« PrethodnaNastavi »
a serious ecclesiastical controversy. If Ignatius had behaved with discretion and reconciled himself to a régime which personally he disliked, it is not probable that the sympathies of Bardas with the Photian party would have induced him to take any measure against the Patriarch.
Ignatius found in the private morals of the powerful minister a weak spot for attack. According to the rumour of the town, Barờas was in love with his daughter-in-law, and had for her sake abandoned his wife. Acting on this gossip, the Patriarch admonished Bardas, who declined to take any notice of his rebukes and exhortations." We may suspect that he refused to admit that the accusation was true-it would perhaps have been difficult to prove—and recommended Ignatius to mind his own business. But Ignatius was deterinined to show that he was the shepherd of his flock, and that he was no respecter of persons.
On the feast of Epiphany (Jan, A.D. 858) he refused the communion to the sinner. It is said that Bardas, furious at this public insult, drew his sword; but he managed to control his anger and vowed vengeance on the bold priest.
The ecclesiastical historians speak with warm approbation of this action of the Patriarch. The same prelate, who adopted such a strong measure to punish the vices of Bardas, had no scruples, afterwards, in communicating with the
, Emperor Basil, who had ascended to power by two successive murders. And the ecclesiastical historians seem to regard the Patriarch's action, in ignoring Basil's crimes and virtually taking advantage of them to reascend the Patriarchal throne, ils perfectly irreproachable. The historian who is not an ecclesiastic may be allowed to express his respectful interest in the ethical standards which are implied.
About eight months later the Emperor Michael decided to tonsure his mother and sisters and immure them in the monastery of Karianos. He requested the Patriarch to perform the ceremony of the tonsure, and we have already seen that Ignatius refused on the ground that the ladies themselves were unwilling. Bardas persuaded the Emperor that his disobedience, in conjunction with his unconcealed sympathy with the Empress, was a sign of treasonable purposes, and a pretended discovery was made that he was in collusion with an epileptic impostor, named Gebeon, who professed to be the son of the Empress Theodora by a former marriage. Gebeon had come from Dyrrhachium to Constantinople, where he seduced some foolish. people; he was arrested and cruelly executed in one of the Prince's Islands." On the same day the Patriarch was seized as an accomplice, and removed, without a trial, to the island of Terebinthos (Nov. 23).
Simeon (Cont. Georg.) 826 ; Anas. ohuny (Xoeir. Cp. Lebedev, Istoriia, tasius, Prarf.; Gen. 99; Vita Ign. 23.24.
3. The expressions which Hergen? Libellus Ignatii, 290 ; Vita Igr., ib. röther (369) applies to Bardas “ ein ως ανά πάσαν την πόλιν περιβομβηθήναι" wolliistiger Hölling," "der miichtige και ουκ άχρι των πολλών μόνον αλλά και Wüstling," aro extraordinarily in.
" μέχρις αυτού του αρχιερέως την πονηράν felicitous.
It is evident that there were no proofs against Ignatius, and that the charge of treason was merely a device of the government for the immediate purpose of removing him. For in the subsequent transactions this charge seems to have been silently dropped; and if there had been any plausible grounds, there would have been some sort of formal trial. Moreover, it would appear that before his arrest it was intimated to the Patriarch that he could avoid all trouble by abdication, and he would have been tempted to yield if his bishops had not assured him that they would loyally stand by him. Before his arrest he issued a solemn injunction that no service should be performed in St. Sophia without his consent. A modern ecclesiastical historian, who has no high opinion of Ignatius, cites this action as a proof that he was ready to prefer his own personal interests to the good of the Church,
In the place of his banishment Ignatius was visited repeatedly by bishops and Imperial ministers pressing on him the expediency of voluntary abdication. As he refused to listen to arguments, threats were tried, but with no result.“ The Emperor and Bardas therefore decided to procure the election of a new Patriarch, though the chair was not de iure
· Libellus Ignatii, 296. Anastasius 9 Vila Ign., ib. Bardas called (Praef. 2) and the Vila Ign. (224) add Ignatius "Gebobasileutos." that he alleged the oath which he had * De Stauropatis, 441. tukon, at his elovation, that ho would • Anastasius, Praef., ib. nover engage in a plot against Michael " Lebedev, op. cit. 26. and Theodora (της βασιλείας υμών). • Vila Iyn. 226. Physical violence Such an oath was apparently required was not employed at this stage (as the
Patriarch (secundum narrative in tlie Vita shows); Hergen. morem, Anastas. ).
