V Ecumenical Council: Condemnation of Three Chapters, Origenism and Papism

Political and religious situation before the Council

The Fifth Ecumenical Council was initiated by Emperor Justinian the Great, who ruled the Eastern Roman Empire for 38 years (527–565) and under whom it acquired the characteristics known to us as the Byzantine Empire.

From the beginning of his reign, Justinian strove to establish the unity of the empire, which seemed to him impossible without religious unity. Monophysitism, anathematized at the Fourth Ecumenical Council in Chalcedon, was widespread in the vast outskirts of the empire—in Syria, Armenia, Cappadocia, Cilicia, Isauria, Egypt, Nubia, Cyprus, and some islands in the Aegean Sea.

Monophysitism was very close in spirit to Egyptian (and not only Egyptian) monasticism, which, in its severe asceticism, sometimes asserted the necessity of mortifying the flesh and all human manifestations as sinful. It was not easy for representatives of such mindsets to accept the statement of the Council of Chalcedon that our Lord Jesus Christ assumed human nature in all its fullness and was like us in every way except for sin.

Additionally, national movements in regions seeking to separate from the empire raised Monophysitism as a religion distinct from the imperial Orthodoxy. It was impossible to suppress Monophysitism by force, and there was no political will to do so. Therefore, Justinian faced a very difficult task: to somehow reconcile with the Monophysites without falling out with Rome, which firmly stood by Chalcedonian theology—a theology largely based on the letter of Pope Leo the Great.

Theodora, the wife and co-ruler of the emperor Justinian, who actively participated in the political and religious life of the empire and had a great influence on the events that took place, was very prone to Monophysitism.

Theodora was an intriguing figure. She was born around 500 AD was the daughter of a Constantinople circus attendant named Acacius. Her father died early, leaving a widow and three young daughters in poverty. According to Theodora's contemporary, the Byzantine historian Procopius of Caesarea, Theodora not only performed in circus shows from a young age but was also a highly sought-after courtesan, thanks to her good looks and wit. Among her clients were very high-ranking officials, one of whom, Hekebol, took her from Constantinople to North Africa when he received a high position there. However, Hekebol soon cast Theodora aside, and she returned to her old trade.

While living in Alexandria, she met Patriarch Timothy IV of Alexandria and Egyptian ascetics, which radically changed her life. Theodora repented of her sins and began to earn her living by spinning yarn. Alongside this, she developed a sympathy for Monophysitism, which was widespread in Egypt.

Returning to Constantinople, she met the military leader Justinian, the future emperor, and became his wife. According to one version, Justinian saw her by chance in a window and was captivated by her beauty. Regardless of the details, once she became empress, Theodora began to support and patronize the Monophysites.

It is also important to note another significant and delicate point. The two heresies, Nestorianism and Monophysitism, condemned respectively at the Third and Fourth Ecumenical Councils, continued to disturb the Church. They represent two extreme viewpoints on the same issue: the union of the Divine and human natures in Christ. In theological disputes, participants were not always entirely honest: any criticism of Monophysitism by its supporters was presented as a revival of Nestorianism, and criticism of Nestorianism as an evasion towards Monophysitism.

Reasons for convening the Council

In the theological disputes of the 6th century, the so-called issue of the Three Chapters arose, concerning three famous 5th-century theologians: Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret of Cyrus, and Ibas of Edessa. The Monophysites justifiably found signs of Nestorianism in their writings and blamed the Council of Chalcedon for not condemning them. They demanded the condemnation of the "Three Chapters", despite the fact that these theologians had long since passed away and, consequently, could not clarify or defend their viewpoints in a judicial inquiry.

Justinian found the Monophysites' arguments valid and issued an Edict around 544 AD, condemning Theodore of Mopsuestia (both him and his works), some writings of Theodoret of Cyrus (specifically those criticizing Saint Cyril of Alexandria), and a letter from Ibas of Edessa to Maris the Persian, in which Ibas praised Theodore of Mopsuestia and opponents of Saint Cyril of Alexandria.

Despite the Edict's declaration of anathema against anyone claiming it was intended to overturn the decisions of the Council of Chalcedon, many hierarchs, primarily in the West, perceived it exactly this way. The Eastern patriarchs and bishops signed the Edict, albeit with some hesitation.

