Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-cx56b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-19T02:06:42.823Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Church of Rome as a Court of Appeal in the Early Fifth Century: The Evidence of Innocent I and the Illyrian Churches

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 September 2013

GEOFFREY D. DUNN
GEOFFREY D. DUNN*
Affiliation:
Centre for Early Christian Studies, Australian Catholic University, 1100 Nudgee Road, Banyo, QLD 4014, Australia; e-mail: Geoff.Dunn@acu.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the early years of the fifth century a significant step in the development of the Roman Church's claim to a universal jurisdiction was taken as it clarified its relationship with the Churches of Eastern Illyricum. Among the letters of Innocent i, bishop of Rome from 402 to 417, there are a half dozen addressed to the churches within that prefecture, politically now in the East but ecclesiastically still looking to Rome. Yet the authority exercised by the Roman bishop was not all-encompassing, being restricted primarily to judicial matters. This article considers Innocent's epistula xviii, written to a group of Macedonian bishops, headed by Rufus, bishop of Thessaloniki, Innocent's vicar, in which Rome acts as a court of appeal in the matter of Bubalius and Taurian. What is fascinating is the role that forgery played in the appeal process. It is argued that the evidence should be considered in its own historical context and not in the light of later ecclesiological understandings.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Ecclesiastical History , Volume 64 , Issue 4 , October 2013 , pp. 679 - 699
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Innocent i, ep. xviii, PL xx.537–9; JK, 304. On the papal vicariate of Thessaloniki see Greenslade, S. L., ‘The Illyrian Churches and the vicariate of Thessalonica, 378–95’, JTS xlvi (1945), 17–30Google Scholar; Macdonald, J., ‘Who instituted the papal vicariate of Thessalonica?’, in Cross, F. L. (ed.), Studia patristica, IV: Papers presented to the 3rd International Conference on Patristic Studies, Oxford 1959, Berlin 1961, 478–82Google Scholar; and Dunn, Geoffrey D., ‘Innocent i and Anysius of Thessalonica’, Byzantion lxxvii (2007), 124–48Google Scholar.

2 Weltin, E. G., The ancient popes, Westminster, Md 1964, 273Google Scholar.

3 Caspar, Heinrich, Geschichte des Papsttums von den Anfängen bis zur Höhe der Weltherrschaft, I: Römische Kirche und Imperium Romanum, Tübingen 1930, 313Google Scholar n. 4.

4 Pietri, Charles, Roma Christiana: recherches sur l'Église de Rome, son organisation, sa politique, son idéologie de Miltiade à Sixte III (311–440), Rome 1976, 1099Google Scholar.

5 The theory of legal appeals begins to emerge in the West with the Synod of Sofia (ancient Serdica) in 343: Hess, Hamilton, The early development of canon law and the Council of Serdica, Oxford 2002, 179–90Google Scholar.

6 See Dunn, Geoffrey D., Cyprian and the bishops of Rome: questions of papal primacy in the early Church, Strathfield, NSW 2007Google Scholar.

7 See Barnwell, P. S., Emperor, prefects, and kings: the Roman West, 395–565, Chapel Hill, NC–London 1992, 51–70Google Scholar.

8 Norton, Peter, Episcopal elections, 250–600: hierarchy and popular will in late antiquity, Oxford 2007, 118–19Google Scholar.

9 Innocent i, ep. xiii.2, in Silva-Tarouca, K., Epistularum romanorum pontificum ad vicarios per Illyricum aliosque episcopis: collectio Thessalonicensis ad fidem codicis Vat. Lat. 5751, Rome 1937, 22Google Scholar (PL xx.516; JK, 300).

10 Athanasius, Apologia contra Arianos xxii.2, in H. G. Opitz, Athanasius Werke, ii/1, Berlin 19xx, 103; Sozomen, Historia ecclesiastica iii.8.5–8, GCS n.F. iv. 111.

11 Athanasius, Apologia contra Arianos xxxv.4–5, Opitz, Werke, ii/1, 113.

12 Synod of Sofia, canon 3c, in Hess, The early development, 212: Latin version; IIIc, ibid. 226–8: Greek version; 4, ibid. 214: Latin version; IV, ibid. 228: Greek version); 7, ibid. 214–16: Latin version; V, ibid. 228: Greek version.

13 Council of Nicaea, canon 6, in Alberigo, G., Conciliorum oecumenicorum generaliumque decreta, I: The ecumenical councils from Nicaea I to Nicaea II (325–787), Turnhout 2006, 23Google Scholar. See L'Huillier, P. L., The Church of the ancient councils: the disciplinary work of the first four ecumenical councils, Crestwood, NY 1996, 46–8Google Scholar, and Dunn, Geoffrey D., ‘The development of Rome as metropolitan of suburbicarian Italy: Innocent i's Letter to the Bruttians’, Augustinianum li (2011), 161–90Google Scholar.

14 See Menis, Gian Carlo, ‘Le giurisdizioni metropolitiche di Aquileia e di Milano nell'antichità’, Antichità Altoadriatiche iv (1973), 271–94Google Scholar; Cattaneo, E., ‘Il governo ecclesiastico nel iv secolo nell'Italia settentrionale’, Antichità Altoadriatiche xxii (1982), 175–87Google Scholar; McLynn, Neil B., Ambrose of Milan: church and court in a Christian capital, Berkeley 1994, 276–90Google Scholar; Humphries, Mark, Communities of the blessed: social environment and religious change in northern Italy, AD 200–400, Oxford 1999Google Scholar; Testa, Rita Lizzi, ‘Christianization and conversion in northern Italy’, in Kreider, Alan (ed.), The origins of Christendom in the west, Edinburgh 2001, 47–95Google Scholar; and Dunn, ‘The development of Rome as metropolitan’, 173–5.

15 On the letters to and from Gratian see Liebeschuetz, J. H. W. G. and Hill, Carole, Ambrose of Milan: political letters and speeches, Liverpool 2005, 244–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16 Sozomen, Historia ecclesiastica vii.4.1, GCS n.F. iv. 304.

17 Zosimus, Historia noua iv.47.2, in F. Paschoud, Zosime: Histoire nouvelle, II/2: Livre IV, Paris 1979, 315.

18 Grumel, V., ‘L'Illyricum de la mort de Valentinien ier (375) à la mort de Stilicon (408)’, Revue des études byzantines ix (1951), 5–46Google Scholar; cf. É. Demougeot, ‘Le Partage des provinces de l'Illyricum entre la pars Occidentis et la pars Orientis, de la tétrarchie au règne de Théoderic’, in La Géographie administrative et politique d'Alexander à Mahomet (Actes du colloque de Strasbourg, 14–16 juin 1979), Leiden 1981, 30. For a summary of the debate about the civil responsibility for Illyricum see Dunn, “Innocent i and Anysius of Thessalonica’, 125–30.

19 Damasus, ep. viii, Silva–Tarouca, Epistularum romanorum pontificum, 16–18=JK 237.

20 Ambrose, epp. vii.51, CSEL lxxxii. 60–7, and vii.52, CSEL lxxxii. 67–70, indicate Ambrose's interest in the church of Thessaloniki from 383. In dealing with the crisis created by Bonosus, the Illyrian bishops participated in the Synod of Capua in 392, presided over by Ambrose (ep. x.70, CSEL lxxxii/3. 3–6) and appealed to Ambrose about what to do next (ep. x.71, CSEL lxxxii/3.7–10).

21 Siricius, ep. iv, Silva–Tarouca, Epistularum romanorum pontificum, 19=JK 257; Dunn, ‘Innocent i and Anysius of Thessalonica’, 130–41. See Chadwick, Henry, ‘Faith and order at the Council of Nicaea: a note on the background of the sixth canon’, Harvard Theological Review liii (1960), 171–95Google Scholar, and Dunn, ‘The development of Rome as metropolitan’, 170–1.

22 If Siricius had only been referring to Anysius’ own province then this would not have been a matter of delegation but simply one of reminding him to do what Nicaea had required.

23 See Greenslade, ‘The Illyrian churches’, 26; MacDonald, ‘Who instituted’, 479; Malcolm R. Green, ‘Pope Innocent i: the church of Rome in the early fifth century’, unpubl. DPhil diss. Oxford 1973, 38; Pietri, Roma Christiana, 1075–6; and Dunn, ‘Innocent i and Anysius of Thessalonica’, 134–5.

24 Ambrose, Epistula extra collectionem vii.9, CSEL lxxxiii/2,195. This arrangement was confirmed, and extended geographically by Gratian to include the prefecture of Gaul: De rebaptizatoribus=Collectio Avellana, ep. xiii; CSEL xxxv. 54–8. See Liebeschuetz, and Hill, , Ambrose of Milan, 252Google Scholar, n. 7, and Dunn, ‘The development of Rome’, 173; cf. McLynn, , Ambrose of Milan, 91Google Scholar. The discussion, however, was not about the ordaining of bishops but the removal of guilty bishops, yet it suggests Rome's involvement in Illyrian affairs. Those in longinquioribus partibus were to be tried before their metropolitan in first instance, or by Rome or Rome's delegate if the accused were a metropolitan. If the trial bishop were accused of bias (before the trial had begun or after it had finished?) then appeal could be made to Rome or to a panel of at least fifteen neighbouring bishops (presumably from a different province from that of the accused). In terms of the parenthetical question, the latter is the more likely option, making a trial in Rome a second-instance one (an appeal) rather than first–instance one.

25 ‘ut omnia quae in illis parentibus gerentur, sanctitati tuae … traderent cognoscenda’: Innocent i, ep. i, Silva-Tarouca, Epistularum romanorum pontificum, 20=PL xx.465. See Dunn, ‘Innocent i and Anysius of Thessalonica’, 141–7.

26 Innocent i, ep. xiii.3, PL xx.516. See Dunn, Geoffrey D., ‘Innocent i and Rufus of Thessalonica’, Jahrbuch der Österreichen Byzantinistik lix (2009), 51–64Google Scholar. I do not believe that the authority delegated to Anysius and Rufus differed.

27 ‘saluo earum primatu curam, et inter ipsos primates primus’: Innocent i, ep. xiii.3, Silva-Tarouca, Epistularum romanorum pontificum, 22=PL xx.516.

28 Innocent i, ep. xvi, PL xx.519–21=JK 299. See Geoffrey D. Dunn, ‘The letter of Innocent i to Marcian of Niš’, in Dragiš Bojović (ed.), Saint Emperor Constantine and Christianity, Niš 2013, i.319–38. Of course, they only appeared to be reordained, since their first ordination was invalid, whereas Rusticius actually had been reordained.

29 Innocent i, ep. xvii, PL xx.526–37=JK 303. See Dunn, Geoffrey D., ‘Innocent i and the Illyrian churches on the question of heretical ordination’, Journal of the Australian Early Medieval Association iv (2008), 65–81Google Scholar.

30 I am currently preparing a new critical edition of the letters of Innocent i, funding for which is provided by the Australian Research Council. I am grateful for their generosity.

31 Coustant, Pierre, Epistolae romanorum pontificum et quae ad eos scriptae sunt a S. Clement I usque ad Innocentum III, i, Paris 1721Google Scholar, col. 841; Jaffé, Regesta, 46.

32 In John Chrysostom, ep. clxiii, PG lii.706, and Innocent i, ep. xvii, PL xx. 527, there is a Eugenius listed as an Illyrian bishop, so this reading is preferred to Eumenius, found here in ep. xviii.

33 Coustant, Epistolae romanorum pontificum, col. 820. ‘[E]t in quemdam redigens ordinem titulis distinxi compositis: ita dumtaxat ut singulorum pontificum, quotquot a me praecepta reperta sunt, sub numerorum serie terminarem, omnesque titulos huic praefationi subnectarem eo modo’: Dionysius Exiguus, praef., PL lxvii. 231.

34 For the two manuscripts of the original form of the Collectio Dionysiana see BAV, ms lat. 5845, and BnF, Paris, ms lat. 3837. On the collectio see Maassen, Friedrich, Geschichte der Quellen und der Literatur des canonischen Rechts im Abendlande bis zum Ausgange des Mittelalters, i, Graz, 1870, 422–40Google Scholar; Schwartz, Eduard, ‘Die Kanonnessammlungen der alten Reichskirche’, Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte: Kanonistische Abteilung xxv (1936), 108–14Google Scholar; Wurm, Hubert, Studien und Texte zur Dekretalensammlung des Dionysius Exiguus, Bonn 1939Google Scholar; Gaudemet, Jean, Les Sources du droit de l'Église en occident du IIe au VIIe siècle, Paris 1985, 134–7Google Scholar; Limouris, G., ‘L'Oeuvre canonique de Denys le Petit (vie s.)’, Revue de droit canonique xxxvii (1987), 127–42Google Scholar; Dura, N., ‘Denys Exiguus (465–550): précisions et correctifs concernant sa vie et son oeuvre’, Revista española de derecho canonico l (1993), 279–90Google Scholar; Kéry, Lotte, Canonical collections of the early Middle Ages (ca. 400–1140): a bibliographical guide to the manuscripts and literature, Washington, DC 1999, 9–13Google Scholar; and Gallagher, Clarence, Church law and church order in Rome and Byzantium: a comparative study, Aldershot 2002, 1–18Google Scholar.

35 Pietri, Roma Christiana, 1099. If the news of this move in Antioch only reached Rome while Maximian was there, then one must doubt that the Macedonians had discussed this in a synod first and had sent Maximian to Rome to discuss it.

36 Innocent i, ep. xxii, PL xx.544–6=JK 308, dated to about 415 by Jaffé. This is placed fifteenth in Dionysius’ list of Innocent's letters.

