The Acts of the Council of Constantinople of 553 : with related texts on the Three Chapters Controversy

THE translation of texts, even when joined by annotations and commentary as extensive as in these two volumes, is, so I was once reliably told, not favoured by official Assessors of Research in British universities. If true, how absurd! The translations in this series have notably improved historical understanding and none, I think, more so than those edited by Richard Price, who here gives us the Acts of a much misunderstood council along with accompanying documents. I list and partly expound the contents. There is, first: an English translation of the minutes of the council, mostly from the surviving Latin in the absence of the Greek originals. This is preceded, after a lengthy general introduction dealing with the church-historical matters and theological issues at stake, by translations of two letters from Africa important for understanding the pained reception there of Pope Vigilius' attitude to the proposed condemnation of the 'Three Chapters' (viz. the works of Theodore of Mopsuestia en bloc, the anti-Cyrilline polemics of Theodoret, and the Letter of Ibas, denouncing Cyril, to Mari); of Justinian's edict On the Orthodox Faith; of three letters explanatory of Vigilius' treatment in Constantinople and of problems with his flock; of three important pieces, Vigilius' two Constituta and second letter to Eutychius in which the Pope eventually condemns the Three Chapters and the long process of aligning papal and imperial wills reaches a conclusion (after a fashion); and, as an appendix, of the anti-Origenist Canons (543 and 553) and Justinian's letter to the council denouncing the same Origen's abominable opinions. There follow notes on the attendance lists, maps, and bibliography (from which valuable and extensive list I am slightly surprised to note absent the article by Michel van Esbroeck, JTS, NS 38 [1987], pp. 129-35, where the 'Mari' to whom Ibas wrote his controversial letter is, I had supposed reliably, placed; if I supposed wrongly I could have wished to be corrected). To list the documents here exposes some of the critical issues raised by the council with which the editor must deal. First, why do the Acts survive entire only in Latin? Richard Price's answer neatly tells the tale of how, when the next oecumenical council met in 680, the confirmation of its predecessor ran into difficulties because Vigilius had (certainly) used the now discredited phrase 'single energy' of the incarnate Christ and the text of the Acts had (very probably) been tampered with elsewhere. The tampering occasioned the production of a bowdlerized second edition of the Acts which again was allegedly interfered with. The Greek manuscript tradition having been discredited and well nigh lost, 'it is sheer luck that the Latin version of the text survived in the West'. That Latin version has the strange renderings of the Greek original, as Richard Price points out, characteristic of the genre. His own English translation is, I judge from the soundings I have taken, reliable (an adjective which does not partake of degrees or require qualification). The minutes of the meetings do not have the verve and excitement of Chalcedon's. There is plenty of drama in the whole conciliar event but it takes place offstage and there are not those episcopal quarrels about ordinations and pensions for displaced clergy and the like which make the non-doctrinal sessions at Chalcedon such fun to read and so instructive. That is partly compensated for by the report of a synod at Mopsuestia in 550 which attested that Theodore never had been venerated in the diptychs there: it illuminates the logistics of the Mopsuestian clergy. As for the doctrinal issues of the opposing Christologies of Cyril and Theodore and the consequent status of Cyril's Twelve Chapters, these are amply dealt with in the general introduction. The council also condemned Origenist teachings in canons not included in the Acts, which repeated those issued ten years before. That Justinian's authority lay behind the condemnation both of the Three Chapters and of the Origenist theses is abundantly plain. Whether, and if so how, the two condemnations are linked is obscure. Richard Price works hard on the problem but I find the matter no clearer at the end. The emperor certainly had a tidy and bureaucratic mind and thought it appropriate to settle two problems at once. Perhaps that is the most that can be said and it is futile to delve deeper for an intrinsic and/or extrinsic connection; but I salute a good try. (Friends of Origen who resent, or even unwisely doubt, the condemnation or its validity may console themselves with the window to him in Emmanuel College Chapel, Cambridge.) Much to be valued is the account Richard Price gives of the two important persons in the drama, most of which, as I have remarked, takes place offstage: Vigilius and Justinian. The lights and shades in the portrait of the first are well caught. It was (one can imagine a prosecuting counsel saying) a disgraceful and cowardly thing to take flight from Rome and a city under threat of siege; no wonder that the hostile crowd of abandoned churchpeople resented it and pelted him. It served him right that he was available for exploitation by a clever and subtle emperor. But he was made to suffer for it and he did not, in the end, betray his office even if he wriggled and tried unsuccessfully to deceive. In Justinian we meet a confident and competent theologian, even though, as with all royal compositions, one can never be quite sure who wrote them. Everybody who discusses him since Schwartz speaks of the 'zigzag' policy on church unity, meaning that he favoured now the non-Chalcedonians, now the Chalcedonians. Certainly he tried hard to secure church unity after the Acacian schism and, I think, can be credited with a high degree of success. Richard Price sees in the decisions of the council of 553 an attempt not so much to conciliate the opponents of Chalcedon (for that was by then clearly impossible) as to clarify the decisions of its predecessor and define their true extent. Not only, and not principally, are the non-Chalcedonians in view; the aim is to show Chalcedonians what they are committed to. They were committed to the Twelve Chapters of Cyril and that meant rejection of their opponents, Theodoret and Ibas, along with Theodore, who was behind the Nestorian error in the first place. I find this convincing as I do all the main judgements of Richard Price. Not only so, but there are many amusing and clever asides which make these two volumes not only an important contribution to historical scholarship and research but a pleasure