The Epiclesis Debate at the Council of Florence

Christiaan Kappes

Description

The Epiclesis Debate at the Council of Florence is the first in-depth investigation into both the Greek and the Latin sides of the debate about the moment of Eucharistic transubstantiation at the Council of Florence. Christiaan Kappes examines the life and times of the central figures of the debate, Mark Eugenicus and John Torquemada, and assesses their doctrinal authority. Kappes presents a patristic and Scholastic analysis of Torquemada’s Florentine writings, revealing heretofore-unknown features of the debate and the full background to its treatises. The most important feature of the investigation involves Eugenicus. Kappes investigates his theological method and sources for the first time to give an accurate appraisal of the strength of Mark’s theological positions in the context of his own time and contemporary methods. The investigation into both traditions allows for an informed evaluation of more recent developments in the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church in light of these historical sources. Kappes provides a historically contextual and contemporary proposal for solutions to the former impasse in light of the principles rediscovered within Eugenicus’s works. This monograph speaks to contemporary theological debates surrounding transubstantiation and related theological matters, and provides a historical framework to understand these debates.

The Epiclesis Debate at the Council of Florence will interest specialists in theology, especially those with a background in and familiarity with the council and related historical themes, and is essential for any ecumenical library.

Salient aspects of Mark’s youth may convince us that he was disposed toward ecclesiastical union and Latin theology before he arrived upon the shores of Italy. Mark was educated in an extremely pious family. Evidence for polemics is entirely absent from Eugenicus’s family’s preconciliar literary production. Mark’s family tree attests to three generations of religiosity. First and foremost, his grandfather Manuel Eugenicus (fl. 1384–92) made a name for himself as an iconographer. His notoriety was such that he was commissioned to paint in Iberia (present-day Calendzhiha, Georgia). Thereat, he was hired to decorate the Church of St George in that ancient cradle of Christianity. Unlike Mark’s father and brother, his grandfather did not prove to be well-educated. This is evidenced by the fact that Eugenicus has been found to make notable orthographic errors among his iconographic productions. Mark’s biological father George evinced his family’s religious piety by composing ecclesiastical offices and dedicated himself to the education and formation of youth as an abecedarian. Mark’s own education was anything but narrow, for he studied under the most lettered minds of his age. Initially, Mark was placed under the yoke of John Chortasmenos (c. 1370–c. 1437), who was a logician and patriarchal notary. Thenceforth, Mark undertook a liberal education from the famed humanist, George Gemistos Plethon (c. 1355–1452/4). Plethon taught him to read Homer, Plato, and other authors of antiquity. Thenceforward, after his father’s untimely death, Mark took up the reigns of his father’s school in 1410. At some later point in Mark’s formation, he likely had theological exchanges with one of our aforementioned theologians, whom he designated as a “champion of Orthodoxy”; namely, Makarios Makres. Again, Makres was a preliminary negotiator for the upcoming council. In his own works, Makres had traced out a philo-Latin course whereby he positively (if latently) employed wholesale passages of Demetrius Cydones’ translation of Thomas Aquinas into his own theology. Unprejudicially, Mark praised Makres for his genuine Orthodoxy and excellence. A talented philologist in his own right, Mark would have effortlessly uncovered latent passages of Aquinas in the works of yet another eminent figure, whom he also admired, namely, Joseph Bryennius (c. 1350–c. 1431). Though never an understudy of Bryennius (who was in Cyprus during the years of 1402 to 1412), Mark and Bryennius collaborated in theology. Bryennius likely gave Mark an initial flare for anti-Thomistic apologetics. Though chronological precision is wanting, Mark’s quasi-tutelage under Bryennius predates his formal study (1437) of Neilus Cabasilas. In his preconciliar, preparatory period Mark did his research under the aegis of Emperor John VIII. Within the tomes of Makres and Bryennius, Mark’s acute intellect had long accustomed itself to read Scholastic parentheses, which typically departed from classical vocabulary and syntax. Though precise dates are wanting for his studies with Makarios and Bryennius, Mark only took up theological studies after leaving the eremitical state on the isle of Antigone in the Sea of Marmara (c. 1420–22). Thereafter, upon his transfer to the Monastery of Mangana in Constantinople (1422), he took formal monastic vows and incessantly researched within the monastery’s vast library. Notably, Mark’s first period of literary production can be controversially categorized as totally irenic (c. 1426–31), that is, prior to formal negotiations for the Council of Ferrara-Florence under the auspices of Pope Eugene IV (fl. 1431–39). Mark’s only hint of interest in theological controversies at that time stems from a congratulatory letter to Patriarch Joseph II (1422). Similar to his model Makres, Mark simply professed his faithful adherence to the long-standing Greek opposition to innovations to the creed with respect to the filioque. As Makres’s opposition to the filioque had not inhibited him from negotiating with Latins for a new ecumenical council, neither did Eugenicus assume the posture of an anti-unionist for encouraging his patriarch to press for the traditional Byzantine position. In effect, this epistle is the only piece of preconciliar literature that hints at Mark’s distraction from his hesychastic bliss from about the time of his move to Constantinople (1422) until his encounter with Dominican anti-Palamite apologetics (1430s). In his second (apologetic) period, after profound study (c. 1427) of the works of Gregory Palamas, Mark likely came upon contemporary anti-Palamitical literature, which inspired Eugenicus’s own apologetic works in the 1430s. Mark focused his energies on Manuel Calecas. Because of Mark’s acquaintance with Bryennius, who was long familiar with Demetrius Cydones and Manuel Calecas, Mark probably came to know anti-Palamite theology. In short, Mark’s early biography only gives the impression that he was a well-educated, well-rounded scholar, who embraced a peaceful monastic life until the time at which he came across Calecas’s polemical works. Since no one had adequately refuted the latinophrôn Thomist-become-Dominican, Mark obliged himself to respond.

