By Panteleimon Levakos,
Assistant Director of the Department of Theology,
National and Kapodistrian University of Athens
Assistant Director of the Department of Theology,
National and Kapodistrian University of Athens
A. Introductory Remarks
"On this day, we commemorate the Holy Six Hundred and Thirty God-Bearing Fathers of the Holy and Ecumenical Fourth Synod in Chalcedon."[1] The sentence in question, which expresses the content of the feast of the Holy Fathers which is chronologically placed between July 13 and 19, captures the celebration of an Ecumenical Synod which was called to reconcile the need for the clarification of dogmatic teaching with the equally absolute need for solving administrative problems of the Church. The dogmatic divergence concerned Jesus Christ, while the administrative issues concerned the determination of the jurisdiction of the Church of Constantinople in specific areas of the empire, as well as the resolution of the dispute between the Churches of Antioch and Jerusalem over the areas in which they would exercise pastoral jurisdiction.
B. The Fourth Ecumenical Synod: Purpose and Convergence
The definition of the Christological dogma, that is, the teaching of the Church regarding Jesus Christ and His Incarnation, was a long and arduous process, which lasted from the early Christian period to the middle of the ninth century (843).[2] This process went through many and different stages, which had multiple effects on the one hand for the unity of the Church and on the other for the exercise of the pastoral jurisdiction of the five patriarchal Thrones of the Christian world. The Fourth Ecumenical Synod was convened in Chalcedon in the year 451, initially with the aim of establishing a clear position that Jesus Christ was perfect God and perfect man at His Incarnation, while subsequently providing the necessary clarifications to the Churches regarding the exercise of their pastoral care.[3] However, the solutions that were rendered, although they "corrected and glorified the great Mystery of piety",[4] nevertheless caused tremors in the unity of the ecclesiastical body.[5] One family of Churches (the Coptic of Egypt, the Armenian, the Ethiopian, the Syro-Jacobite, and the Malankar Syrian Church of the regions of India and Eritrea) broke the unity with the five official patriarchal Thrones (Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem), while the foundations were laid for the preparation of the Great Schism of the Churches of Rome and Constantinople in the year 1054. The question that arises in this case is the following: how is hymnology called upon to describe what unfolded in the proceedings of the Ecumenical Synod in question?
C. "The Woven Garment of High Theology"
The answer to the above question emerges from the overall examination of the Matins hymns of the feast. The Patriarch of Constantinople Philotheos Kokkinos (1353-1355, 1364-1376),[6] who composed the Canons of the feast, emphasizes the dogmatic part of the decisions of the Synod. The acrostic of the canon, "Πλάνης ἀνυμνῶ δεξιοὺς καθαιρέτας" ("I hymn the deposition of the delusional intellectuals"),[7] reveals the hymnographer's intention that no mention should be made of the disputes of the patriarchal Thrones about the privilege of honor and their areas of jurisdiction. The hymnographer composed two canons. The first canon is accented in the First mode with the purpose of the festive and triumphant sound of the tone to highlight the victory of the Orthodox Church over the heretical threat. The second canon is accented in the Plagal of the Fourth mode so that the body of the Church can understand the expressed dogmatic teaching within the hymns by listening to the didactic and slightly joyous style of said sound. The hymnographer thanks the Master Christ because the wise Fathers "revealed to us a tri-hypostatic God, teaching with clarity and omnipotence, always fleeing from error."[8]
The theology of the Fourth Ecumenical Synod owes much to Saint Cyril, Archbishop of Alexandria, who theologized about the hypostatic union of the divine and the human essence in the incarnate Jesus Christ. Therefore, the hymnographer Philotheos captures the core of the work of the Synod in just one stanza and mentions the theology of Cyril of Alexandria (370-444), who had passed away before the convocation of the Synod: "Six hundred and thirty in number of the most revered men cast down the delusion of Eutyches and heresy of Severus. We proclaim Christ with two natures, standing by the words of Cyril the blessed."[9] The writing of the service during the non-existence of communion between the Churches of Rome and Constantinople did not prevent Philotheos Kokkinos from highlighting the role of the Church of Rome in safeguarding the orthodox dogma during that period of time. After all, there were several times, at least until the year 861, in which the Church of Rome defended the correct faith precisely because the Church of Constantinople had followed the wrong path in the management of theological disputes.[10] The hymnographer points out that "the laws of the Spirit, being studied by poets, the practical laws of the Sages, having been sent to you, from Rome you accepted, and developing the light of the Spirit, you supported the Church well."[11] Also, "considering the writings from Rome as a gift of God, the wise teachers supported the tower of that piety, proclaiming the two energies of Christ, as well as the natures."[12]
The family of the Churches which was cut off of its own accord from the body of the Church is not directly mentioned by the hymnographer and patriarch Philotheos. The hymns, which are chanted in the Hymns of the Sunday Matins in question, are accented in the Plagal of the Second in order to show again the intention of the hymnographer in a didactic and at the same time summary style to recapitulate what he quoted in the Canons of the day. The rough listening of Plagal of the Second, as it is expressed in the existing Prosomoia of the feast, is chosen as the most suitable for the brief repetition and consolidation of what caused the convocation of the Synod and subsequently determined its outcome. The Horos of the Synod is characterized as "divine teaching", while the Fathers, using the "sling of the Spirit" expelled from the fullness of the Church "the burdensome and evil wolves". The expulsion of heretics from the Church, as well as those who chose to cut themselves off from the existing unity, is characterized by the patriarch Philotheos as a path to spiritual death because they are "grievously ill".[13]
D. Conclusions
Philotheos Kokkinos' hymnological approach to the Fourth Ecumenical Synod captures the very character of the Synod of Chalcedon. The efforts of the participating Fathers to bring the Churches that quarreled over their areas of jurisdiction to a compromise, as well as the effort to establish the dogmatic teaching on the divine and human nature of Jesus Christ, constitute the character of the "conciliatory" Synod of 451. The hymnographer Philotheos succeeds in reconciling in the Canons and Praises of the Services all of the above, partially omitting that the Synod in question became the occasion for the schism of the Ancient Eastern Churches, as well as the spark that ignited the gradual schism between Constantinople and Rome. In conclusion, the hymnography of the Sunday in question reveals the way in which the Church made sure that the person praying receives the theological meaning of the day, as well as the indisputable historical truths regarding the formation process of the dogma as we know it today.
