Byzantine Emperor Coronation Oath

Byzantine Emperor Coronation Oath

The imposition of a coronation oath to defend the orthodox faith on new Emperors by the Patriarch of Constantinople is well attested in the Byzantine Empire from the end of the 5th Century onwards. The earliest record of such an oath, is found in De Ceremoniis, written or commissioned by Emperor Constantine VII, who reigned from 913 to 959, contained in a fragment from περὶ πολιτικῆς καταστάσεως (About State Protocol) by Peter the Patrician, the Byzantine Master of Offices under Justinian I, from 539 to 565. Peter is likely pulling from earlier sources. In De Ceremoniis I.92, the extract from Peter describes the coronation ceremony of Anastasius I in 491, following the death of Emperor Zeno. It appears the oath was required to confirm the new emperor’s orthodoxy in the context of doctrinal uncertainty following Chalcedon, with Empress Ariadne setting out that the new Emperor would be required to take an oath publicly in front of the Gospels and Euphemius, Patriarch of Constantinople [490-496]. This was likely the first instance of a such a coronation oath, ad hoc in the instance of Anastasius I, but later becoming a standard part of the coronation cermony. The oath given below is a reconstruction of the oath from two sources [John Cantacuzene, Historia, and Pseudo-Codinus, De Officiis), as it was in the 14th century, but is unlikely to have changed substantially since it’s origin in the late 5th century.

Source: Translated and reconstructed by E Brightman. in Journal of Theological Studies 2 [1901]: 387-88.

I, __________, in Christ [our] God, faithful Emperor and Autocrator of the Romans, with my own hand set forth: I believe in one God . . . [the rest of the Creed follows].

Further I embrace and confess and confirm as well as the apostolic and divine traditions the constitutions and decrees of the seven ecumenical councils and of local synods from time to time convened and, moreover, the privileges and customs of the most holy Great Church of God.

And furthermore I confirm and embrace all things that our most holy fathers here or elsewhere decreed and declared canonically and irreproachably.

And all things which the holy fathers rejected and anathematized, I also reject and anathematize.

And I believe with my whole mind and soul and heart the afore-said Holy Creed.

All these things I promise to keep before the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of God.

The Book of Steps, Mêmrê 14.1.3 [Syriac]

 The Book of Steps, Mêmrê 14.1.3

Written late 4^th/early 5th Century.

Source: Kitchen, Robert A., and Martien FG Parmentier. The book of steps: the Syriac Liber Graduum. Cistercian Publ., 2004. p.135

The Upright do not swear, except ‘yes’ or ‘no’, about anything; but the Perfect speak only what our Lord wishes, because not even with ‘yes’ or ‘no’ will they transgress and be diminished.

Alleged Priscillianist Dictum of Secrecy, as recorded in Augustine, Letter 237.3

Alleged Priscillianist Dictum of Secrecy, as recorded in Augustine, Letter 237.3 

Written by Augustine to Ceretius, likely sometime after 414 CE. Section discusses an alleged dictum of the Priscillianists regarding the safe keeping of their secret doctrines. Whether this dictum goes back to Priscillian [d.385 CE], or is just held by his followers, or is indeed an invention of Augustine or other opponents of Priscillianism is unclear. For similar outlooks towards secrecy of doctrines/apocryphal works see the Oath of Justin the Gnostic, as reported in Refutation of all Heresies, 5.23-24; 5.27:1-3 (c.f. comments in the alleged Clement of Alexandria "Mar Saba Letter").

Source: Augustine, Letters, 211-270. The Works of Saint Augustine: A Translation for the 21st Century, (part 2). Trans.: Roland Teske, 2005. p. 137-138.

For some heretics could perhaps be found who are more impure, but none is comparable to them [Priscillianists] in deceitfulness. Others, of course, lie because of the habit and weakness of this life, for such vices are human, but these people are reported to have the commandment in their wicked doctrine of their heresy that, for the sake of their esoteric doctrines, they should lie even with a false oath. Those who have had experience of them and belonged to them and have been set free from them by God's mercy even quote the very words of this commandment:

"Swear, perjure yourself, but do not disclose the secret."

Apostolic Tradition 16.9-11

Apostolic Tradition 16.9-11

One of what have become to be known as Church Order documents, the so-called Apostolic Tradition, is an anonymous aggregation of older sources, compiled and reworked in a relatively coherent text, in Greek. The text is no longer extant in Greek apart from small fragments, but is found in various translations in Latin, Sahidic, Arabic and Ethiopic. There are noticeable traditions from North Africa, Syria and Rome, and contains little to no internal information with regards to the identity or geographical location of the main redactor/compiler. Thus it is difficult to situate the community of the compiler/redactor. It was probably compiled in the mid-third to mid-fourth century. In the subsequent centuries, it was translated and redacted by each new community using the document, adding/removing/changing material, or completely reworking it into a new document, a phenomenon which has become to be known as “living literature.” This makes the establishment of the “original” text a very difficult, if not futile exercise.