Acknowledgments

Abbreviations

Introduction

1. The Historical Origins and Theological Significance of the Florentine Debate on the Epiclesis

2. The Life and Times of Mark of Ephesus
3. The Status Questionis of Mark’s Theology and Works, and Preliminary Debate at Florence
4. John Torquemada and His Cedula as Gleaned from the Sermo prior and Sermo alter
5. Mark of Ephesus’s Libellus as Refutation of the Cedula and Sermo prior
6. Torquemada’s Sermo alter and Reunion: A Refutation of the Libellus
7. Scholarius and Solutions to the Impasse
8. Greek Solutions for Contemporary Problems
9. Toward Greco-Roman Ecclesial Reunion

Appendix I

Appendix II

Appendix III

Selected Bibliography

Sujets

• Religion
• Christianisme
• Christian Theology
• HISTORY
• Philosophie et théologie
• Byzantine Empire
• Orthodox
• Christianity

Informations

• Publié par: University of Notre Dame Press
• Date de parution: 31 octobre 2019
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9780268106393
• Langue: English

Extrait

The Epiclesis Debate at the Council of Florence
CHRISTIAAN KAPPES
The Epiclesis Debate at the Council of Florence
UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME PRESS NOTRE DAME, INDIANA
University of Notre Dame Press Notre Dame, Indiana 46556 undpress.nd.edu
Copyright © 2019 by the University of Notre Dame
All Rights Reserved
Published in the United States of America
Library of Congress Control Number: 2019948595 ISBN: 978-0-268-10637-9 (hardback) ISBN: 978-0-268-10640-9 (WebPDF) ISBN: 978-0-268-10639-3 (Epub)
This e-Book was converted from the original source file by a third-party vendor. Readers who notice any formatting, textual, or readability issues are encouraged to contact the publisher at [e-mail] .
To Elgan Baker,
for his friendship and support
CONTENTS
Acknowledgments
A Note on Translations
Abbreviations
Introduction
ONE The Historical Origins and Theological Significance of the Florentine Debate on the Epiclesis
TWO The Life and Times of Mark of Ephesus
THREE The Status quaestionis of Mark’s Theology and Works, and Preliminary Debate at Florence
FOUR John Torquemada and His Cedula as Gleaned from the Sermo prior and Sermo alter
FIVE Mark of Ephesus’s Libellus as Refutation of the Cedula and Sermo prior
SIX Torquemada’s Sermo alter and Reunion: A Refutation of the Libellus
SEVEN Scholarius and Solutions to the Impasse
EIGHT Greek Solutions for Contemporary Problems
NINE Toward Greco-Roman Ecclesial Reunion
Appendix I: Sermo prior of John Torquemada: On the Matter and Form of the Most Holy Eucharist
Appendix II: The Libellus of Mark of Ephesus on the Eucharistic Consecration
Appendix III: Sermo alter of John Torquemada: On the Matter and Form of the Most Holy Eucharist
Notes
Selected Bibliography
Index
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am naturally indebted to a number of persons for inspiring, aiding, and correcting this monograph in preparation for publication. First of all, the genesis of my idea to write on the epiclesis controversy was occasioned by a discussion and invitation to present my findings from two doctoral students, Charles Yost and Nicholas Kamas (both at the University of Notre Dame), who organized a session at the 49th Congress of Medieval Studies at Kalamazoo, Michigan (2014). The special session was entitled “Eucharistic Controversies: Byzantine East and Latin West.” In the course of my research, I also had the privilege of using Notre Dame’s Hesburgh Libraries. Therein, I became indebted to Julia Schneider (Notre Dame), who placed at my disposal the university’s impressive resources to help me to complete my research.
