/

Gratsianskiy Mikhail

Apostle Peter and the «Acacian schism»


Gratsianskiy Mikhail (2015) "Apostle Peter and the «Acacian schism» ", Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Sviato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriia I : Bogoslovie. Filosofiia, 2015, vol. 59, pp. 9-19 (in Russian).

DOI of the paper: 10.15382/sturI201559.9-19

Abstract

The article analyzes the ideological foundation of the exceptional position of papacy within the Universal Church, as it was revealed during the conflict between the papacy and the Church of Constantinople at the end of the 5th century. The perception of a specifi c role of Apostle Peter as a presumed first bishop of Rome found its application as a keystone of the argumentation, which pope Felix III (483–492) developed for a justifi cation of his political actions, which in their turn lead to the uncanonical condemnation of patriarch of Constantinople Acacius and the beginning of a long-termed schism between Rome and the Orient. This argumentation, or rather an ecclesiological concept, styled by many scholars as ‘petrine discourse’, both presented an underlying structure of papal ideology and was a primary motivation for concrete actions on the field of ecclesiastical policy of the popes.

Keywords

Acacius of Constantinople, Pope Felix III, Pope Gelasius I, Church Politics, Schism, Petrine Discourse

References


1. Bacht H. 1953 “Die Rolle des orientalischen Mönchtums in den kirchenpolitischen Auseinandersetzungen um Chalkedon (431–519)“, in Grillmeier A., Bacht H. Das Konzil von Chalkedon. Geschichte und Gegenwart, Würzburg, 1953, vol. 2, pp. 193–314.
2. Beck H.-G. Geschichte der orthodoxen Kirche im Byzantinischen Reich, Göttingen, 1980.
3. Blaudeau Ph. Alexandrie et Constantinople (451–491) de l’histoire à la géo-ecclésiologie, Rome, 2006.
4. Blaudeau Ph. 2012 “Between Petrine Ideology and Realpolitik. The See of Constantinople in Roman Geo-Ecclesiology (449–536)”, in Grig L., Kelly G. (eds.) Two Romes. Rome and Constantinople in Late Antiquity, Oxford, 2012, pp. 364–384.
5. Blaudeau Ph. Le Siège de Rome et l’Orient (448–536). Etude géo-ecclésiologique, Rome, 2012.
6. Brennecke H. Ch. 2007 “Chalkedonense und Henotikon. Bemerkungen zum Prozess der östlichen Rezeption der christologischen Formel von Chalkedon“, in Heil U., von Stockhausen A., Ulrich J. (eds.) Ecclesia est in re publica. Studien zur Kirchen- und Theologiegeschichte im Kontext des Imperium Romanum, Berlin, New York, 2007, pp. 259–290.
7. Caspar E. Geschichte des Papsttums von den Anfängen bis zur Höhe der Weltherrschaft, Tübingen, 1933, vol. 2.
8. Deliyannis D. 2014 “The Roman Liber pontificalis, Papal Primacy, and the Acacian Schism”, in Viator, 2014, vol. 45/3, pp. 1–16.
9. Demacopoulos G. The Invention of Peter: The Development and Reception of the Petrine Discourse at the Close of Christian Antiquity, Philadelphia, 2013.
10. Duchesne L. Histoire ancienne de l’Eglise, Paris, 1910, vol. 3.
11. Dvornik F. Byzantium and the Roman Primacy, New York, 1979.
12. Frend W. H. C. 1976 “Eastern Attitudes to Rome during the Acacian Schism”, in Studies in Church History, 1976, vol. 13, pp. 69–82.
13. Grillmeier A. Jesus der Christus im Glauben der Kirche, Freiburg; Basel; Wien, 1991, vol. 2/1.
14. Haacke R. 1953 “Die kaiserliche Politik in den Auseinandersetzungen um Chalkedon (451–553)“, in Grillmeier A., Bacht H. Das Konzil von Chalkedon. Geschichte und Gegenwart, Würzburg, 1953, vol. 2, pp. 95–177.
15. Haller J. Geschichte des Papsttums. Idee und Wirklichkeit, Stuttgart, 1950, vol. 1.
16. Hefele Ch. J., Leclercq H. Histoire des conciles d’après les documents originaux, Paris, 1908, vol. 2/2.
17. Fliche A., Martin V. (eds.) Histoire de l’église, Paris, 1948, vol. 4.
18. Mayeur J.-M., Pietri Ch., Pietri L., Vauchez A., Venard M. (eds.) Histoire du christianisme, Paris, 1998, vol. 3.
19. Jedin H., Dolan J. (eds.) History of the Church, New York, 1980, vol. 2.
