATIONS 47 Catalogue 47 Excursus: his own works 60 Genres and authors 62 Composition and layout 70 Excursus: Anastasius and the Papal Library – A Research Question 89 Translation Methods, Theories and Inconsistencies 95 Tools 95 Methods 99 Theories 104 Conclusions 113 A Case Study: The Notes of Anastasius on Eriugena’s Translation of the Corpus Dionysiacum 115 Transliteration 121 Semantic Alternatives 122 CEU eTD Collection Compounds 124 Corrections 126 Anastasius’s instruments and sources 129 Some Problematic Notes 133 Conclusions 135 Excursus: Three Eusebian Fragments Translated by Anastasius? 137 The Interpreter of the Popes.
    [Show full text]
  • The Byzantine Imperial Chancery and Its Language Policy from Justin II to Leo III (Sixth-Eighth Centuries): from Latin to Greek
    The Byzantine Imperial Chancery and its Language Policy from Justin II to Leo III (Sixth-Eighth Centuries): From Latin to Greek Christian Gastgeber* This article traces the development of language use in the imperial chancery of Constantinople. After Emperor Justinian I permitted Greek as the official language for documents concerning the Greek-speaking areas, his successors followed this path; Greek was increasingly pre- ferred and started to replace Latin in documents that addressed the entire empire and, in a final stage, in imperial documents directed to Western addressees. To illustrate this process, the respective documents are discussed insofar as the preserved texts allow the drawing of safe conclusions about their original language and the stages of its development. For this reason, the texts are examined with regard to the target audience and, if Latin, to chancery or local translations. Keywords: Byzantine chancery; Latin in Byzantium; Byzantine documents; Byzantine laws; Latin documents in Byzantium Introduction From a broader perspective, the documents of the Byzantine imperial chancery are an illumi- nating source with regard to socio-political opportunities. Their shape and text presentation provide further insight into the respective status and policy of the Byzantine emperors. This study will examine one of these parameters: the choice of language for imperial documents in the early Byzantine period.1 Admittedly, it is a first attempt at studying the language poli- cy in early Byzantine chancery products from this point of view. It is a well-known fact that Latin terms, mainly those from the field of law but also in connection with administration, were gradually replaced by Greek equivalents (in two stages: first the Latin words were writ- ten with Greek letters, then the terms were replaced by Greek equivalents), a process that is termed »exhellenism« and seems to have started from the seventh century on.2 Nevertheless, * Correspondence details: Dr.
    [Show full text]