Next, I am also grateful to Sandra Collins of the Byzantine Catholic Seminary of Saints Cyril and Methodius in Pittsburgh for helping me to obtain necessary sources, and for giving me professional advice contributing to the completion of my research. Next, I am grateful to Cardinal Archbishop Joseph Tobin, CSsR, of Indianapolis, and Archbishop William Skurla of Pittsburgh, who generously gave me their blessings to teach and research at Saints Cyril and Methodius. Naturally, my professorship and deanship at the graduate theological school of Saints Cyril and Methodius have provided me with the ideal environment to undertake the necessary research for successful completion of this project.
I would like to thank Christopher Schabel of Cyprus for his generosity in providing me with some of his most recent research that contributed to my study. In the same vein, I am grateful to Christian Chivu and the Gândul Aprins Foundation in Rumania for generously supplying me with their multivolume edition containing Mark of Ephesus’s works in Greek and Rumanian. I warmly thank John Monfasani (SUNY) for his advice on questions concerning Bessarion of Nicaea. I greatly appreciate the willingness of Thomas Izbicki (Rutgers) to make especially helpful suggestions with respect to my treatment of Torquemada. In the same vein, I am indebted to Marie-Hélène Blanchet (CHCB, Paris) for her invaluable corrections with respect to Mark of Ephesus and Gennadius Scholarius. I am indebted to John Demetracopoulos (Patras, GR) for his suggested corrections to my translations from Greek. I likewise am grateful to Peter Simpson (CUNY) for checking and correcting my Greek translation of Byzantine liturgical texts. I express my appreciation for the valuable counsel from, now deceased, Rev. Dr. Peter Damian Fehlner (emeritus at the Seraphicum) on Duns Scotus, and Jared Goff (Mt. Angel) on Bonaventure of Bagnoregio. I am particularly beholden to and Stephen and Carol Kappes, who greatly assisted me in editing and formatting this text for publication. Lastly, I wish to thank Rebecca Willen for her diligence in indexing this volume.
A NOTE ON TRANSLATIONS
All translations are my own unless citing a translated text, in which I may have made my own modifications. The use of underline is meant to highlight textual similarity between two sources. The use of bold signifies my emphasis on a single case of parity between two ancient texts. In general, all italics as emphasis are my own in quoted/translated material. All references to appendix I, II, or III are to those at the end of this book.
ABBREVIATIONS
AC
Constitutiones Apostolorum , in Prex Euch. , 82–95
Acta Graeca
Theodore Xanthopoulos, Dorotheus of Myteline, et al., Quae supersunt Actorum Graecorum Concilii Florentini , CFDS Series B, vol. 5, bks. 1 and 2, ed. Joseph Gill (Rome: PIOS, 1953)
Acta Latina
Andrea Sanctacroce, Acta Latina Concilii Florentini , CFDS Series B, vol. 6, ed. Georg Hofmann (Rome: PIOS, 1955)
Acta Slavica
Anonymous and Symeon Suzdalensis, Acta Slavica Concilii Florentini : Narrationes et documenta , CFDS Series B, vol. 11, ed. J. Krajcar (Rome: PIOS, 1976)
Addai
C. Giraudo, ed., The Anaphoral Genesis of the Institution Narrative in Light of the Anaphora of Addai and Mari: Acts of the International Liturgy Congress, Rome, 25–26 October 2011 , Orientalia Christiana Analecta 295 (Rome: Edizioni Orientalia Christiana, 2013)
Antirrhetic 1
Mark Eugenicus, First Antirrhetic on the Distinction between Essence and Energy: First Antirrhetic against Manuel Kalekas , in Εὑρισκόμενα, 2:54–277 [= Pilavakis]
Antirrhetic 2
Mark Eugenicus, Second Antirrhetic against Manuel Kalekas , in Εὑρισκόμενα, 2:278–455
Antirrhetic 3
John Eugenicus, Antirrhetic of the Decree of the Council of Ferrara-Florence , ed. E. Rossidou-Koutsou (Nicosia: Research Centre of Kykkos Monastery, 2006)
