A Source Book for Ancient Church History Part 76

And the foremost foremost!

These are they who are brought nigh,

In gardens of pleasure!

A crowd of those of yore, and a few of those of the latter day!

And gold-weft couches, reclining on them face to face.

Around them shall go eternal youths, with goblets and ewers and a cup of flowing wine; no headache shall feed therefrom, nor shall their wits be dimmed!

And fruits such as they deem the best;

And flesh of fowl as they desire;

And bright and large-eyed maids like hidden pearls;

A reward for that which they have done!

They shall hear no folly there and no sin;

Only the speech, Peace, Peace!

And the fellows of the rightwhat right lucky fellows!

Amid thornless lote trees.

And talh(282) trees with piles of fruit;

And outspread shade,

And water poured out;

And fruit in abundance, neither failing nor forbidden;

And beds upraised!

Verily we have produced them(283) a production,

And made them virgins, darlings of equal age (with their spouses) for the fellows of the right!

A crowd of those of yore, and a crowd of those of the latter day!

And the fellows of the leftwhat unlucky fellows!

In hot blasts and boiling water;

And a shade of pitchy smoke,

Neither cool nor generous!

Verily they were affluent ere this, and did persist in mighty crime; and used to say, What, when we die, have become dust and bones, shall we indeed be raised? or our fathers of yore?

Say, Verily, those of yore and those of the latter days shall surely be gathered together unto the tryst of the well-known day.

Then ye, O ye who err! who say it is a lie! shall eat of the Zaqqum(284) tree and fill your bellies with it! a drink of boiling water! and drink as drinks the thirsty camel!

(_b_) Paulus Diaconus, _Historia Langobardorum_, VI, 46 ff. (MSL, 95:654.)

The Advance of the Saracens.

Ch. 46. At that time [A. D. 711] the people of the Saracens, crossing over from Africa at a place which is called Ceuta, invaded all Spain. Then after ten years, coming with their wives and children, they invaded as if to settle in Aquitania, a province of Gaul. Charles(285) had at that time a dispute with Eudo, prince of Aquitania. But they came to an agreement and fought with perfect harmony against the Saracens. For the Franks fell upon them(286) and slew three hundred and seventy-five thousand of them; but on the side of the Franks only fifteen hundred fell. Eudo with his men broke into their camp and slew many and laid waste all.

Ch. 47. At the same time [A. D. 717], the same people of the Saracens with an immense army came and encompa.s.sed Constantinople and for three years besieged it until, when the people had called upon G.o.d with great earnestness, many of the enemy perished from hunger and cold and by war and pestilence and so wearied out they abandoned the siege. When they had left they carried on war against the people of the Bulgarians who were beyond the Danube, but, vanquished by them also, they fled back to their ships. But when they had put out to the deep sea, a sudden storm fell upon them and many were drowned and their vessels were destroyed. But in Constantinople three hundred thousand men died of the pestilence.

Ch. 48. Now when Liutprand heard that the Saracens, when Sardinia had been laid waste, had also polluted those places where the bones of the holy bishop Augustine, on account of the devastation of the barbarians, had formerly been transported and solemnly buried, he sent thither and when he had given a large sum obtained them and transported them to the city of Pavia, where he buried them with the honor due so great a father.(287) In these days the city of Narnia was conquered by the Lombards.

107. The Monothelete Controversy and the Sixth General Council, Constantinople A. D. 681

The Monothelete controversy was the natural outcome of the earlier Christological controversies. With the a.s.sertion of the two complete and persisting natures of Christ, the question must sooner or later arise as to whether there was one will or two in Christ. If there were two wills, it seemed to lead back to Nestorianism; if there was but one, either the humanity was incomplete or the position led to virtual monophysitism. But political causes played even a greater part than the theological dialectic. The Emperor Heraclius, in attempting to win back the Monophysite churches, on account of the war with Persia and later on account of the advancing Moslems, proposed that a union should be effected on the basis of a formula which a.s.serted that there was but one will in the G.o.d-man. This had been suggested to him in 622 by Sergius, patriarch of Constantinople [Hefele, 291, 295]. In 633 Cyrus of Phasis, since 630 patriarch of Alexandria, brought about a union between the Orthodox Church and the Egyptian Monophysites on the basis of a Monothelete formula, _i.e._, a statement that there was but one will or energy in Christ. At once a violent controversy broke out. The formula was supported by Honorius of Rome, but attacked by Sophronius, patriarch of Jerusalem, and after the fall of Jerusalem in 638, by the monk Maximus Confessor. In 638 Heraclius tried to end the controversy by an _Ecthesis_ [_Hefele_, 299], and Constans II (641-668) attempted the same in 648, by his _Typos_. But at the Lateran Council of 649, under Martin I, Monotheletism as well as the _Ecthesis_ and _Typos_ were condemned. For this Martin was ultimately banished, dying in misery, 654, in the Chersonesus, and Maximus, after a long, cruel imprisonment, and horrible torture and mutilation, died in exile, 662. But Constantius Pogonatus (668-685), the successor of Constans II, determined to settle the matter by a general council. Pope Agatho (678-682) thereupon held a great council at Rome, 679, at which it was decided to insist at the coming general council upon the strictest maintenance of the decisions of the Roman Council of 649. On this basis Agatho dictated the formula which was accepted by the Council of Constantinople, A. D. 681, which sent its proceedings and conclusions to the Pope to be approved. Along with them was an express condemnation of Honorius. Leo II (682-683), Agathos successor, approved the council with special mention of Honorius as condemned for his heresy.

(_a_) Cyrus of Alexandria, _Formula of Union_, A. D. 633, Hahn, 232.

