Questions for 'Homework'

Priscillian's teaching on "Prophesying"

As I remarked in an earlier post, there is a similarity between the reaction to Priscillian and his teaching and the early teaching of John Wesley. I have traced the 'famous' comment by the Bishop of Bristol to John Wesley - usually reported as "enthusiasm Mr. Wesley is a nasty, nasty thing".
In fact during   " a series of meetings between Butler and John Wesley in August 1739, at one of which Butler said to Wesley, ‘Sir, the pretending to extraordinary revelations and gifts of the Holy Ghost is a horrid thing, a very horrid thing’  " (1)


This makes it all the more pertinent to the story of Priscillian who insisted that  "we do not despair of speaking about him either, because without preventing or stopping the spirit of anybody he concluded with the certain end of prophecy, but in order that all those who believe in him might speak of him freely,  . . . . " and  . . " he who trusts in Christ God may have no despair of prophesying about God, in what he had promised his faithful." (2)

The Questions

 There is a general recognition, amongst scholars and writers on Priscillian, that the Würzburg Tractates contain nothing that could be described as 'heretical'. However, those who have condemned him as a heretic have been definite that either the Tractates were not written by him - naming Bishop Instantius as the author, or that Priscillian was lying - a habitual occurrence in a Manichee!

Question 1- "Were Tractates I and II written by Priscillian ?"

Question 2 - "Was Priscillian telling the truth about his beliefs or was he lying in his teeth?"

The answers to these two questions would indicate to us whether or no Priscillan was a heresiarch. (the instigator or leader of a heresy)

Other questions are based around the practical out-workings of Priscillianism.

Question 3 - "On what basis were the Priscillianist churches organised? Hierarchical or Familial?" (3)

Question 4 - "What was Priscillian's attitude to ordaining clergy (bishops?) with an itinerant ministry?" (i.e. not having a defined 'See') (4)


I am taking a short time off from blogging to catch up on reading, so leave the questions with you as "homework"!

Footnotes
(1) H. Rack, Reasonable Enthusiast, 2nd edn, 1992, 209. Quoted in Oxford Dictionary of National Biography,
(2)  Tractate I . 545 and 555: Marco Conti. Priscillian of Ávila - The Complete Works. Oxford Early Christian Texts 2010 (1st Edition) pp. 65 - 66 This new book (2010) contains the Latin text of the Würzburg Tractates I - XI : the Canons on the Letters of the Apostle Paul : the Fragment Quoted in Orosius' Commonitorium and spurious works attributed to Priscillian. There is a translation into English on facing pages and at the end a commentary by Conti.

(3) This question is asked byVirginia Burrus:-  "Was the church a "political" community in which relationships between individuals were sharply delineated by the hierarchical ranks of office and gender? Or was it a "familiar" social body in which relationships were ordered by the more fluid hierarchies of birth, material resources, experience, education, or personal gifts of insight or eloquence?" 
 Virginia Burrus. "The Making of a Heretic. Gender, Authority, and the Priscillianist Controversy". UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS 1995. available here:-

http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft009nb09t;brand=ucpress

(4) By the time of the Council of Toledo (A.D. 400) there appears to have been a number of Galician 'bishops' ordained by Priscillianists who have no recorded sees. - See for example - Chadwick pp.170 - 188

For those interested in primary sources see Amazon link below. There is the opportunity to look inside the book.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Priscillian-Avila-Complete-Oxford-Christian/dp/0199567379/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1379769289&sr=1-5&keywords=Marco+Conti

Priscillian:- his trial, condemnation and death

The revolt against the unpopular emperor Gratian in 383 led to his capture and murder. The military commander from Britain, Magnus Maximus, acclaimed as Augustus by his troops, entered Trier as the emperor of the western provinces. The opportunity was quickly sized by Ithacius of Ossonuba, at that time a refugee in Trier, to present grave criminal charges against the Priscillianists. Maximus directed that these should be referred to a synod at Burdigala (Bordeaux).

The Synod of Bordeaux 

At the synod to which the Priscillianist bishops and their followers were ordered to attend, bishop Instantius was found guilty and deposed from his see (and later exiled). Priscillian, realising that he too would be found guily, appealed directly to the emperor at Trier. (1)

The Trials at Trier

The date of the trial of Priscillian before the secular court in Trier, and his subsequent death, has not been verified with any degree of certainty. Chadwick does not rule out the late autumn of 385, but feels that the summer of 386 is the most probable date (2). The initial trial took place with bishop Ithacius as chief prosecutor. When Priscillian and his companions were found guilty, the question of sentence was referred to the emperor. At this point Ithacius withdrew from the prosecution, necessitating a retrial. This took place under Patricius, a treasury official, pointing up the comment in S. Severus that Maximus "wanted the heretics property" (3)
In the usual procedure at a trial on the charge of malignant witchcraft, torture was used to extract a confession. It is likely that this was the case when Priscillian confessed under 'juridical examination' 'to his interest in magical studies, to having held nocturnal gatherings of (loose) women, and to having prayed naked'. (4)

The sentences of the Priscillianists

At the end of the second trial Priscillian was beheaded together with the priests Felicissimus and Armenius, Latronianus (a poet mentioned by St. Jerome) and the woman Euchrotia. In the 'inquisition' initiated in Spain by Maximus (5) the deacon Aurelius and Asarivus (or Asarbus) were beheaded. The layman Tiberianus lost all his property by confiscation and was exiled, along with the bishop Instantius to the Isles of Scilly. (6)
It is of interest that the condemned were found guilty and put to death for the practise of sorcery and magic and NOT for heresy, that being outside the remit of a secular court.

