Cambridge Ancient Hi.. - Index of

justin i and justinian 827
Chapters, and the so-called letter of Ibas of Edessa to Maris the Persian,
in which the incarnation of the Word was denied and Cyril was accused of
being a follower of the heretical Apollinaris of Laodicea. In 544 Justinian
issued an edict, no longer extant, condemning these Three Chapters. There
were, however, problems associated with these condemnations, and negative
outcomes which the emperor could not envisage. In the first place, the
Monophysites found the edict unacceptable because it had not rejected the
authority of Chalcedon. In the west Justinian’s legislation found even
stronger opposition, because it was argued that Theodore had died in the
peace of the church and Theodoret and Ibas had been vindicated at
Chalcedon. Surely the edict represented a betrayal of an inspired council?
Vigilius of Rome, who was deeply in Theodora’s debt, was not so much
invited as brought to Constantinople, the expectation being that he would
put the weight of papal authority behind Justinian and subscribe the edict.
Afraid of abrogating Chalcedon, the pope initially refused to sign, but then
produced the required anathemata in 548, to great opposition in the west.
In his tract On the Right Faith, published in 551, Justinian reiterated the anathemata
of 544. Although this tract also proclaimed four councils and
reaffirmed the Council of Chalcedon, the emperor’s policy of showing that
the council of 451 was anti-Nestorian, true to Cyril and therefore acceptable
to its opponents had ended up alienating some Chalcedonians.
Justinian now wished to press on and summon a council to ratify the
condemnation of the Three Chapters, but Vigilius would not agree, rightly
fearing that the west would not be properly represented at such a gathering.
When a council none the less coverned on 5 May 553, the pope refused
to participate. Not surprisingly, the Second Council of Constantinople
ratified all Justinian’s religious policies, professing four councils, the correctness
of Cyrillian christological tradition and the Cyrillian or neo-
Chalcedonian interpretation of Chalcedon. 60 Despite the fact that Vigilius
finally acceped Constantinople II in 554 and was restored to communion
with Eutychius, the patriarch of the capital, Justinian had to resort to eliminating
opposition to the council’s decrees by exiling bishops. The bishops
of Africa, in particular, suffered for their resistance to the council, and
some of them, like Facundus of Hermiane, who were not exiled, were
incarcerated in Constantinople, where Justinian and Eutychius attempted
forcefully to show them the error of their ways. 61 Because its oecumenical
nature was suspect, the reception of Constantinople II remained ambiguous
for more than half a century, not only, but particularly, in the west. 62
On succeeding Vigilius as bishop of Rome in 555, Pelagius I attempted
to win over western opponents of Constantinople II by his profession of
60 Grillmeier, Christ in Christian Tradition ii.1 459–84; Frank (1991).
61 On the role of Eutychius in this episode and its hagiographical presentation by his biographer
Eustratius see Cameron (1988) 230–1. 62 Murphy and Sherwood (1974) 127–8.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008