Vigilius belonged to an aristocratic family fromRome; his father, John, is identified as aconsul in theLiber pontificalis, having received that title from the emperor inConstantinople.[1] According toProcopius, his brotherReparatus was one of thesenators taken hostage byWitigis, but managed to escape before the Ostrogothic king ordered their slaughter in 537.[2]
Vigilius entered the service of the Church and wasordained adeacon in 531. That year, the Roman clergy agreed to a decree empowering thepope to determine the succession to theHoly See, now considered invalid.[3] Vigilius was chosen byPope Boniface II as his successor and presented to the clergy assembled inOld St. Peter's Basilica. The opposition to such a procedure led Boniface in the following year to withdraw his designation of a successor and to burn the decree respecting it.[4]
While Vigilius was in Constantinople, Pope Agapetus died on 22 April 536, andSilverius wasmade pope through the influence of the king of theGoths. Soon after Silverius was ordained, the Byzantine generalBelisarius occupied Rome, which was thenbesieged by the Goths. Although the Goths were unable to encircle the city completely, both the Byzantine soldiers and the inhabitants feared they would be destroyed. Soon after the siege began, for example, Belisarius ordered the women, children, and unnecessary servants of Rome to leave forNaples, as well as his own army's camp followers.[6] Around the same time, Silverius was accused of offering to betray Rome to the Goths. Belisarius had him deposed, put in a monk's habit and exiled to Greece. Several other senators were also banished from Rome on the same charges.[7]
What part Vigilius played in the deposition of Silverius is unclear in the primary sources. The authors of theLiber Pontificalis, who are hostile to Vigilius, state he delivered to Belisarius the imperial orders to depose Silverius, yet are circumspect about how Silverius was elected and ordained.[8]Procopius, on the other hand, states that Belisarius appointed Vigilius shortly after Silverius was deposed.[7] Vigilius wasconsecrated and enthroned as pope on 29 March 537. After the death of Silverius, Vigilius was recognized as pope by all the Roman clergy, even though the manner of his elevation was not regular.[4]
Empress Theodora soon learned that she had been deceived. After Vigilius had attained the object of his ambition and been made pope, he maintained the same position as his predecessor against the Monophysites and the deposed Anthimus. A letter purported to be from the pope to the deposed Monophysite patriarchs Anthimus, Severus, and Theodosius seems to indicate that Pope Vigilius accepted the Monophysitism. This letter, however, is not regarded as genuine by most investigators and bears all the marks of forgery.[9] The pope did not restore Anthimus to his office.[4]
In the year 540 Vigilius took a stand in regard to Monophysitism, in two letters sent to Constantinople. One of the letters is addressed toEmperor Justinian I, the other to thePatriarch Menas. In both letters the pope supports positively theSynods ofEphesus andChalcedon, the decisions of his predecessorPope Leo I, and the deposition of the Patriarch Anthimus. Several other letters written by the pope in the first years of his pontificate give information respecting his interposition in the ecclesiastical affairs of various countries. On 6 March 538, he wrote to BishopCaesarius of Arles concerning the penance of the Austrasian KingTheudebert I on account of his marriage to his brother's widow.[10] On 29 June 538, a decretal was sent to Bishop Profuturus of Braga containing decisions on various questions of church discipline. BishopAuxanius and his successor,Aurelian of Arles, entered into communication with the pope respecting the granting of thepallium as a mark of the dignity and powers of apapal legate forGaul; the pope sent suitable letters to the two bishops. In the meantime new dogmatic difficulties had been developing at Constantinople that were to give the pope many hours of bitterness. In 543 Emperor Justinian issued a decree which condemned the various heresies of theOrigenists; this decree was sent for signature both to the Eastern patriarchs and to Vigilius.[4]
In order to draw Justinian's thoughts fromOrigenism, Theodore Askidas,bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, called his attention to the fact that the condemnation of various representatives of theAntiochene school, who were said to have inspiredNestorianism, would make union with the Monophysites much easier. The emperor, who laid much stress upon winning over the Monophysites, agreed to this, and in 543 or 544 he issued a new edictcondemning the Three Chapters. The "Three Chapters" concerned writings of Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret of Cyrus, and a letter of Ibas of Edessa. While all three were, indeed, in error, this was due in some part to a misunderstanding of language used byCyril of Alexandria against the Nestorians. Both Ibas and Theodoret had been deprived of their bishoprics by heretics, and had been restored by the Holy See and the Council of Chalcedon on anathematizing Nestorius. There were no good precedents for thus dealing harshly with the memory of men who had died in the peace of the Church. Such a condemnation at this point was seen by many of the bishops as potentially undermining the Council of Chalcedon itself.[11]
