VIGILIUS, vi-jil'i-us: Pope 537-555. He came of a Roman patrician family, and was a deacon during the pontificate of Boniface II. Vigilius seems to have been an opponent of Gothic rule and to have worked against it after being

Early appointed apocrisiary of the Curia at

Pontificate. Constantinople. On the death of

Agapetus (Apr. 22, 536), Yigilius promised Empress Theodore that, if he were elected pope, he would oppose the Council of Chalcedon and intercede for the deposed patriarchs Anthi mus, Severus, and Theodosius (see Monophysites).

When he arrived in Rome, however, he found Silverius (q.v.), the candidate of Theodahat, already enthroned, but the intruder was removed with the aid of Belisarius, to whom Vigilius had been recom mended by Theodore, and on Mar. 29, 537, Yigilius ascended the papal throne. How far Vigilius ful filled his promise to the empress is uncertain. A letter addressed by him to the patriarchs already

mentioned is preserved by Liberatus (MPL, lxviii.

1041) and Victor of Tunnenna (q.v.), in which,

while strictly enjoining silence upon them, he ex

presses his sympathy with them, saying: " We do

not confess two natures of Christ, but one Christ

composed of two natures." But according to the

Liber pontificalis he wrote Theodore flatly refusing to make peace with heretics. The latter communi cation is obviously apocryphal, and the authentic

ity of the former letter is more than doubtful.

Several years passed before Yigilius became in volved with the government at Constantinople con cerning dogmatic problems. On Sept. 17, 540, at the insistence of Justinian, the pope found himself obliged, in two letters to the emperor and the Patri

arch Menas (Litteris clemantice and Licet universe), to subscribe to the Chalcedonian creed and to ana thematize the monophysite patriarchs. Little

besides this is known of the early years of his pon

tificate. The deacon Arator, in his Epistola ad Vigil

ium (MPL, lxviii. 73 sqq.), praises him for his ac tivity during the siege of Rome; and an inscription, probably contemporary, states that he restored the graves of the martyrs Alexander, Vitalis, and Mar tialis. On Mar. 6, 538, he directed Caesarius of Arles (q.v.) to inform Theudebert, king of Austrasia, of penance to be done because of his marital affairs; on June 29, 538, he issued certain instructions to

Profuturus, bishop of Brags; on Oct. 18, 543, he

informed Auxanius, the successor of Caesarius at

185

Arles, that he could not send him the pallium with out first informing the emperor; on May 22, 545, he conferred the pallium on Auxanius, and on Aug. 23, 546, on Auxanius' successor, Aurelian. By 546 Vigilius was no longer in Rome, for in the mean time the "Three-chapters Controversy" (q.v.) had broken out. His situation was grave from the first, and became still more critical Three- when Justinian commanded him to Chapters appear in person at Constantinople. Controversy. In 544 or 545 Vigilius accordingly left Rome, never to return; whether he was detained by force, as the Liber pontificalis states, is uncertain; and, after a sojourn of some length in Sicily, he reached Constantinople, by way of Illyria and Greece, late in 546 or early in 547, Pelagius (q.v.) remaining in Rome as his represent ative. In the mean time he had bitterly reproached Menas for subscribing to the edict and had approved the course of Stephanus in breaking off religious fellowship with him, an example followed by many of the clergy and laity, as well as by the African Church. Though he was officially received by Jus tinian with the highest respect, the gravity of the situation soon became evident. The first step made by the pope is problematical. Theophanes implies that soon after his arrival he condemned the three chapters, but this is highly improbable, since he renewed religious fellowship with Menas, the two being reconciled at the instance of Theodora on June 29. In the mean time, however, Justinian had even threatened to imprison the pope. To this period probably belong the two letters in which Vigilius promised the emperor and empress to con demn the three chapters, these letters to be kept secret for the time being, but later coming to light at a critical moment. The emphasis laid on the rights of the Curia in these documents was plainly intended to create the impression that the pope was the arbitrator in the matter, but as a matter of fact he had tied his own hands. Nevertheless, he convened seventy bishops, and in three sessions debated whether the edict concerning the three chapters was contradictory to the Council of Chalcedon. When, however, Facundus, the most eloquent and learned of the faction under condem nation, desired to speak, Vigilius adjourned the ses sion and required each of those who took part to submit a written opinion. These opinions, under monophysite influence, were rendered in the de sired terms, and Vigilius had them presented to the emperor immediately. The pope now took a de cisive step, and on Easter Even, 548, sent Menas his Judicatum, in which he unreservedly condemned the three chapters and as unreservedly accepted the Chalcedonian creed. The publication of this document by his nephew and deacon Rusticus roused a tumult of opposition throughout the West. This opposition seems to have produced an impres sion at court, for otherwise Justinian would scarcely have returned his Judicatum to Vigilius or have thought of referring the entire matter to a great synod. On Aug. 15, 550, however, he exacted from the pope an oath to proceed in the condemnation of the three chapters, though in conference with the emperor Vigilius secsred a promise that no

further action should be taken until the synod had been convened. In the summer of 551 Justinian unexpectedly anticipated the decision of the synod and in a new edict renewed the condemnation of the three chapters.