Pope Vigilius of Rome found himself caught between two fires: Western bishops pressured him not to sign the Edict, while Emperor Justinian, who had lobbied for Vigilius's election to the Roman See, pushed for its acceptance.

In 546 AD, Justinian summoned Pope Vigilius to Constantinople, where he stayed for more than seven years. While en route to Constantinople, Vigilius wrote to both Justinian and Patriarch Menas of Constantinople, expressing his disagreement with the condemnation of the Three Chapters. Upon arriving in the capital, he even excommunicated Patriarch Menas for signing the Edict. However, after resisting the emperor's will for several years, the Pope, in 548 AD, issued a document called the Judicatum, agreeing to the condemnation of the Three Chapters. Thus, a consensus was reached among all five patriarchates, which had already been established by that time.

Nevertheless, the Western Church sharply opposed Vigilius's decision. African bishops convened a council chaired by Reparatus, Bishop of Carthage, where they excommunicated Pope Vigilius, provoking a schism that lasted for 150 years.

Under the influence of Western bishops, the Pope again changed his mind and withdrew the Judicatum. Additionally, in 548, Empress Theodora, who had been a powerful patron of the Monophysites, passed away. This intensified the protests against the Edict in the West.

In June 551, Justinian issued another Edict, a large treatise titled "Confession of the True Faith". In it, the emperor elaborately explained the heretical nature of the "Three Chapters." This Edict led to even greater conflict between Justinian and Vigilius, reaching the point where the Pope decided to flee his de facto captivity in Constantinople.

Justinian was forced to back down, and Pope Vigilius returned. Under these circumstances, Justinian decided to convene an Ecumenical Council, hoping to use its authority to finally secure the condemnation of the Three Chapters.

Pope Vigilius was proposed to preside over the forthcoming Council, to which he readily agreed, provided that the Council would be conducted with "observance of the law" (servata aequitate) of the Western Church.

However, it soon became clear that Justinian and Pope Vigilius had entirely different understandings of servata aequitate. Justinian intended that each of the five patriarchates would have an equal number of bishops participating in the Council, while the Pope expected an equal number of hierarchs from the Western and Eastern Churches. In fact, only 25 Western bishops arrived in Constantinople, compared to 140 Eastern bishops.

It should also be noted that parallel to the Christological disputes were debates concerning the teachings of Origen. However, these were somewhat overshadowed by the former and were not discussed as loudly and actively. Origen was a renowned Christian philosopher of the 2nd–3rd centuries who first systematically articulated Christian ideas in a philosophical context and had a significant influence on many Church Fathers, including Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa, Basil the Great and others. At the same time, Origen expressed many ideas incompatible with Christianity, such as the pre-existence of souls and universal restoration (apocatastasis), among others.

Proceedings

The Fifth Ecumenical Council opened in Constantinople on 5 May 553. Its sessions were held in a hall connecting the Hagia Sophia with the patriarchal chambers. The Council was presided over by Patriarch Eutychius of Constantinople. The Pope refused to participate in the Council. Emperor Justinian also did not personally attend the Council but periodically sent his envoys.

At the first session, Justinian's Forma was read, in which the emperor spoke about the need to restore the authority of the Council of Chalcedon and the condemnation of the Three Chapters. He stated that the Nestorians, referring to the fact that the teachings of the Three Chapters by Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret of Cyrus and Ibas of Edessa had not been condemned by the Church in a council, were attempting to impose their heretical doctrine on the Church. The emperor also referred to Pope Vigilius's Judicatum and several other documents and letters to various individuals in which Vigilius condemned the Three Chapters.

Justinian reported that, contrary to his initial agreement to participate in the Council, the Pope now refused to do so and put forward unacceptable conditions.

Justinian also declared that he preserved and accepted all four previous Ecumenical Councils, followed the faith of the great Fathers of the Church, and asked that the issue of the Three Chapters be considered in the absence of Pope Vigilius.

The Council sent a delegation of 20 bishops to the Pope, asking him to come to the Council. The Pope refused, claiming illness. He then complained that there were not enough Western bishops at the Council, to which he was told that at previous Ecumenical Councils the West had been represented only by papal legates, and not always. After the visit of the second delegation, which included secular dignitaries, Pope Vigilius asked for 20 days, during which he would formulate his attitude to the Three Chapters.

Very important from the point of view of determining the sources of the Church's teaching was the 3rd session of the Council on 9 May (according to other sources – on 12 May). Before beginning to discuss the question of the Three Chapters, the fathers of the Council declared that they would adhere to the decisions of the four previous Ecumenical Councils and to the teachings of the holy Fathers, and they listed them by name: St Athanasius the Great, St Basil the Great, St Gregory the Theologian, St Gregory of Nyssa, St Ambrose of Milan, St John Chrysostom, St Cyril of Alexandria, St Proclus of Constantinople, Pope Leo the Great, St Augustine, Bishop Hilary of Poitiers and Archbishop Theophilus of Alexandria.

That is, in essence, the Fathers of the Council affirmed the authority of Sacred Tradition.

During the next few sessions, the Council Fathers considered the works by Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret of Cyrus and Ibas of Edessa and also discussed the question: can hierarchs be excommunicated after their death?

At the penultimate session on 26 May 553, Justinian's envoy presented the Council with additional documents demonstrating Pope Vigilius's agreement to condemn the Three Chapters. He proposed that the Pope's name be removed from the diptychs on the grounds that he had changed his position and was actually defending the teachings of the Three Chapters.

On 2 June, at the final, eighth session, the Council condemned all the writings of the Three Chapters presented by the emperor for discussion: those of Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret of Cyrus, and Ibas of Edessa. Regarding personal condemnation, only Theodore of Mopsuestia was anathematized, as it was proven that he did not repent of his errors until his death. In contrast, Theodoret of Cyrus and Ibas of Edessa had distanced themselves from Nestorianism during their lifetimes and had managed to explain their theological formulations in an orthodox manner.

Anathematisms of the Council

The Council adopted 12 anathematisms, largely reiterating what Emperor Justinian had proposed. These not only condemned the Three Chapters, specifying what exactly in their works was condemned but also meticulously expressed the Orthodox teaching on the Holy Trinity and Christ, guarding it against both Nestorian and Monophysite interpretations (with a stronger emphasis on the former).

For example, Anathematism 5: "If anyone understands the expression one only Person of our Lord Jesus Christ in this sense, that it is the union of many hypostases, and if he attempts thus to introduce into the mystery of Christ two hypostases, or two Persons, and, after having introduced two persons, speaks of one Person only out of dignity, honour or worship, as both Theodorus and Nestorius insanely have written; <…> let him be anathema. For since one of the Holy Trinity has been made man, viz.: God the Word, the Holy Trinity has not been increased by the addition of another person or hypostasis," this is against Nestorianism.

Anathematism 8: "If anyone uses the expression of two natures, confessing that a union was made of the Godhead and of the humanity, or the expression the one nature made flesh of God the Word, and shall not so understand those expressions as the holy Fathers have taught, to wit: that of the divine and human nature there was made an hypostatic union, whereof is one Christ; but from these expressions shall try to introduce one nature or substance [made by a mixture] of the Godhead and manhood of Christ; let him be anathema," this is against Monophysitism.

Regarding Origenism, Anathema 11 is particularly noteworthy: "If anyone does not anathematize Arius, Eunomius, Macedonius, Apollinaris, Nestorius, Eutyches and Origen, as well as their impious writings, as also all other heretics already condemned and anathematized by the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, and by the aforesaid four Holy Synods and [if anyone does not equally anathematize] all those who have held and hold or who in their impiety persist in holding to the end the same opinion as those heretics just mentioned: let him be anathema."

Thus, the Council mentions Origen among the heretics condemned by the four previous Ecumenical Councils.

However, Origen's teachings were not only not condemned at these Councils but were not even considered, although they were criticized during his lifetime.

By the end of the 3rd century, a situation had arisen where various heretical theologians began using Origen's rich philosophical legacy to justify their concepts, which in their development clearly contradicted the Church's teachings. Thus, the question of the Church's stance on Origenism had become pressing. There are also differing opinions regarding the origin of the anathemas against Origen's teachings. Some historians assert that they were adopted by the Fifth Ecumenical Council, while others believe they originated earlier.

Be that as it may, it is commonly accepted that the Fifth Ecumenical Council condemned Origen's teachings, particularly those on the preexistence of souls and universal restoration: "If anyone asserts the fabulous pre-existence of souls, and shall assert the monstrous restoration which follows from it: let him be anathema."