The Eastern patriarchs and bishops signed the condemnation of these Three Chapters, although many signed under duress.[11] In Western Europe, however, the procedure was considered unjustifiable and dangerous, because it was feared that it would detract from the importance of theCouncil of Chalcedon. Vigilius refused to acknowledge the imperial edict and was called to Constantinople by Justinian, in order to settle the matter there with a synod. According to theLiber pontificalis on 20 November 545, while the pope was celebrating the Feast ofSt. Cecilia in theChurch of St. Cecilia inTrastevere, and before the service was fully ended, he was ordered by the imperial official Anthimus to start at once on the journey to Constantinople. The pope was taken immediately to a ship that waited in theTiber in order to be carried to the eastern capital while a part of the populace cursed the pope and threw stones at the ship. Rome was now besieged by the Goths underTotila and the inhabitants fell into the greatest misery. Vigilius sent ships with grain to Rome, but these were captured by the enemy.[12] If the story related by theLiber pontificalis is essentially correct, the pope probably left Rome on 22 November 545. He remained for a long time inSicily and reached Constantinople about the end of 546 or in January 547.[4]
After his transfer to Constantinople, Vigilius wrote to his captors: "Do with me what you wish. This is the just punishment for what I have done." and "You may keep me in captivity, but the blessed Apostle Peter will never be your captive."[13]
While in captivity, Vigilius sought to persuade the emperor to send aid to the inhabitants of Rome and Italy who were so hard pressed by the Goths. Justinian's chief interest, however, was in the matter of the Three Chapters, and as Vigilius was not ready to make concessions of this point and wavered frequently in his measures, he had much to suffer. The matter was further complicated by the fact that the Latins, Vigilius among them, were for the most part ignorant of Greek and therefore unable to judge the incriminated writings for themselves.[11] The change in his position is to be explained by the fact that the condemnation of the writings mentioned was essentially justifiable, yet appeared inopportune and would lead to disastrous controversies with Western Europe. Finally, Vigilius acknowledged in a letter of 8 December 553 to thePatriarch Eutychius the decisions of theSecond Council of Constantinople and declared his judgment in detail in aConstitution of 26 February 554. The Pope agreed to condemn the Three Chapters,[14] and thus after a residence of eight years at Constantinople the pope was able, after coming to an understanding with the emperor, to start on his return to Rome in the spring of 555.
^Raymond Davis, translator,The Book of Pontiffs (Liber Pontificalis) (Liverpool: University Press, 1989), p. 56
^Procopius,De bello gothico I (V).26; translated by H.B. Dewing,Procopius (Cambridge: Loeb Classical Library, 1979), vol. 3 pp. 247f
^Fanning, William (1911).Papal Elections.The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 11. Robert Appleton Company.New York. Online transcript by Robert A. Orosco (31 August 2016).New Advent. Knight, Kevin (editor). Archived on 8 April 2016. "It is commonly held also that he is prohibited from doing so by Divine law".
^Davis,The Book of Pontiffs (Liber Pontificalis), p. 55
^Procopius,De bello gothico I (V).25.1–4; translated by Dewing, vol. 3 p. 239
^abProcopius,De bello gothico I (V).25.13–14; translated by Dewing, vol. 3 p. 243
^Davis,The Book of Pontiffs (Liber Pontificalis), pp. 55ff
^cf. Duchesne inRevue des quest. history. (1884), II, 373; Chamard, ibid., I (1885), 557; Grisar inAnalecta romana, I, 55 sqq.; Savio inCivilta catt., II (1910), 413–422].
^Letter translated in William E. Klingshirn,Caesarius of Arles: Life, Testament, Letters (Liverpool: University Press, 1994), pp. 118f
^Davis,The Book of Pontiffs (Liber Pontificalis), pp. 57ff
^Carroll, Warren H. (1987).The Building of Christendom. Front Royal, VA: Christendom College Press.ISBN978-0-931888-24-3.
^Michele Renee Salzman (2021).The Falls of Rome Crises, Resilience, and Resurgence in Late Antiquity. Cambridge University Press. p. 294.ISBN9781107111424.
Ekonomou, Andrew J. 2007.Byzantine Rome and the Greek Popes: Eastern influences on Rome and the papacy from Gregory the Great to Zacharias, A.D. 590–752. Lexington Books.
Louise Ropes Loomis,The Book of Popes(Liber Pontificalis). Merchantville, NJ: Evolution Publishing.ISBN1-889758-86-8 (Reprint of the 1916 edition. English translation with scholarly footnotes, and illustrations).
