Baring-Gould’s sources: Greek Menology and Modern Roman Martyrology. Authorities: — A Greek anonymous life, and authorities for the life of Popes Agapetus and Vigilius.] When Justinian, Emperor of the East, was preparing to invade Italy and rescue it from the domination of the Goths, the Gothic King Theodotus sent Pope Agapetus to Constantinople (a.d. 535), to ward off the impending danger, by exercising his influence upon the Emperor, and should all his efforts to obtain peace prove unavailing, he was to produce a letter from the Gothic King containing a declaration of war. Should Justinian land his troops in Italy, Theodotus declared his intention of instantly putting the Roman Senate to the sword, and razing the city of the Caesars to the ground.
Agapetus reached Byzantium in February, 336. He found the see of Constantinople [a bishop’s “see” is his diocese, named from his seat (Latin sedes)] vacant, and the Empress Theodora prepared to translate to it the Bishop of Trebizonde, suspected of Eutychian [followers of Eutyches, who said Christ had only a divine nature; condemned at Chalcedon in 451] views.
The Pope threatened in the event of such an appointment to cut off communion with the new Patriarch. Justinian [Byzantine emperor 527–565] listened to his remonstrances, and nominated Mennas to the vacant see. The new Patriarch was consecrated, April 22nd, 336, by the aged Pope. Agapetus died shortly after.
The opportunity was seized by Vigilius. The scandalous story has been told elsewhere1 of Vigilius promising the Empress to uphold Eutychianism if she would obtain for him the Papacy, of how he hastened to Rome with treasures supplied by Theodora to bribe the venal Roman people, how he found Sylverius already in the chair of S. Peter, 1 See life of S. Sylverius, June 20.
how he deposed him with the help of Belisarius, how he banished him and caused his death, and so cleared the way for his own accession to the apostolic throne. The Controversy of the Three Chapters now disturbed the East. Justinian the Emperor was a theologian, or thought himself so; whilst his frontiers were threatened by hungry barbarians, he took the field against heretics whom he could exterminate without danger to his person. He would reap victories over theological opponents when he shrank from exposing himself to the precarious fortune of battle against the enemies of his empire and of Christianity.
“What is there to fear,” asked a bold conspirator of his associates, “ from this bigoted tyrant? Sleepless and unarmed he sits whole nights in his closet, debating with reverend greybeards, and turning over the pages of ecclesiastical volumes.” 1 It was now three hundred years since the death of Origen. The orthodoxy of this great ecclesiastical writer was made the subject of debate, of controversy, of anathema. Jus tinian, with penetrating eye, descried more than ten errors in his works, and his memory was condemned to reprobation. But the writings of Origen were dear to the monks of Palestine, and to many of the more intelligent and learned of the Oriental bishops. It was necessary to divert the mind of the Imperial controversialist to another subject. Theodore Askidas, Archbishop of Ctesarea in Cappadocia [a region of central Turkey], both respected the memory of Origen and loved the works of that great doctor. He was perhaps disposed to take Monophysite views of the nature of Christ; but this is not established. The harlot Theodora, whom Justinian had raised to the Imperial throne as his consort, was deeply tainted with these views, and sought an opportunity to 1 Procopius, De Bell. Goth. iii. 32.
August 25.3 S. Mennas. overthrow or weaken the authority of the Council of Chalcedon. Theodore and Theodora combined their influence over the feeble mind of Justinian to excite a controversy which would further their several ends.
Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret of Cyrus, and Ibas of Edessa, had not been condemned — on the contrary, they had been admitted as orthodox, by the Council of Chalcedou.. They were all three dead — but what did that matter? Let their memories be the battlefield for a new controversy ! If these three writers should be pronounced heretical, the authority of Chalcedon would be shaken — this was what Theodora sought; and the heat and excitement of the controversy would distract the Emperor’s thoughts from Origen — this was the purpose of Theodore Askidas.1 Pope Vigilius was under written promise to the Empress to obtain the condemnation of the Council of Chalcedon. It was necessary to bring him to Constantinople. He was accordingly ordered to resort to the imperial capital; and he set forth, loaded with the imprecations of the Roman people, and assailed with volleys of stones, as the murderer of Sylverius, and of his nephew, whom he had scourged to death. “ May famine and pestilence pursue thee; evil hast thou done to us, may evil overtake thee wherever thou art !” In the meantime Justinian had concluded his perusal of the writings of Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret of Cyrus, and Ibas of Edessa. He looked for heresy, and his passion was gratified. He detected minute points, words, expressions, capable of being forced to express unsound views. These he formulated in Three Chapters, and prepared to issue an edict condemning them. It was presented to 1 See on the purpose of Theodore in stirring up this controversy, Hefele’s Con cilien Geschichte, iii. 1. 4, c. 1.