This teaching of apocatastasis suggests not only universal forgiveness at the Last Judgment for sinners (i.e., people) but also for the devil and demons. Despite the Lord saying the opposite in the Gospel: "And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life" (Matthew 25:46), the doctrine of apocatastasis was shared to some extent by many Church Fathers, such as Gregory of Nyssa, Isaac the Syrian and others. However, they were not anathematized for this by either the Fifth Ecumenical Council or subsequent ones.

After the Council

The Council was almost immediately recognized in the East. Only some supporters of the Three Chapters faced repression. However, the reconciliation with the Monophysites which Emperor Justinian had so hoped for did not occur. They remained completely indifferent to the Council, believing it did not concern them. Nevertheless, certain changes did take place.

After the Fifth Ecumenical Council, Monophysitism practically disappeared from Greek theological circles, remaining confined to the empire's national peripheries, albeit quite numerous.

The Fifth Ecumenical Council is very illustrative in light of Catholicism's claims that the Pope has always been recognized as the supreme authority in resolving various ecclesiastical issues. The fact that Pope Vigilius changed his position on the Three Chapters several times (four, to be precise), each time expressing it in an ex cathedra form, eloquently demonstrates the inaccuracy of the claim of papal infallibility in doctrinal matters. Additionally, the fact that the Pope was excommunicated for his position by both the Fifth Ecumenical Council and earlier by the African bishops' council clearly indicates that popes are also accountable to councils, just like any other bishops.

As for the acceptance of the Fifth Ecumenical Council in the West, it proceeded with much difficulty and pain. Pope Vigilius eventually accepted the Council's decrees and was released to return to Rome, but he died on the way in Syracuse on 7 June 555. Many Western bishops saw the Fifth Council as a veiled departure from the Council of Chalcedon and refused to accept either it or the popes, Vigilius's successors, who accepted this Council. These divisions in the West only fully ceased in 700.

Significance of the Fifth Ecumenical Council

As already mentioned, the Council did not address any new theological issues or introduce any new doctrinal definitions. The condemnation of the Three Chapters only more clearly outlined the Orthodox doctrine and separated it from both Nestorianism and Monophysitism. The significance of the Council and its impact on theology and the further life of the Church can be seen in two points.

First, it affirmed that it is the Council, not the pope or any other bishop, is the one through which God reveals true teaching on various issues. More precisely, not even a specific Council, even if it has the external signs of being Ecumenical, but rather the fullness of the Church, both contemporary and of past ages. This is what the Council's assertion about being guided by the decisions of previous Ecumenical Councils and the Holy Fathers means. The pope is not infallible; he is subject to and accountable to the Council.

This was well articulated by the Patriarch of Constantinople Gennadios II Scholarios —the first patriarch after the Turkish conquest of Byzantium in 1453: "Christ truly founds the Church on Peter, but the invincibility against the gates of hell—ungodliness and heresies—He grants to the Church, not to Peter. Therefore, we limit the impossibility of error, as an exclusive gift, to the Councils alone, and only those representing the whole Church. For we, convinced by many arguments and examples, assert that only the Church stands and will stand above all falsehood, and that the Holy Spirit led all their decisions in the Councils, and absolutely nothing was done by human will. The only thing that depended on it was to desire the truth and to come together in pursuance of that desire."

Secondly, it rejected the doctrine of apocatastasis. Indeed, it is probably impossible for our sinful and limited minds to simultaneously embrace both faith in God's boundless mercy and the affirmation of eternal hellish torments. Not only the ancient Church Fathers but also many modern church writers express ideas about the eventual end of sufferings. However, the words "Then they will go away to eternal punishment..." (Matt. 25:46) from the Gospel cannot be erased.

Today, the ideas of apoсatastasis are asserted not so much in theological treatises as in the general narrative that all sins and errors are covered by some kind of "love", implying that no matter how one sins, what one believes in or which religious organization one belongs to, God loves everyone and won't send anyone to hell. This quite popular opinion today stems from the idea of apoсatastasis, that eventually, everyone will be in heaven.

The Fifth Ecumenical Council asserts a different understanding, which can be expressed by the Gospel words: "Enter through the narrow gate, for wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it" (Matt. 7:13,14).

In light of the current situation of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, these words gain special significance.