The extant versions we have are as follows: a Latin translation [Verona Palimpsest]; Sahidic; Arabic; two Ethiopic, Book 8 of the Apostolic Constitutions, The Canons of Hippolytus and the Testamentum Domini.

Section 16, within a larger section on catechumens [15-21] contains a list of various professions which are incompatible with the Christian faith. This list is not covered by the few small extant Greek fragments, it is in all translations/versions/derivatives of the text, with the exception of Latin, for which there is a large lacuna [chapters 7-21], however it is heavily modified in various editions. The list is held by some [Stewart-Sykes, Loc. 996] to predate the compilation of the text, to around the mid second century, while others [Hermeneia, p. 87] suggest it may be as late as the mid 4^th century that the list becomes recognisable as what we see in the versions extant today.

Within Section 16.9, the profession of soldier is discussed. This is present in all versions/derivatives of the text with the exception of the Latin lacuna. The discussion, in all versions [except that in Apostolic Constitutions 8], takes the form of first looking at the soldier who wishes to become a Christian, and secondly, a Christian/Catechumen who wishes to become a soldier. Two versions of the Apostolic tradition [Sahidic and Ethiopic 2] contain a prohibition of the military oath, [along with potentially the Canons of Hippolytus, which prohibits the taking of “bad word]. This may indicate that the prohibition is “original” to the Apostolic Tradition. In any case, it’s inclusion or removal in various versions throughout the third to fifth centuries is an intriguing facet of the “living literature” of church order documents, and the tradition history of opposition to the military oath by Christian sources. Translations of the relevant versions are shown below.

Apostolic Tradition 16.9 [Sahidic]	Apostolic Tradition 16.9 [Arabic]	Apostolic Tradition [Ethiopic 1]	Apostolic Tradition [Ethiopic 2]	Apostolic Constitutions 8.32 [4th Century]	Canons of Hippolytus, 13-14 [4th Century]	Testamentum Domini 2.2 [4th-5th century]
[Based on Greek Text]	[Based on Sahidic Translation]	[Translation made from a no-longer extant Arabic Translation]	[Based on Greek Text]	[Based on Greek text of Apostolic Traditions]	[Extant only in Arabic, through Sahidic, which was based on a Greek text]	[Based on Greek text. Extant in Syriac which was based on a Greek text. Also extant in Arabic and Ethiopic, through Sahidic, which was based on a Greek text]
Hermeneia, p. 88-90	Hermeneia, p. 88-90	Hermeneia, p. 88-90	Bausi, p. 39	Hermeneia, p. 90	Hermeneia, p. 91	Hermeneia, p. 91
9. A soldier who has authority let him not kill a man. If he is ordered, let him not go to the task nor let him swear. But if he is not willing, let him be cast out.	9. A soldier in the sovereign's army should not kill, or if he is ordered to kill, he should refuse, if he stops, so be it; otherwise he should be   excluded.	9. They are not to accept soldiers of an official, and if he is given an order to kill, he is not to do it, and if he does not stop, he is to be expelled.	9. Un soldato che si trovi in una qualsiasi autorità, non uccida; e anche se gli è stato ordinato, non immoli, non giuri e non si ponga serti sulla testa.	Let a soldier who comes be taught to do no injustice or to extort money, but to be content with his given wages. Let the one who objects be rejected.	[13] Whoever has received the authority to kill, or else a soldier, they are not to kill in any case, even if they receive the order to kill. They are not to pronounce a bad word.	[2.2] If anyone be a soldier or in authority, let him be taught not to oppress or to kill or to rob, or to be angry or to rage and afflict anyone. But let those rations suffice him that are given to him. But if they wish to be baptized in the Lord, let them cease from military service or from the [post of] authority, and if not let them not be received.
10. One who has authority of the sword, or a ruler of a city who wears the purple, either let him cease or be cast out.	10. One who has the power of the sword or the head of a city and wears red, let him stop or be excluded.	10. An official who has a sword or a chief of appointed people and who wears purple is to stop or be expelled.	10. Chi esegue condanne di spada, o il governatore di una città o un porporato, cessi, o altrimenti venga espulso.	[Not present]	[13] Those who have received an honor are not to wear wreaths on their heads. Whosoever is raised to the authority of prefect or the magistracy and does not put on the righteousness of the gospel is to be excluded from the flock and the bishop is not to pray with him.	[Not present]
11. A catechumen or faithful [person] if he wishes to become a soldier, let them be cast out because they despised God	11. A catechumen or a believer, if they want to be soldiers, let them be excluded because they distance themselves from God.	11. A catechumen or believer, if they wish to become a soldier, are to be expelled because they are far from God.	11. Il catecumeno o il cristiano adulto, se desidera essere arruolato, venga espulso, perché ha fatto un torto al Signore.	[Not present]	[14] A Christian must not become a soldier, unless he is compelled by a chief bearing the sword. He is not to burden himself with the sin of blood. But if he has shed blood, he is not to partake of the mysteries, unless he is purified by a punishment, tears, and wailing. He is not to come forward deceitfully but in the fear of God.	[2.2] Let a catechumen or a believer of the people, if he desires to be a soldier, either cease from his intention, or if not let him be rejected. For he has despised God by his thought, and leaving the things of the Spirit, he has perfected himself in the flesh, and has treated the faith with contempt.