37 Martyrologium Hieronymianum, PL xxx.462; Zosimus, ep. i, PL xx.645. See Duchesne, Le Liber pontificalis: texte, introduction et commentaire, i, Paris 1955, p. ccl.

38 Innocent i, ep. xiii, PL xx.515–17=Silva-Tarouca, Epistularum romanorum pontificum, 22=JK 300. See Coustant, Epistolae romanorum pontificum, col. 815; Caspar, Geschichte des Papsttums, 309; Green, ‘Pope Innocent i’, 13–14, 46; Pietri, Roma Christiana, 1089; and Dunn, ‘Innocent i and Rufus of Thessalonica’, 51–64. This letter is not in the Collectio Dionysiana.

39 Caspar, Geschichte des Papsttums, 309 n. 2; Jalland, T. G., The Church and the papacy: an historical study, London 1944, 273Google Scholar; and Pietri, Roma Christiana, 1088–9, reject the idea that this was Innocent's first letter, based upon dating ep. xvi to 409 or 410. On dating ep. xvi, PL xx.519–26=JK 299, to 413, thereby preserving ep. xiii as Innocent's first to Rufus, see Coustant, Epistolae romanorum pontificum, col. 819, and Green, ‘Pope Innocent i’, 13–14, 49.

40 Innocent i, ep. xvii, PL xx.526–7: ‘Innocentius Rufo, Eusebio, Eustathio, Claudio, Maximiano, Eugenio, Gerontio, Ioanni, Polychronio, Sophronio, Flauiano, Hilario, Macedonio, Calicratio, Zosimo, Profuturo, Nicetae, Hermogeni, Vincentio, Asilogo, Teretntiano, Herodiano et Marciano, episcopis Macedonibus et diaconis in domino salutem’; ep. xviii, PL xx.538: ‘Innocentius Rufo, Gerontio, Sophronio, Faluiano, Macedonio, Prosdocio et Aristeae episcopis per Macedoniam constitutis’.

41 John Chrysostom, ep. clxiii, PG lii.706. Not ep. clxv, as listed by Coustant, Epistolae romanorum pontificum, col. 841, n. c. On the date of Chrysostom's letter see Delmaire, Roland, ‘Les “Lettres d'exil” de Jean Chrysostome: études de chronologie et de prosopographie’, Recherches Augustiniennes xxv (1991), 174Google Scholar.

42 Innocent i, ep. xviii.1, PL xx.538.

43 Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich, ms Clm 6243, fo. 58r; cf. BnF, Paris, ms lat. 3837, fo. 122r, and BAV, ms lat. 5845, fo. 96r. Hence I refer to them simply as Illyrian bishops. The difficulty with the reading in the Munich manuscript is that it reads episcopis Machedoniae et Daciis. One would expect more of a parallel, with either Macedonibus to match Daciis or Daciae to match Machedoniae.

44 Wurm, Studien und Texte, 136–7.

45 The idea that this was an extraordinary gathering is supported by Pietri, Roma Christiana, 1099.

46 If the historicity of the synodal letter in Theodoret, Historia ecclesiastica. iv.9.1–9, GCS n.F. v. 224–7, is accepted, then the Eustathius mentioned there could be the same individual as the Eustathius of Chrysostom, ep. clxiii, and Innocent i, ep. xvii. In that case he would have been a bishop from at least 375 or 378/9, making him quite senior by 413. Bardy, G.rejected the historicity of Theodoret's documents: ‘Sur un Synode de l'Illyricum (375)’, Bulletin d'ancienne littérature et d'archéologie chrétienne ii (1912), 259–74Google Scholar. Jacques Zeiller amended the imperial titles to date the documents to late 378 or early 379 when Gratian was in Sirmium: Les Origines chrétiennes dans les provinces danubiennes de l'empire romain, Paris 1918, 308–43.

Zeiller is supported by J.-R. Palanque, Saint Ambroise et l'empire romain: contribution à l'histoire des rapports de l'église et l'état à la fin du quatrième siècle, Paris 1933, 498, and R. Gryson, Scolies Ariennes sur le concile d'Aquilée, SC cclxvii, Paris 1980, 107–21. McLynn dismisses the documents as fictions designed to enhance the status of the presbyter Elpidius in his anti-homoean campaign in Asia: Ambrose of Milan, 92–4. Daniel H. Williams sees the documents in Theodoret as ‘suspiciously out of context’ and certainly not supporting the idea that Ambrose was in attendance, given that Paulinus, Vita Ambrosiani xi.1–2 (Pellegrino, Vita, 64) described Ambrose as being in Sirmium for the episcopal ordination of Anemius: Ambrose of Milan and the end of the Nicene-Arian conflicts, Oxford 1995, 123–6. The mention of Eustathius, if he were the same bishop, could lend some degree of support to the historicity of Theodoret's documents.