to read. Journal of Theological Studies 201010 Following his universally acclaimed translation of the acts of the Council of Chalcedon (2005) Richard Price has now produced a two-volume set with the translation of the acts of the Council of Constantinople, held in 553, and including much additional material from the so-called Three Chapters Controversy for which this council is the decisive event. The translation is, where I checked, reliable and always highly readable in English. It represents yet another significant achievement of almost equal importance to that of the translation of the acts of Chalcedon, even though, or perhaps rather, especially because, the council of 553 is less well known outside a small circle of specialists. Very helpfully, therefore, a general introduction of 108 pages not only offers the necessarily technical description of the available texts and versions here translated, but also sets out lucidly and succinctly the ecclesiastical politics and theological problems at stake. Later on individual texts receive more specific introduction, adding many important insights. The volumes further include maps, indices of persons and documents, a glossary for the uninitiated into the theology and ecclesiastical affairs of the time, and an extensive up-to-date bibliography, which between them offer various gateways into the documents, topics and scholarly debates for the non-specialist, and have much to offer for those who have already puzzled over the theological and historical questions of the council, Emperor Justinian's religious policies and the competing theologies. The Constantinopolitan Council of 553 - the fifth ecumenical council- is in many ways related to that of Chalcedon and reflects the century of discussion and controversy about that council's achievement, or otherwise, and the dramatic developments in the Churches between the mid-fifth century and the times of Justinian. By the time that Justinian convened it, the complex issues became condensed in the controversy over the so-called Three Chapters. Justinian proposed, taking up a suggestion made by the so-called Miaphysites (Non-Chalcedonians) a few years earlier, to condemn three items: the person and writings of Theodore of Mopsuestia (the forefather of 'Antiochene' theology), specific writings of Theodoret of Cyrus (d. c. 460) directed against Cyril of Alexandria and the (part-) Council of Ephesus (431) under his leadership, and the Letter of Ibas to Mari the Persian, another denunciation of that council and of Cyril. The proposed condemnation attracted much resistance particularly in the Churches of Africa and the west, where the idea of a posthumous condemnation of persons deceased in the peace of the Church was criticised on principle and where the move was feared to fatally undermine the Council of Chalcedon (and with it Pope Leo), which had seemingly endorsed Theodoret and Ibas. Pope Vigilius initially wrote against the condemnation, but was cajoled and coerced into agreeing to it eventually, causing a protracted and bitter schism in the west. This fascinating but convoluted story can be traced in Price's translation of a selection of documents: (1) letters from Africa that show the grievances and objections there before the council; (2)Justin's Edict on the Orthodox Faith of551, which very much predetermined the later course of action at the council; (3) letters by Pope Vigilius of the time; (4) the acts of the council itself, meeting in six sessions in May and June 553; and (5) Vigilius's two constituta, that is two lengthy and elaborate examinations of the case of the Three Chapters, the first despite a very full rebuttal in particular of the heterodoxies of Theodore refusing to assent to their condemnation - and therefore not preserved with the acts; the second agreeing under immense pressure to do just that; and a terse but revealing letter to the Constantinopolitan Patriarch Eutychius announcing his de facto capitulation. (An appendix adds the canons of the con-demnation of Origen whose relation to this controversy remains obscure.) With these texts the collection reaches significantly beyond the protocols and the documentation preserved in the Latin edition (the original Greek is lost) of the acts of the council In so doing it renders an invaluable service to the historical understanding of the council and its political and theological contexts. Much of the drama happened offstage, with Justinian and Vigilius the main protagonists. The records of the official sessions of the council reveal very little about the struggles behind closed doors and appear at times rather pale. In large parts they relied on documents drawn up in advance and appear occasionally almost scripted or stage-managed. The documents presented here at least allow a glimpse behind the stage. In Price's interpretation of the central questions of the politics and theology of Justinian and the council two related elements deserve particular attention. Building on suggestions (not only) from eastern orthodox scholarship Price rejects more conventional views that it was Justinian's policy to accommodate the NonChalcedonian Christians and to compromise over Chalcedon in the hope of increased internal stability of the empire. Rather the emperor mounted a strong defence of the Council of Chalcedon by hedging it with the condemnations of the Three Chapters. Yet in so doing he also committed the Chalcedonians to the more radical statements of Cyril, including his Twelve Chapters against Nestorius. Theologically, the advocated reading of the Christology originally outlined at Chalcedon a century earlier was, to Price, the real and necessary clarification of issues left unresolved there, and was, moreover, also fundamentally in the spirit of the original sentiments and decrees of that council. According to this view, the theology of the council of 553 may seem less' new' than the debate over its so-called 'Neo-Chalcedonianism' suggests and is certainly not, to Price, to be juxtaposed to an imaginary original, 'pure' Chalcedonian orthodoxy. Implied in this is a more sympathetic hearing of 'miaphysite' arguments and positions than is traditionally granted. This assessment merits, and requires, serious scholarly discussion. Overall, Price must be congratulated for a translation that will remain indispensable both for historians and for scholars of historical theology. , -- Thomas Graumann, Faculty of Divinity, Cambride The Journal of Ecclesiastical History, Volume 62/3 201107 Price must be congratulated for a translation that will remain indispensable both for historians and for scholars of historical theology. The Ecclesiastical History, Volume 62/3 201107 Lire la suite...