The author of this formula, known also as Cyrus of Phasis, under which name he was condemned at Constantinople, A. D. 680, attempted to win over the Monophysites in Alexandria and met with great success on account of his formula of union. The first five anathemas, the form in which the formula is composed, are clearly based upon the first four councils. The sixth is slightly different; and the seventh, the most important, is clearly tending toward Monotheletism. The doc.u.ment is to be found in the proceedings of the Sixth General Council in Mansi, and also in Hardouin. For a synopsis, see Hefele, 293, who is most valuable for the whole controversy.

6. If any one does not confess the one Christ, the one Son, to be of two natures, that is, divinity and humanity, one nature become flesh(288) of G.o.d the Word, according to the holy Cyril, unmixed, unchanged, unchangeable, that is to say, one synthetic hypostasis, who is the same, our Lord Jesus Christ, being one of the holy h.o.m.oousian Triad, let such an one be anathema.

7. If any one, saying that our one Lord Jesus Christ is to be regarded in two natures, does not confess that He is one of the Holy Triad, G.o.d the Word, eternally begotten of the Father, in the last times of the world made flesh and born of our all-holy and spotless lady, the Theotokos and ever-virgin Mary; but is this and another and not one and the same, according to the most wise Cyril, perfect in deity and the same perfect in humanity, and accordingly only to be thought of as in two natures; the same suffering and not suffering, according to one or the other nature, as the same holy Cyril said, suffering as a man in the flesh, inasmuch as he was a man, remaining as G.o.d without suffering in the sufferings of His own flesh; and the one and the same Christ energizing the divine and the human things with the one theandric energy,(289) according to the holy Dionysius; distinguishing only in thought those things from which the union has taken place, and viewing these in the mind as remaining unchanged, unalterable, and unmixed after their union according to nature and hypostasis; and recognizing in these without division or separation the one and the same Christ and Son, inasmuch as he regards in his mind two as brought together to each other without commingling, making the theory of them as a matter of fact, but not by a lying imagination and vain combinations of the mind; but in nowise separating them, since now the division into two has been destroyed on account of the indescribable and incomprehensible union; saying with the holy Athanasius, for there is now flesh and again the flesh of G.o.d the Word, now flesh animated and intelligent, and again the flesh of the animated and intelligent G.o.d the Word; but should under such expressions understand a distinction into parts, let such an one be anathema.

(_b_) Constans II, _Typos_, A. D. 648, Mansi, X, 1029. _Cf._ Kirch, nn.

972 _f._

The attempt to end the controversy by returning to the condition of things before the controversy broke out, an entirely futile undertaking. The question having been raised had to be discussed and settled by rational processes. See Hefele, 306.

Since it is our custom to do everything and to consider everything which can serve the welfare of the Christian State, and especially what concerns our true faith, by which we believe all our happiness is brought about, we perceive that our orthodox people are greatly disturbed, because some in respect to the Economy(290) of our great G.o.d and Saviour Jesus Christ a.s.sert that there is only one will, and that one and the same affects both the divine and human deeds; but others teach two wills and two operations in the same dispensation of the incarnate Word. The former defend their views by a.s.serting that our Lord Jesus Christ was only one person in two natures, and therefore without confusion or separation, working and willing as well the divine as the human deeds. The others say that because in one and the same person two natures are joined without any separation, so their differences from each other remain, and according to the character of each nature one and the same Christ works as well the divine as the human; and from this our Christian State has been brought to much dissension and confusion, so that differing from one another they do not agree, and from this the State must in many ways needs suffer.

We believe that, under G.o.ds guidance, we must extinguish the flames enkindled by discord, and we ought not to permit them further to destroy human souls. We decree, therefore, that our subjects who hold our immaculate and orthodox Christian faith, and who are of the Catholic and Apostolic Church, shall from the present moment on have no longer any permission to raise any sort of dispute and quarrel or strife with one another over the one will and energy, or over two wills and two energies.

We order that this is not in any way to take anything from the pious teaching, which the holy and approved Fathers have taught concerning the incarnation of G.o.d the Word, but with the purpose that all further strife in regard to the aforesaid questions cease, and in this matter we follow and hold as sufficient only the Holy Scriptures and the tradition of the five holy general councils and the simple statements and unquestioned usage and expressions of the approved Fathers (of which the dogmas, rules, and laws of G.o.ds holy Catholic and Apostolic Church consists), without adding to or taking from them anything, or without explaining them against their proper meaning, but everywhere shall be preserved the former customs, as before the disputes broke out, as if no such dispute had existed. As to those who have hitherto taught one will and one energy or two wills and two energies, there shall be no accusation on this account; excepting only those who have been cast forth as heretics, together with their impious doctrines and writings, by the five holy universal councils and other approved orthodox Fathers. But to complete the unity and fellowship of the churches of G.o.d, and that there remain no further opportunity or occasion to those who are eager for endless dispute, we order that the doc.u.ment,(291) which for a long time has been posted up in the narthex of the most holy princ.i.p.al church of this our G.o.d-preserved royal city, and which touches upon the points in dispute, shall be taken down. Whoever dares to transgress this command is subject before all to the fearful judgment of Almighty G.o.d, and then also will be liable to the punishment for such as despise the imperial commands. If he be a bishop or clergyman, he will altogether be deposed from his priesthood or clerical order; if a monk, excommunicated and driven out of his residence; if a civil or military officer, he shall lose his rank and office; if a private citizen, he shall, if n.o.ble, be punished pecuniarily, if of lower rank, be subjected to corporal punishment and perpetual exile.