Chapter XI
Origen, Universalism, and the Influence of the Patristic Fathers on the Council
Ever since the adoption of Christianity as the State religion of the Roman Empire, the idealizations of Rome and Christianity have largely been inescapable and inseparable. As mentioned, in the early decades following the rapid growth of Christianity and its formal adoption in the Edict of Thessaloniki, many Christians associated Christianity with the Roman Empire – nearly forgetting the three decades of imperial persecution that befell the followers of Jesus of Nazareth. Yet, the Church grew in position, power, and prestige as the centuries went on.
There was still a lingering belief among the common populace that the Roman Empire could not fall because of its divine ordination by God himself. Evidence for this continually smacks of confirmation bias – in that any seemingly improbable survival following the collapse of Roman power and wealth after the Crusade of 1204 was associated always with the mercy and benevolence of the Divine Father in Heaven. Yet, at the Council of Constantinople all of that changed.
In a shocking bid to the recognition of general eschatology, the Church leaders made it very clear that the success and survival of the Roman Empire was not equivalent to the success, survival, and eventual victory of the Church in salvation history. In a formal document, the Orthodox Church disassociated itself with the Roman State – not in repudiation, but in the acknowledgement that the Church existed before it became the state religion of the empire, and would continue to exist even if the empire would fall to its enemies; whether they are Catholic, Mohammedan, or other. Archbishop Michael penned the resolution as:
Let it be resolved, through this council at Constantinople, in the year of our Lord 1477, that the success and survival, and ultimate victory of the triumphant Church in human and salvation history is not dependent upon the success, survival, and ultimate victory of the Roman Empire. Although it may had been in God’s plan to use the Roman Empire to safeguard the religion of Christ against the bowls and jaws of Hades, the Church itself will exist and continue to exist until the return of our Lord.
The Council also deliberated upon its relationship with other brother and sister religions. The relationship between Christianity and other religions have always been contentious, as the claims of Christianity are unique in terms of salvation. The convention Christian triumphalist attitude, very crudely put, is that all non-Christians will be tormented in hell for eternity, while the righteous few receive eternal paradise in Heaven. It should be noted that, this is not the oldest Christian position, nor the directly formalized positions of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches. In fact, neither of the two ancient Christian churches has ever stated a single individual to be in hell – seeing that this is not the appropriate mission of the Church. The Catholic Church eventually came to the position that the Mohammedans have their place in salvation history, and that those who have not known Christ may still be saved. For some fundamentalist Protestants, this is evidence of the Catholic Church’s apostasy that they would implicitly endorse of form of universalism.
Universalism, the belief that all persons will be saved in the end of days, has its roots in the ancient Christian tradition. Not in the formal means that some say today – that all religions are roughly the same and all are on different points of the heavenly journey, that in time, all will reach the mountaintop, but in that the magnitude and scale of the victory won at Calvary is so great – God reconciled the world to himself. It is written that “God is the savior of all humanity, but especially those who believe” [1]. Origen of Alexandria, perhaps the most prolific of Christian theologians, wrote that all persons, including the Devil himself, will be restored to heavenly paradise because of the immense love of God [2]. Indeed, the notion of universal salvation was popular among the Eastern Patristic Fathers, although none came to the strong conclusion of Origen – that we know all will be saved, but rather, that we can reasonable hope that all will be saved.
Origen of Alexandria, the most prolific, and at times controversial, theologian and father of the Early Church. Some observers of the Council of Constantinople in 1477 suggest that the council moved to a stronger affirmation of the theology of Origen.
In this venue and tradition, it should come to one as little surprise who studies Eastern Christian soteriology that the Council adopted similar lines in relationship with other religions. The Council declared that while the Mohammedans were followers of a false religion – in terms that the full truth of Christianity is being rejected, the Mohammedans nonetheless were brothers and sisters of the inheritance of Abraham. Like with the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the Council accepted the open possibility that Mohammedans were to be saved in their own unique way. In addition, the council re-affirmed that the Armenians were brothers of the same faith, like the Nestorians further to the East in northern Mesopotamia. While the Church re-affirmed the heresy of the Catholic Church, it continued to declare Catholics to be Christian, just having strayed a bit from the path of the Orthodox communion.
These latter developments from the Council would become important in missionary efforts in conquered or re-conquered territories of the empire. The heavily Sunni Mohammedan regions of the former Sultanate of Candar were subject to a relative degree of freedom and toleration. Perhaps this was motivated to prevent further uprisings against the Roman State. In accordance with these new declarations, missionary efforts to convert the Mohammedans in Candar were halted, also seeing that there was no apparent progress or hope in converting the people to the Orthodox faith. Furthermore, after the Roman victory against the Kingdom of Naples, which I shall cover in the coming chapters, restored a foothold in the boot of Italy – the Catholic population in Southern Italy were left to continue to practice the Catholic faith; although over time, some of the people began to blend Catholicism and Orthodoxy into a unique blend of church.
By the conclusion of the Council, the Church was triumphant in its ecclesiastic matters. The non-possessor movement was, temporarily at least, defeated. The push to reform the ancient liturgy was also defeated. The Church re-affirmed the apostolic tradition of brotherly religion co-existence, and opened the door to a possible strong declaration in favor of universal salvation – however unlikely that would be.
However, John XI was somewhat displeased with the Church’s declaration concerning the triumph of the Church as not being dependent upon the triumph of the Roman state. Naturally, the Roman emperor, who himself was a pious and devout Christian, wanted the assurance of learned men and sages that the empire he controlled would continue to thrive and prosper because the mission of the Roman Empire was tied to the salvific mission of the Orthodox Church. It would be inaccurate to say that John lost his love and adoration of the Church as a result, or that the allies he had in the Church that were simultaneously striking back at the despotates were now lost. He did however sulk back in the knowledge that the men of divine theological musings declared that if the Roman Empire was to fall, that the Church would not fall with it. For the emperor, he saw this a major psychological blow to the continued policy and hope of the imperium and the general population.
The people of the Roman Empire were still a very superstitious crowd. There was an ancient prophecy that the Hagia Sophia would never fall into the hands of a non-Christian people [3]. Despite the pronouncement of Church officials that the empire and the Church, while joined in state statutes of law, were not dependent upon one another for further existence, was sharply rejected by those who still devoutly believed that the mission of the Church and the empire were tied together ever since the dream of Constantine at the Battle of the Milvian Bridge. While the Council of Constantinople was not a grand ecumenical council of the Early Christian era, nor akin to the future Counter Reformation councils of the Catholic Church in combating the spread of Protestantism in the 16th Century, the Council of Constantinople was the last great council convened and supervised in the jurisdictional territory of the Roman Empire – where the formation of orthodox Christology and theology had taken place a millennium earlier.
[1] First Timothy, Chapter 4, Verse 10.
[2] This is the doctrine of Apokatastasis. This teaching however, was never accepted by the Church as official teaching.
[3] This is true for OTL. In the historical Siege of 1453, after the city had been breached, many thousand people gathered in the Hagia Sophia believing this prophecy would save them from impending doom. Of course, the prophecy failed, and the Turks entered and killed and captured most of those taking refuge in the Church.