VOL. IX. Mennas, and he was required to sign it. He hesitated, and only yielded reluctantly, on the understanding that his signature was provisional, and that he might withdraw it, should Pope Vigilius object to the condemnation. Ephraem, Patriarch of Antioch, at first refused to sign the edict, but yielded when threatened with deposition. Peter, Patriarch of Jerusalem, showed the same cowardice and inconsequence. When a crowd of zealous and protesting monks besieged him, he swore that the edict attacked the Council of Chalcedon, and that he would never sanction it; yet, when threatened by the Emperor, he basely gave in to it his adhesion. Zoilus of Alexandria followed their ignoble lead. Mennas is charged with having forced his suffragans to subscribe, but this is not a charge that can be substantiated. It was an excuse made by some of the subscribers to Stephen, the papal secretary, to cover their own subservience to the imperial will.
Facundus, Bishop of Hermiane, and other African bishops were then in Constantinople; Facundus drew up a defence of the Three Chapters, and he and his African allies broke off communion with Mennas and all those prelates who had signed the condemnation.
At this juncture Vigilius arrived in Constantinople, January 25, a.d. 547, and was received by the Emperor with the highest honour. Vigilius on leaving Rome had been earnestly, solemnly charged by the clergy and the people not to listen to any overtures made by die Empress to obtain a condemnation of the Council of Chalcedon. It had leaked out that to her Vigilius owed his position on the throne of S. Peter, that in return for his advancement he had made some promise to support the Monophysite heresy; his unscrupulous, irreligious character was too well known, and the Church of Rome viewed the journey of Vigilius to Constantinople with undisguised alarm. The Pope assumed a tone S. Mennas.
of high and rigid orthodoxy on his arrival at Byzantium. He launched an interdict against Mennas of Constantinople, Ephraem of Antioch, Peter of Jerusalem, and all the bishops who had signed the edict of Justinian condemning the Three Chapters.
But Yigilius was subjected to the manipulation of Theodora and Justinian; by flattery, persuasion, and every art which would weigh with an unscrupulous man like Yigilius, he was brought into an opposite frame of mind, and he fulminated his anathemas in echo to the imperial thunders against those who adhered to the orthodoxy of the Three Chapters. “ In conformity with your invincible wishes,” wrote the Pope to Justinian and to Theodora, “I anathematize the letter of Ibas, and the doctrine of Theodoret, and of Theodore, formerly Bishop of Mopsuestia, who was ever alien from the Church, and opposed to the holy Fathers. We anathematize every one who does not acknowledge that the Word of God, Christ, has but one substance, one person, and one operation l”1 When Vigilius had thus changed sides, he returned to communion with Mennas and the other bishops whom he had previously excommunicated.
On April nth, 548, Pope Vigilius sent to Mennas his “Judicatum,” which, as the title expresses, contains the judgment of the Pope on the questions propounded to him. This document is unfortunately lost, but fragments remain which allow us to judge of its character.2 He anathematized the Three Chapters, but introduced a saving clause that no derogation to the authority of the Council of Chalcedon was meant thereby. That is — he condemned as heretical those whose orthodoxy had been proclaimed by the Fathers of Chalcedon, yet without prejudice to that 1 The words “ one operation ” are probably an interpolation. 2 Besides the fragment published by Baluze, Bishop Hefele has discovered five more in the u Constitution” of Vigilius. Council ! Three years after, when Vigilius had reverted again to the opposite side, he excused his “ Judicatum,” as a shifty production whose tendency was to appease a profitless controversy.
Shortly after the publication of the “Judicatum,” the Empress Theodora died, June 28th, a.d. 548. But her death did not appease the contest, for Justinian was now fired with theologic zeal, and bent on forcing the whole Church to condemn Theodore of Mopsuesta, dead a hundred years ago in full communion with the Church, Theodoretof Cyrus, and Ibas of Edessa, whose orthodoxy had been vindicated by the Fourth CEcumenical Council. The “ Judicatum " of the Pope had excited lively alarm and indignation. His nephew, the deacon Rusticus, the Roman deacon Sebastian, wrote to Italy that the Holy Father “ had struck a blow at the authority of the Council of Chalcedon !” The Roman clerks, John, Gerontius, Severinus, John, and Deusdedit, opposed the “Judicatum ” on the same grounds. Vigilius, angry and alarmed, deprived them of their offices. Valentinian, Bishop of Tomi, and Aurelian [Roman emperor 270–275], Archbishop of Arles, wrote in alarm to the Pope. The rumour spread through Gaul [roughly modern France and Belgium] that Vigilius had overthrown the four great councils. In Illyria, in Dalmatia, in Africa, and in Scythia, opposition to the “Judicatum” became determined. A synod of the Illyrian bishops met, vindicated the orthodoxy of the Three Chapters, and deposed the Metropolitan Benenatus for condemning them in conformity with the “Judicatum” of the Pope. So far from appeasing controversy, the judgment of Vigilius had excited it.