Vigilius now assumed the offensive instead of the defensive, probably under the influence of Pelagius, who about this time arrived from Rome. The pope

correctly saw his chief enemy in Theo-

Vacillating dorus Ascidas, whom he excommuniCourse. Gated in the middle of July. But Vigil-

ius no longer felt safe, and fled from the Domus Placidia, the residence of the apocrisiary, to the basilica of St. Peter at Hormisda, where, on Aug. 17, he pronounced Theodorus deposed and his adherents, including Menas, excommunicated, though these sentences were to remain secret until their effect upon Justinian and those condemned should be ascertained. The attempt to tear him from sanctuary failed, but on assurance of safety from Justinian the pope returned to the Domus Placidia, only to leave it again on the night of Dec. 23 and take refuge in the chapel of St. Euphemia at Chalcedon. Even there he was exposed to peril, probably in consequence of the publication of his ban on Theodorus and his open letter of Feb. 5, in which he complained of the treatment he had received in Constantinople. His excommunicated opponents, however, now laid before the pope a defense of their tenets with a corresponding creed; and after the death of Menas the new Patriarch Eutychius sent Vigilius a courteous notification of his accession (Jan. 6, 553). Hereupon the pope declared himself ready for a synod, though he desired that it be held in Italy or Sicily. The emperor finally informed the pope that he must either attend the synod or have it opened without his presence. Vigilius remained true to his refusal to appear, declaring that he would give his opinion in writing. On May 5, 553, the synod convened, and on May 14 Vigilius completed his Constitutum de tribes capitulis, in which he rejected all community of spirit with the followers of Theodore of Mopsuestia and yet declined to condemn the three chapters. The document was to be presented to Justinian on May 25, but he refused to receive it, and his commissary laid before the synod the secret letters mentioned above, in which Vigilius had promised to condemn the three chapters. At the same time the command was given to strike the pope's name from the diptychs, and the final decision of the synod in its eighth session (June 2) was in harmony with the imperial wish concerning the three chapters. Whether Vigilius was condemned to banishment is uncertain, but at all events he could scarcely return to Italy, where Justinian's power was at its zenith. Nevertheless, efforts seem to have been made at Rome to secure his return, and the result was the complete recantation of Vigilius. He announced his change of position in a letter to the Patriarch Eutychius on Dec. 8, 553, and explained it at length on Feb. 26, 554, in his Coustitutum Vigilii pro damnatione trium capitulorum. By his recantation he gained return to Rome, formal sanction being given by Justinian on Aug. 13, 554; but he died at Syracuse, on his way home, June 7, 555,

186

being buried in the church of San Marcello on the Via Salaria.

Vigilius was no uncompromising . adherent of what he deemed right; and though it is true that the justice of the condemnation of the His three chapters is a moot question, that Character. the dogmatic verdict can not be rendered simply from the attitude of the Africans and their sympathizers, and that ecclesiastical polity had some reason to sacrifice Theodore for Chalcedon, all this does not justify his instability. And while his policy was, in its last analysis, the essentially papal principle of refusing to allow the State to dictate to the Church; he lacked ability to attain his ends by other than surreptitious means. When, under the influence of Pelagius, he demanded a free council on western soil and declined to attend the synod at Constantinople, he was on the right path, dangerous as this might prove when opposed to the policy of an emperor like Justinian; but his past was against him, and his recantation might have been expected.

(G. Krüger.)

Bibliography: Original documents are in MPL, Lux. 15178; CSEL, xxxv. 230-320, 348 sqq.; Jaffé. ReBeata, i. 117-124; MGH, Epist_ iii (1891), 57-68, and Auct. ant., xi (1893), 200 sqq. Consult further: Liber pontificalis, ed. L. Duchesne, i. 296-302, Paris, 1886; J. Basnage, Hist. de l'Mise, i. 517-547, Rotterdam, 1699; J. Punkes, Papst hi9dius, Munich, 1864; L. Duchesne, Vigils et P_lage, in Revue des questions historiques, xxxvi (1884), 369-381; B. Constant, in Pitra'a Analecta uovissima, i (1885), 370-461; J. Langen, Geschichte der römischen Kirche, i. 341-382, Bonn, 1885; Revue des questions historiques, xxxvii (1885). 540-578, 579-593; A. Knecht, Die Religiouspolilik Justiuiaus 1., Würzburg, 1896; L. M. Hartmann, Geschichte Italiens im Mittelalter, i. 382-394, Leipsic. 1897; H. Grisar, Geschichte Roms cared der Päpste im Mittelalter, i. 502-507, 574-580, Freiburg, 1900; Bower, Popes, i. 345-370; Platina, Popes, i. 128-130; Milman, Latin. Christianity, i. 462-470; Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, vols. ii.-iii. passim, Eng. transl., Vol. iv. passim, Fr. transl., vols. ii.-iii. passim; DCB, iv. 1144-51 (full, names sources); KL, xii. 956-959; and the literature under Three-Chapters Controversy.