rüthor is wrong here (973-374).
vacant, inasmuch as Ignatius had neither resigned nor boen canonically deposed. Such a procedure was not an innovation; there were several procedents. The choice of the government and the ecclesiastical party which was opposed to Ignatius fell upon Photius. He was not only a grata persona at Court; but his extraordinary gifts, his eminent reputation, along with his unimpeachable orthodoxy, were calculated to shed prestige on the Patriarchal chair, and to reconcile the public to a policy which seemed open to the reproaches of violence and injustice. Many of the bishops who had vowed to support the cause of Ignatius were won over by Bardas, and Photius accepted the high office, which, according to his enemies, had long been the goal of his ambition, and which, according to his own avowal, he would have been only too glad to decline. He was tonsured on December 20; on the
? four following days he was successively ordained lector, subdeacon, deacon, and priest, and on Christmas Day consecrated bishop, by his friend Gregory Asbestas. For this rapid and irregular elevation to the highest dignity of the Church, which was one of the principal objections urged against Photius, the recent precedents of his uncle Tarasius and Nicephorus, as well as others, could be alleged. The ambiguous position of Gregory, who had been deposed by a synod and suspended by a Pope, furnished another handlo agninst the New Patriarch. But all the bishops who were present in Constantinople, except five, acknowledged him," and the five dissentients were persuaded to acquiesce when he gave them a written undertaking that he would honour Ignatius as a father ind act according to his wishes. But two inonths later
E.y. Arsacius, Atticus, Macedonius Metrophanes (loc. cit.), who was one of II., etc. Cp. llergenrüther, i. 377. the five, says!: “When we saw that the
2 Ho dwells on his reluctance to mass of the bishops had been seduced accept the post in some of his letters ; we thought it right to acknowledge cp. Ep. 159 au Bardam.
himn in writing (8L) 18toxel pou ouodoylas) 3 l'ila Ign. 232.
as a son of our Church and in com. From Metrophanes, Ep. 416, it munion with its High Priest (Ignatius), would appear that the formality of in order that even here we might not election by the bishops was not ob. be found in disagreement with his will ; served ; that, after the consecration of for he (Ignatius) had directed us to Photius, the bishops met and nomi. elect a Patriarch from our Church in nated three candidates, of whom Christ. So when l'hotius signed in l'hotius was not one; but that all our presenco a promise that he would except five then went over to the 'hold' the Patriarch freo from blanie l'hotian side.
and neither speak against him nor • Libellus lyn. 300 ; Vila Ign. 233. permit others to do so, we accepted
he is said to have recovered the document on some pretext and torn it up into sinall pieces. Then those bishops who were really on the side of Ignatius, and had unwillingly consented to an impossible compromise, held a series of meetings in the church of St. Irene, and deposed and excommunicated Photius with his adherents." Such an irregular asseinbly could not claim the authority of a synod, but it was a declaration of
l'hotius immediately retorted by holding a synod in the Holy Apostles. Ignatius, in his absence, was deposed and anathematized; and the opportunity was probably used to
! declare Gregory Asbestas absolved from those charges which had led to his condemnation by the ex-Patriarch (spring A.D. 859).
In the ineantime Bardas persistently endeavoured to forco Ignatius to an act of abdication. He was inoved from place to place and treated with cruel rigour. His followers were
unwillingly, on account of tho violence sequent to the synod which deposcu of the government.' It appears from him. He evidently places the synoils this that Ignatius, though he refused in the spring, for he connects tlio do. to abdicato, would have been prepared position of Ignatius with the recovery to do so it' another than Photius had of the signed document of Photius boen his successor. It is to be observed (δε μετά βραχύ και το ίδιος αφείλετο that while the Lib. Ign. and the Vita χειρόγραφον και καθείλεν Ιγνάτιον). Iyn. assert that Ignatius declined As Motrophanes was himself an actor throughout to abdicate, Basil, arch. in these transactions, anul was incar. bishop of Thessalonica, a younger
oorated with Ignatius in the Numera, contemporary of Photius, in his Vila ho is the bottor authority. It was, no Euthym. jun. 178 states that lic, dloubt, hoped to extract an abdication partly voluntarily, partly under com. from Ignatiug without deposing him, pulsion, executed un act of abdication but the assembly of St. Irene forced the (βιβλίον παραιτήσεως τη Εκκλησία (
hand of Photius. It was, however, no παραδίδωσι). Tapadlowoi). Cp. Papadopulos-Kera- . less desirable after the synod to procure mous,
татр. Þórios (cited above), an abdication in view of public opinion. 659-660 ; P.-K. accepts this statement. 3 He was removed from Terebinthos The evidencu is certainly remarkable, to Hieria (where lie was kept in a but Basil, though he speaks sym- goat-fold), then to the suburb of pathetically of Ignatius, is an ardent Promotos (on the Galata side of the admirer of Photius ; cp. ib. 179. Golden Horn; seo Pargoire, Boradion,
Metrophanes, ib. The meeting 482-483), where he was beaten by lasted forty oluys.