References:
[1] Βαρθολομαίος Κουτλμουσιανός (επ.), Μηναίον τοῦ Ιουλίου, εκδ. Αποστολική Διακονία της Εκκλησίας της Ελλάδος, ἐν Ἀθῆναις 1967, σ. 73.
[2] Βλάσιος Ιω. Φειδάς, Εκκλησιαστικὴ Ιστορία, Απὸ την αρχὴ μέχρι την Εικονομαχία, Αθήνα, τ. Α΄, χ.ε., Αθήνα (2)1994, σ. 19.
[3] Georg Ostrogorsky, Ιστορία του Βυζαντινού Κράτους, τ. Α΄ (μτφρ. Ιωάννη Παναγοπούλου), εκδ. Βασιλόπουλος, Αθήνα (5)1997, σ. 122.
[4] Βαρθολομαίος Κουτλμουσιανός (επ.), Μηναίον τοῦ Ιουλίου, εκδ. Αποστολική Διακονία της Εκκλησίας της Ελλάδος, ἐν Ἀθῆναις 1967, σ. 73.
[5] Ιωάννης Ε. Καραγιαννόπουλος, Ιστορία Βυζαντινού Κράτους, τ. Α΄, εκδ. Βάνιας, Θεσσαλονίκη 1995, σ. 278-280.
[6] Μανουήλ Ι. Γεδεών, Πατριαρχικοὶ Πίνακες (ειδήσεις ιστορικαί βιογραφικαί περί των πατριαρχών Κωνσταντινουπόλεως από Ανδρέου του πρωτοκλήτου μέχρις Ιωακείμ Γ΄ του από Θεσσαλονίκης, 36-1884), εκδ. Otto Keil, ἐν Κωνσταντινουπόλει 1890, σ. 431-439.
[7] Βαρθολομαίος Κουτλμουσιανός (επ.), Μηναίον τοῦ Ιουλίου, εκδ. Αποστολική Διακονία της Εκκλησίας της Ελλάδος, ἐν Ἀθῆναις 1967, σ.72.
[8] Βαρθολομαίος Κουτλμουσιανός (επ.), Μηναίον τοῦ Ιουλίου, εκδ. Αποστολική Διακονία της Εκκλησίας της Ελλάδος, ἐν Ἀθῆναις 1967, σ. 72.
[9] Βαρθολομαίος Κουτλμουσιανός (επ.), Μηναίον τοῦ Ιουλίου, εκδ. Αποστολική Διακονία της Εκκλησίας της Ελλάδος, ἐν Ἀθῆναις 1967, σ. 73.
[10] Averil Cameron, “Byzantium and the Past in the Seventh Century: The Search for Redefinition”, στο Changing Cultures in Early Byzantium, εκδ. Ashgate, Aldershot 1996, σ. 268-269.
[11] Βαρθολομαίος Κουτλμουσιανός (επ.), Μηναίον τοῦ Ιουλίου, εκδ. Αποστολική Διακονία της Εκκλησίας της Ελλάδος, ἐν Ἀθῆναις 1967, σ. 74.
[12] Βαρθολομαίος Κουτλμουσιανός (επ.), Μηναίον τοῦ Ιουλίου, εκδ. Αποστολική Διακονία της Εκκλησίας της Ελλάδος, ἐν Ἀθῆναις 1967, σ. 74.
[13] Βαρθολομαίος Κουτλμουσιανός (επ.), Μηναίον τοῦ Ιουλίου, εκδ. Αποστολική Διακονία της Εκκλησίας της Ελλάδος, ἐν Ἀθῆναις 1967, σ. 75.
Source: Translated by John Sanidopoulos.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider supporting the work of the Mystagogy Resource Center:
