Over the course of the past generation there has emerged a scholarly consensus stressing the role of Severus of Antioch in the formation of a non-Chalcedonian hierarchy independent of the imperial church. While some scholars have appreciated some of Severus’ initial hesitation about setting up a new hierarchy, there is general agreement that it was Severus who planted the seed that would sprout the mass ordinations of John of Tella and Jacob Baradaeus. The independent church that emerged by the second half of the sixth century should be called ‘the Severan Church’.
My paper reassesses this consensus. I show its dependence on the reports of John of Tella’s biographers, Elias and John of Ephesus, that Severus had endorsed John of Tella’s ordination campaign. Severus’ own writings, however, show no trace of this. On the contrary, Severus’ writings portray a dedication to the unified imperial ecclesiastical framework and to the canon law which governs it. John of Tella and Jacob Baradaeus’ campaigns broke with this framework and were in violation of canon law.
I argue that despite Severus’ intransigent doctrinal positions and despite the persecution he suffered as a result, various elements in his ecclesiology demonstrate his unwavering commitment to the traditional eastern, ‘Eusebian’ identification of church and empire. He opposed the rebaptism of Chalcedonians; he was lenient about the inclusion of Chalcedonians in the diptychs; and he remained loyal to the rule of the emperor, no matter what his doctrinal affiliation.
The reports of Severus’ alleged endorsement of John of Tella’s initiative should be read as a later generation’s attempt to grant Severus an active role in the inception of the independent church. I argue, on the contrary, that Severus continued to see himself as the true representative of the divinely sanctioned imperial church: it was the current emperor, not him, who needed to change.
No comments:
Post a Comment