The Pope thought prudent to withdraw it, after a consultation with Mennas, Dacius of Milan, and several other Greek and Latin bishops. But at the same time that he openly withdrew his “Judicatum,” he privately by oath promised Justinian (Aug. 15, a.d. 550) “that he would endeavour, along with the Emperor, to obtain a sentence of anathema against the Three Chapters,” it was further stipulated that this compact should be kept secret. Soon after this, the Emperor convoked a great synod at Constantinople of the bishops of Illyria and Africa. The bishops of Illyria refused to attend, but those of Africa were present, either personally or by representation. The Emperor and the Greek bishops endeavoured to cajole them into signing a condemnation of the Three Chapters. On their refusal, Reparatus of Carthage was deposed on a frivolous excuse, and his compliant secretary elevated in his room. Firmus of Numidia was won by the presents of the Emperor. Primasius of the province of Byzacene only yielded when his metropolitan [the archbishop who heads a group of dioceses] died, and he was able, by giving in his adhesion to the anathema, to secure the metropolitan chair for himself. The fourth African deputy, Verecundus, proved stubborn.
Justinian, at the instigation of Theodore Askidas, now drew up a second edict charged with anathemas against the Three Chapters. The publication of this edict caused a commotion in the breast of the Pope. It was, he saw clearly, impossible for him to proceed further in the matter of the Three Chapters without rousing against him the whole of the West. The timorous, compromising “ Judicatum ” had been thrown out as a feeler, and it had shown him that the West was resolute in its chivalrous attachment to the Chalcedonian Council, and would not endure an oblique imputation cast at it. That Justinian would force him to subscribe the edict if he tarried in Constantinople was certain. If he subscribed it, Rome would be in revolt, and he could never again set his foot in it. At the suggested possibility of his yielding, the vigorous Romans had pelted him with stones. How would they treat him if he basely subscribed? He took refuge in the basilica of S. Peter, with Dacius of Milan, and other Latin bishops who were with him. I11 the meantime Theodore Askidas, in concert with Mennas, deposed Zoilus, Patriarch of Alexandria, because he would not condemn the Three Chapters, and appointed in his room a certain Apollinaris. From the church of S. Peter, Pope Vigilius drew up a sentence of excommunication and deposition against Askidas, Mennas, and all their partisans, and confided it to the care of a woman, who was to publish it in the event of certain contingencies.
Justinian, hearing of the flight of the Pope, sent soldiers to take him from the church. But Vigilius would not leave the sanctuary. When they threatened force, he flew to the altar, and embraced one of its pillars. The soldiers seized him by the legs and pulled; the Pope, a stalwart and sturdy man, held the pillar; the column yielded, and the altar slab would have fallen on him and crushed his head, had not some of the clergy placed their shoulders under it and sustained it. The resolution of the Pope overcame the purpose of the soldiers, and they withdrew. The Emperor then swore that he would not injure the Pope, nor interfere with his liberty, if he would return to his palace, and Vigilius left his asylum.
Time passed, and Vigilius saw that he was being detained in Constantinople for no other purpose than that he should yield through exhaustion of patience to the resolution of the Emperor. He had now been nearly four years in Constantinople; the difficulties of his position were not lightened, they daily became more perplexing. He secretly fled again from his palace, crossed the Bosphorus, and took refuge in the church of S. Euphemia at Chalcedon. Thence, in January, 552, he launched the edict of excommunication drawn up six months before against Askidas, Mennas, &c. August 25.3 51. Mennas.
A month later he received in his sanctuary a profession of faith from Askidas, Mennas, and the rest, which satisfied him. They assured him that they respected the Council of Chalcedon, and adhered to its decisions without adding to or subtracting anything from them. As for the matter of the Three Chapters, let that remain to be decided by a future council.
Not long after, in August, a.d. 552, Mennas died, and was succeeded in the patriarchal see by Eutychius. The brief biography of Mennas does not add much to what is known of him from other sources. He took part, but it was a harmless one, in one of those persecutions of the Jews on a false charge which have disgraced Christian history. It was the custom for such of the Holy Eucharist as was not consumed at mass by the communicants to be given to innocent children. Now, there was a Jewish lad, son of a glass maker, at school, and on one occasion he was given what remained of the Host, the priest not knowing that he was unbaptized. The story goes that when his father heard what he had received, filled with rage, he cast his child into the glass-furnace. The mother sought him in vain; the third day, going near the furnace, she called her son, and the boy answered from the midst of the fire, and came forth unhurt.
Thus ran the malicious lie, diligently circulated among the people to excite them to fury against the Hebrews. Justinian at once seized the glass-blower and crucified him; Mennas took the wife and child, and baptized them. The Jews were stripped of all their immunities, and were oppressed with a vexatious law which compelled them to observe the Passover on the same day on which the Christians celebrated Easter.