The reasons why Priscillian's teaching was so violently rejected by orthodox catholic bishops both at the time, and during the following years, needs further reflection.


(1) Sulpicius Severus Chron.ii.49. 5-6.
(2) Chadwick, Priscillian of Ávila. page132 - 138
(3) Sulpicius Severus Dial.iii.11. 10-11. quoted in Chadwick, op.cit. page 144
(4) Chadwick, op. cit. page 139
(5) Sulpicius Severus, Dial.iii.11.
(6) Chadwick op.cit. page 144

Priscillian - Bishop of Ávila A.D. 380/1 - 385 (1)

 

Ancient door lintel - Paradela, Toques, Spain

 

 

Ana Maria C.M. Jorge states:- 

"Priscillian helps us to achieve a better understanding of the Christianization process and the orthodox/heterodox debate in late antiquity. He also provides insight into the complexity of a period which precludes any arbitrary simplification and which, despite a search for unity, proves to be a time of opposition and confrontation." (2)

In spite of the Synod of Nicaea and their creed (A.D. 325), the years immediately following were a time of uncertainty. There were a number of attempts to overthrow the "orthodoxy" of the Nicene Formulas which were seen as the work of a minority in the Church. Arianism was still a force to be reckoned with. In 385, Justina, the mother of the boy Emperor of Rome, had asked Bishop Ambrose to give permission for an Arian basilica to be dedicated in Milan. As late as 585 the Visigoth conquerors of northern Spain were Arian Christians.

Questions were also being asked around the relationship of the Divinity and Humanity of Christ and answered in various ways. A form of Monarchianism seems to have been held by Priscillian without it being condemned as a heresy - i.e. it was an acceptable form of Christianity at that time. 
Priscillian's version of Christianity seems to have rapidly become popular with women and country folk, especially those in the upper classes of society. His rigorist teaching, along with an ascetic way of life can easily be understood as a challenge to the city dwelling bishops of the time. Sulpicius Severus was among those who "bitterly attacked the western bishops of his time whose principal care was either to maximize the return from their estates, or, if not landowners, to go about begging, so that in either case, whether rich or poor, their single obsession was money". (3)

When this is compared to the absoluteness of the Priscillian demand "None can be Christ's disciple if he loves anyone more than God", and the acceptance of baptism entails "a total abandonment of the foul darkness of secular activities" (4) it was inevitable that there would be a reaction from some of the more 'worldly' bishops of the time.

The following statement appears to summarise the situation!
Priscillianism was:-"One of the first protest movements against the corruption and vice of the orthodox catholic clerics" (5)

Opposition to the teaching

In a desire to prevent the “sect” from growing, Idacius of Mérida and Ithacius of Ossonuba, (modern Estoi near Faro in the Algarve) denounced the Priscillianist movement to Gratian in 381. The Emperor immediately published an edict ordering the Spanish bishops to expel the “heretics from their churches: "... (6)
In response the bishops Instantius, Salvianus and Priscillian travelled to Rome. On the way they passed through Aquitania where they were joined by the widow Euchrotia, her daughter Procula and other women. S. Severus represents these as "an abandoned company of loose females". Chadwick notes that "this feminine company with the three bishops was a serious imprudence" but with Priscillian's known opinion on the equality of women it is understandable.

The request for an audience with Damasus, the bishop of Rome fell on deaf ears.(7)  The bishops Instantius, Priscillian and Salvianus went on to Milan hoping to have an audience with bishop Ambrose. While they were there it seems that Salvianus died. Once again they were refused. They did however (by means of bribery?) obtain an imperial rescript restoring them to their churches. (8)

On the return of Priscillian and Instantius to Spain, bishop Ithacius repeatedly attempted to resist their restoration to their bishoprics, holding that they were heretical. At this point Priscillian and his party seem to have had the upper hand (or more influence in the right places!) as they obtained an order for the arrest of Ithacius as "perturbator ecclesiarum" (9) Ithacius fled to the imperial city of Trier in Gaul and found refuge with the bishop Brittanus.

In A.D. 383 the emperor Gratian was assassinated and Magnus Maximus took power and entered Trier as the new emperor.

                                               . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Notes
(1) Council of Burdigala (Bordeaux) at which Bishop Instantius was deposed was in A.D. 385. From there Priscillian appealed to the Emperor at Trier. (See next blog post)
(2) Ana Maria C.M. Jorge - Abstract
(3) Chadwick p.5 (1975 ed.) quoting Sulpicius Severus Chron l: 23 
(4) Wurzburg Tractates (Tract. ii pp.34 f. Schepss) The Tractates were a Priscillian statement of faith.
     See next post for more detail.
(5) "uno de los primeros movimientos de protesta contra la corrupción y el vicio del clero católico ortodoxo" La Historia con Mapas. Biografía de Priscilianismo (s. IV-VI) - (My translation)
(6) Sulpicius Severus Chron ll 47.2
(7) The petition addressed to Damasus appears as the second of the Wurzburg Tractates.
(8) Sulpicius Severus Chron ll 48.2
(9) Sulpicius Severus Chron ll 49.1