47 Theodoret, Historia ecclesiastica v.35.1–3, GCS n.F. v. 337. Fedalto, Giorgio, Hierarchia ecclesiastica orientalis, II: Patriarchatus Alexandrinus, Antiochenus, Hierosolymitanus, Padua 1988, 682Google Scholar.

48 ‘Mora coepiscoporum nostrorum Maximiani et Eumenii, uel potius importunitas temporum fecit, ut uos iteraretis de Bulbalio et Tauriano querimoniam, et nos iterum in homines perditissimos insurgeremus’: Innocent i, ep. xviii.1, PL xx.538.

49 Innocent i, ep. xviii.1, PL xx.538.

50 Innocent i, ep. xix, PL xx.540–2=JK 305.

51 I am grateful to the anonymous reader of this article who drew my attention to the use of the term in the Latin text of 2 Timothy iv.2. On that passage see Malherbe, Abraham J., ‘“In season and out of season”: 2 Timothy 4:2’, Journal of Biblical Literature ciii (1984), 235–43Google Scholar.

52 Green, ‘Pope Innocent i’, 50. Pietri calls them ‘prélats’: Roma Christiana, 1099.

53 Innocent i, ep. xviii.2, PL xx.539. Here I accept the reading of BAV, ms lat. 5845, fo. 90v, over credentibus, found in some manuscripts of the Collectio Dionysio-Hadriana. This is supported by Pietri, Roma Christiana, 1099.

54 Innocent i, ep. xviii.1, PL xx.538. They would have confirmed a verdict if the first scenario is adopted and reached one if the second.

55 Innocent i, ep. xiii.3, PL xx.516.

56 Innocent i, ep. xvii.14, PL xx.535–6.

57 ‘On voit bien qu le vicaire… ne se sentait guère de trancher tout seul; il se couvrait de l'autorité romaine’: Pietri, Roma Christiana, 1099–100.

58 ‘Cette causa major, signalée par Thessalonique, le Siège apostolique s'en était emparé pour la traiter tout seul; aux interlocuteurs macédoniens revenait seulement la mission de prévenir l'Eglise insulaire’: ibid. 1100.

59 Green, ‘Pope Innocent i’, 50.

60 ‘Sed, ut possum, paucioribus uerbis tantorum malorum metabor compendium, et strictim, quae in volumine litterarum uestrarum conspexerim, retractabo’: Innocent i, ep. xviii.1, PL xx. 538.

61 Ibid.

62 ‘non oportuit uideri piissimis mentibus uestris, cuiuscumque retractari iudicium’: ibid. Here retracto is taken in the sense of ‘reconsider in order to change’.

63 ‘quia ueritas, exagitata saepius, magis splendescit in luce’: ibid.

64 ‘et pernicies reuocata in iudicium, grauius et sine poenitentia condemnatur’: ibid. Here iudicium is taken to refer, as I indicated earlier, to the Illyrian decision, not Innocent's.

65 ‘Innocent s'occupait de faire respecter une autorité dont l'influence s’étendait désormais jusqu’à la Crète’: Pietri, Roma Christiana, 1100.

66 Jasper, Detlev, ‘The beginning of the decretal tradition: papal letters from the origin of the genre through the pontificate of Stephen v’, in Jasper, Detlev and Fuhrmann, Horst, Papal letters in the early Middle Ages, Washington, DC 2001, 36Google Scholar.

67 Palladius, Dialogus ii.248–9, SC cccxlii.94. See Dunn, Geoffrey D., ‘Roman primacy in the correspondence between Innocent i and John Chrysostom’, in Giovanni Crisostomo: oriente e occidente tra IV e V secolo, Rome 2005, 687–98Google Scholar, and ‘The date of Innocent i's epistula 12 and the second exile of John Chrysostom’, Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies xlv (2005), 155–70.

68 Codex Theodosianus xvi.2.45 (14 July 421), SC cdxcvii. 212.

69 Green, ‘Pope Innocent i’, 50.

70 ‘Hinc Bubalum et Taurianum a Macedonibus judicatos ad apostolicam sedem provocasse, ac Macedonas, quod suum ipsorum judicium recognosceretur, iniquo animo tulisse colligitur’: Coustant, Epistolae romanorum pontificum, col. 842, n. g.

71 Dunn, ‘Innocent i and the Illyrian churches’, 66–70.

72 Innocent i, ep. xvi, PL xx.519–21=JK 299.