Apophth.
J.-C. Guy, ed., Les Apophthegmes des Pères , 3 vols., Sources chrétiennes 387, 474, 498 (Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1993–2005)
Apparatus
John Torquemada, Apparatus super decretum Florentinum unionis Graecorum , ed. Georg Hofmann and Manuel Candal, CFDS Series B (Rome: PIOS, 1942)
Aristotle
Aristotle, Aristotelis graece ex recensione Immanuelis Bekkeri , 5 vols., ed. I. Bekker (Berlin: Academia Regia Borussica, 1831–36)
BAC
Biblioteca Autores Cristianos
Barb.336
Stefano Parenti and E. Velkovska, eds., L’Eucologio Barberini gr. 336: Seconda edizione riveduta , Bibliotheca Ephemerides Liturgicae Subsidia 80 (Rome: Edizioni Liturgiche, 2000)
BAS
Anaphora Basilii Caesariensis secundum codicem Barberini gr. 336 , in Prex Euch. , 230–43
BAV
Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana
Benziger
Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica , 3 vols. (New York: Benziger, 1947–48)
Brightman
C. E. Hammond and F. E. Brightman, eds., Liturgies, Eastern and Western, Being the Texts Original or Translated of the Principal Liturgies of the Church: Eastern Liturgies Volume , vol. 1 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1896) [= BAS + CHR anaphoras + ordo missae ]
BTPB
Antonio Rigo, ed., Byzantine Theology and Its Philosophical Background , Studies in Byzantine History and Civilization 4 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2011), 160–86
B. Ward
B. Ward, trans. and ed., The Sayings of the Fathers of the Desert , Cistercian Studies Series 59 (Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1984)
CCC
Catechism of the Catholic Church: Modifications from the “Editio Typica” (New York: Doubleday, 1997)
CFDS
Georg Hoffman, Manuel Candal, et al., eds., Concilium Florentinum Documenta et Scriptores , Series A–B, by Mark Eugenicus, John Torquemada, et al. (Rome: PIOS, 1940–77)
CHR
Anaphora Ioannis Chrysostomi secundum codicem Barberini gr. 336 , in Prex Euch. , 223–29
Commentary
Nicholas Cabasilas, The Commentary on the Divine Liturgy , trans. and ed. J. M. Hussey and P. A. McNulty (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1998) [= SC 4b]
Commentum
Bonaventure of Bagnoregio, Doctoris Seraphici S. Bonaventurae S.R.E. Episcopi Cardinalis opera omnia Commentaria in 4 Libros Sententiarum , vol. 4 (Quaracchi: College of St. Bonaventure, 1884)
Conférence
Paul Kristeller, ed., Conférence Albert-Le-Grand 1965 (Montreal: J. Vrin, 1967)
CU
Giuseppe Alberigo, ed., Christian Unity: The Council of Ferrara-Florence 1438/39–1989 , Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 97 (Louvain: Leuven University Press, 1991)
Denys
Ps.-Dionysius Areopagite, De Ecclesiastica Hierarchia , in Corpus Dionysiacum 2, Patristische Texte und Studien 36, ed. G. Heilt and A. Ritter (New York: De Gruyter, 1991), 61–132 [= Ps.-Dionysius, On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy , in Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works , ed. P. Rorem, trans. C. Luibheid (New York: Paulist Press, 1987), 193–260]
De sacramentis/ De mysteriis
Ambrose of Milan, De Sacrements, De Mystères , Sources chrétiennes 24, ed. B. Botte (Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1949)
De Spiritu Sancto
Ambrose of Milan, Lo spiritu santo: In tre libri , in Sancti Ambrosii episcopi Mediolanensis opera 16, ed. O. Faller and Claudio Moreschini (Rome: Città Nuova Editrice, 1974)
De Trinitate
Augustine of Hippo, Αυγουστίνου περὶ Τριάδος βιβλία πεντεκαίδεκα , ἅπερ ἐκ τῆς Λατίνων διαλέκτου εἰς τὴν Ἑλλάδα μετήνεγκε , 2 vols., Ἀκαδημία Ἀθηνῶν Βιβλιοθήκη Α. Μανούση 3, ed. M. Papathomopoulos, I. Tsavari, and Gianpaolo Rigotti, trans. Maximus Planoudês (At