Lco Lalakon, the Domestic of the ? The chronology is uncertain, and Numeri (who knocked out two of his there is a discrepancy between Metro. teeth), and loaded with heavy irons. phanes and Vila Igr. According to Then he was shut up in the prison of the latter source Ignatius was removed the Numera, near the Palace, till ho to Mytilene in August (859), and was was taken to Mytilene, whero lic there when the synod in the Holy remained six months (c. August 859 to Apostley was held ; the other assembly February 860). He was then permitted in St. Ireno is not mentioned. Metro. to return to Terebinthos, and he is phanes implies that the two synods said to have suffered ill-treatment from were almost contemporary, and that Nicetas Ooryphas, who was Prefect of the persecution of Ignatius, prior to the City (see above, Chapter IV. 1.144, his deportation to Mytilene, was sub. note). But a worse thing happened.
barbarously punished. The writers of the Ignatian 'party accuse Photius of having prompted these acts of tyranny, but letters of Photius himself to Bardus, bitterly protesting against the cruelties, show that he did not approve this policy of violence,' which indeed only served to increase his own unpopularity. The populace of the city seems to huve beon in favour of Iguntius, who had also sympathizers among the Imperiul minister's, such as Constantine the Drungarios of tho Watch. The monks, from whose rank he had risen, generally supported him; the Studites refused to communicate with the new Patriarch, and their abbot Nicolas left Constantinople. l'hotius, as is shown by his correspondence, took greut pains to win the goodwill of individual monks and others by flattery and delicate attentions.*
The announcement of the enthronement of a new Putriarch, which it was the custom to send to the other four l'atriarchal Sees-Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem-had been postponed, evidently in the hope that Tynutius would be induced to abdicate. When more than a yeur had passed and this hope was not fulfilled, the formal announcement could no longer bo deferred. An inthronistic letter was addressed to the Eastorn l'atriarchis,' and an embassy was sent to Romo benring letters to the l'ope froin Michael and Photius. The chair of St. Peter was now filled by Nicolas I., who stands out among the Pontiffs between Gregory I. and Gregory VII. as having done more than any other to raise the Papal power to the place which it was to hold in the days of Innocent III. Torebinthos, like the other islands in dom on the accession of Basil. In the the neighbourhood of the capital, was mieantime a succession of unwelconio exposed to the Russian invasion of abbots had been imposed on Studion. this year (see below, p. 419). The Sco l'ila Nicolai Stuu. 909 849. chemy despoiled the monastery of 3 Sre the correspondence of l'hotins, Ignatius, srized and slew twenty-two T'ho material is collected in Jlergon. of his household (l'ita Iyn. 2:33 899.). rother, i. 300 849. Ono abbot at loust Ignatius himself (Libellus Ty., ad lest his monastury to avoid tho conflict. init) mentions lois sufferings from Chi l'ita Euthym. jun. 179. .
Cp colil, insutleient clothing, hunger, The Patriarchato of Antioch was stripes, chains.
at this moment vacant, and the com. See Photius, Ep. 159. :
munication is addressed to the 2 Nicolas of Crete had succeededoekonomos and synkellos (Ep. 2, cd. Naukratios as abbot in 848.
Val.). Its tenor corresponds to tho mained seven years in exile, first at
letter to the Pope. Praenete in Bithynia, then in the o llo was elected in April 858. Chersonese, whence (865-800) he was Regino, Chron., 8.11. 868, says of brought in chains to Constantinople him: "regibus ac tyrannis imperavit and incarcerated in his own monastery eisque ac si dominus orbis terrarum for two years. He obtained his free. auctoritate praefuit."