Letters of Pope Symmachus to the bishops of Gaul and Caesarius of Arles: translation and commentary

This article publishes a translation of the 513–514 epistles of pope Symmachus (498–514) to the bishops of Gaul and Caesarius of Arles (502–543). The main issues discussed in the epistles are the claims of the see of Arles for regional primacy in Southern Gaul, women's monasticism and church di...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Svi͡a︡to-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. II, Istorii͡a︡, istorii͡a︡ Russkoĭ pravoslavnoĭ t͡s︡erkvi Istorii͡a︡, istorii͡a︡ Russkoĭ pravoslavnoĭ t͡s︡erkvi, 2023-12, Vol.114 (114), p.119-143
1. Verfasser: Omelchenko, Darya
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng ; rus
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This article publishes a translation of the 513–514 epistles of pope Symmachus (498–514) to the bishops of Gaul and Caesarius of Arles (502–543). The main issues discussed in the epistles are the claims of the see of Arles for regional primacy in Southern Gaul, women's monasticism and church discipline. The conflict between the sees of Arles and Vienne over ecclesiastical primacy dates back to the end of the 4th century and was connected with the fact that Arles became the political capital of Southern Gaul. During the 5th century, the papal position in this dispute was variable and was not accepted as a valid argument by all the bishops of Gaul. Symmachus confirmed the decisions of pope Leo I the Great on the division of ecclesiastical jurisdiction in the province of Vienne, and for the first time granted the bishop of Arles the privilege of wearing the pallium. Although Caesarius became the pope's representative in Southern Gaul, there was no real opportunity for the bishop to exercise this privilege for some time because of the political situation in the region. Regarding the property of the convent at Arles, Symmachus' decision could not satisfy Caesarius because of the vagueness of the pope's wording. As for church discipline, Symmachus could only once again condemn its violations.
ISSN:1991-6434
1991-6434
2409-4811
DOI:10.15382/sturII2023114.119-143