20. Ηοfmann F. 1953 “Der Kampf der Päpste um Konzil und Dogma von Chalkedon von Leo dem Großen bis Hormisdas (451–519)“, in Grillmeier A., Bacht H. Das Konzil von Chalkedon. Geschichte und Gegenwart, Würzburg, 1953, vol. 2, pp. 13–94.
21. Kosiński R. 2010 “Dzieje Akacjusza, patriarchy Konstantynopola w latach 472–489“ (History of Acacius, Patriarch of Constantinople, in Years 472–489), in U schyłku starożytności. Studia źródłoznawcze, 2010, vol. 9, pp. 63–97.
22. Κötter J.-M. Zwischen Kaisern und Aposteln. Das Akakianische Schisma (484–519) als kirchlicher Ordnungskonflikt der Spätantike, Stuttgart, 2013.
23. Michel A. 1953 “Der Kampf um das politische oder petrinische Prinzip der Kirchenführung“, in Grillmeier A., Bacht H. Das Konzil von Chalkedon. Geschichte und Gegenwart, Würzburg, 1953, vol. 2, pp. 491–562.
24. Pietri Ch. 1987 “D’Alexandrie à Rome: Jean Talaïa, émule d’Athanase au Ve siècle“, in Mélanges offerts à Claude Mondésert, Paris, 1987, pp. 277–295.
25. Revillout E. 1877 “Le premier schisme de Constantinople. Acace et Pierre Monge”, in Revue des questions historiques, 1877, vol. 22, pp. 83–134.
26. Richards J. The Popes and the Papacy in the Early Middle Ages 476–752, London, 1979.
27. Salaville S. 1918–1919 “L’affaire de l’Hénotique ou le premier schisme byzantin au Ve siècle”, in Échos d’Orient, 1918, vol. 18/114, pp. 255–265; 1919, vol. 18/116, pp. 389–397; vol. 19/117, pp. 49–68; vol. 19/120, pp. 415–433.
28. Schwartz E. 1934 “Publizistische Sammlungen zum acacianischen Schisma“, in Abhandlungen der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-historische Abteilung. Neue Folge, München, 1934, vol. 10.
29. Townsend W. T. 1936 “The Henotikon Schism and the Roman Church”, in The Journal of Religion, 1936, vol. 16/1, pp. 78–86.
30. Ullmann W. Gelasius I. (492–496). Das Papsttum an der Wende der Spätantike zum Mittelalter, Stuttgart, 1981.
31. Ullmann W. 1960 “Leo I and the Theme of Papal Primacy”, in Journal of Theological Studies, 1960, vol. 11, pp. 25–51.
32. Wessel S. Leo the Great and the Spiritual Rebuilding of a Universal Rome, Leiden; Boston, 2008.
33. Winkelmann F. Die östlichen Kirchen in der Epoche der christologischen Auseinandersetzungen, Berlin, 1980.
34. Bolotov V. V. Lekcii po istorii Drevnej Cerkvi (Lectures for History of Ancient Church), Saint-Petersburg, 1918, vol. 4.
35. Gracianskij M. V. 2007 “«Pravoslavnaja partija» i prihod k vlasti imperatora Justina I (518–527 gg.)” (“Orthodox Party” and Coming to Power of Emperor Justin I (518–527)), in Vizantijskij vremennik, 2007, vol. 66, pp. 125–145.
36. Gracianskij M. V. 2000 “Akakianskaja shizma” (Acacian Schism), in Pravoslavnaja jenciklopedija, Moscow, 2000, vol. 1, p. 362.
37. Gracianskij M. V. 2014 “Vozniknovenie i razvitie koncepcii papskogo primata v I–V vv.” (Origin and Development of Pope Primate Concept in I–V Cent.), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija I: Bogoslovie. Filosofija, 2014, vol. 2/52, pp. 9–29.
38. Gracianskij M. V. 2015 “Prichiny i obstojatel'stva nachala «Akakianskoj» shizmy (484 g.)” (Reasons and Circumstances of Begin of “Acacian” Schism (484)), in Iresiona. Antichnyj mir i ego nasledie. Vyp. IV. Sb. nauch. trudov k 50-letiju professora N. N. Bolgova, Belgorod, 2015, pp. 188–200.
39. Maksimovich K. A. (ed.) Istorija Drevnej Cerkvi: Ucheb. posobie (History of Ancient Church: Textbook), Moscow, 2012, vol. 1: 33–843 gg.
40. Kulakovskij Ju. A. Istorija Vizantii (Byzantine History), Saint-Petersburg, 1996, vol. 1.
41. Maksimovich K. A. 2014 “Metarecenzija na: Zaharov G. E. Recenzija na monografiju: Demacopoulos G. E. The Invention of Peter: The Development and Reception of the Petrine Discourse at the Close of Christian Antiquity. Philadelphia, 2013” (Metareview on: Zaharov G. E. Review on Monography: Demacopoulos G. E. The Invention of Peter: The Development and Reception of the Petrine Discourse at the Close of Christian Antiquity. Philadelphia, 2013), in Vestnik PSTGU. Serija I: Bogoslovie. Filosofija, 2014, vol. 5/55, pp. 149–156.

Information about the author

Gratsianskiy Mikhail