References

• Bausi, Alessandro. "La “nuova” versione etiopica della Traditio apostolica: edizione e traduzione preliminare." (2011): 19-69.
• Bradshaw, Paul F., Maxwell E. Johnson, L. Edward Phillips, and Harold W. Attridge. The Apostolic Tradition: A Commentary. Hermeneia. Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 2002.
• Stewart-Sykes, Alistair, ed. On the apostolic tradition. No. 22. RSM Press, 2001. [Kindle Edition]

Shenoute, Excerpts on Swearing

Shenoute, Adversus Graecos: De Usura [Excerpt]

Written 4^th/5^th Century.

Source: Shenoute on Usury. Trans: Anthony Alcock. Available @: https://www.academia.edu/25320358/Shenoute_on_Usury

[T]he New Testament does not contradict the words of Moses but it brings forth the greater good. For the Lord came not to dissolve the Law and the prophets but to fulfil them. What does 'fulfil them' mean? Let us try to understand. Well, it is not the fulfilment of the law not to swear a false oath, as the prophets announced. It is rather the fulfilment of the law not to swear an oath at all, as the Lord said: You have heard that the ancients said, 'Do not swear a false oath, but give your oath to the Lord. The fulfilment of the Law is the command that orders not to swear at all. Let your word be merely 'Yes, yes, no, no.'

Shenoute, Letter 6. To an Elder. About Monastic Vows

Written 4th/5th century.

Source: Letters of Shenoute. Trans: Anthony Alcock. Available @:
https://www.academia.edu/6202844/Letters_of_Shenoute

Since this matter has gone into your heart, father, 'If this is so, let me cause the brothers to swear an oath to me, whether male or female, not to do any evil including those who have just entered as neophytes', I have been pleased with what you said, that this counsel will give us all rest about these things that distress our hearts. But after I had inspected this matter, because according to the Scripture salvation is in great counsel, I say to you: not only if you cause them to swear by the name of God whom do not see - but I confess or bear witness to you that what I say will be even truer truth - even if God Jesus appears in the place where you will cause them to swear and they swear seeing see Him, those who are sinners will also sin in the convent. Which is the greater one, the Lord of my oath or my oath? For if the remembrance of God does not restrain man from sinning, no oath will do it. For He did not say, 'Swear an oath and you will be without sin.' But He did say, 'Think of the Lord and you will carry out all my wishes.' For it is not fitting to seal an empty grave, let alone that it is full of bones, shrouds and impurity of every sort, with the royal seal, but it is fitting to seal a treasure full of every good thing. For the person who sins in these convents is empty. He is full of bad thoughts, impurity and lawlessness. He is not worthy to utter the name of God, especially to call God as a witness. The name of God belongs to those who fear Him, as is written, that it is to be uttered only decently and positively to the point of swearing, like the one who said, 'I have sworn and made a pact to keep the laws of justice.' I do not keep those among us who sin from swearing an oath to God. Let them be liable to the anger that will be revealed from heaven because they sin after all these injunctions. But I do keep the holy name of blessed God. Will they be compelled to swear an oath by the name of God not to sin, those impure ones who sin or will sin at all times in these convents? Or do you not see those who have transgressed after swearing an oath to you that they will not sin, and have done it again? Or do you say in truth, 'No man will swear falsely among us, male or female.'? Or has no-one done so? Or did you not say, 'If they swear false oaths, that is their own fault or their blood is upon them.'? Indeed, it their own fault and their blood is upon them. But you said, 'You would destroy them and have destroyed them by casting them forth. Let me cause them to swear an oath. Be silent and wait. God will judge them.' How long will be in this tribulation? Our heart has been destroyed in these troubles. I said to you, 'Have you been troubled or your heart worn down like the one who began to grieve and be sad, his soul having grieved until the death of Jesus?' After this word and all the others I said to you, I told you that I was not the one to cast forth sinners from these convents or do anything audaciously, imperiously and without consideration. It is God who will cast them forth.

If therefore it accords with the ordinance that God put it in your heart, namely that an oath should be sworn, so that you too might also be holy, together with all the brothers who believe in in their own salvation, but did not take an oath, the blood of those who sin in these convents at all times is upon them and the one who rules over them, if he tolerates them in the convents when they tell him. Only they will not bear witness to the name of the Lord and His Christ, not so that a sin will not count against those who do these works of iniquity among us, but so that you will not defile your love which you have for God. Let those who will transgress against the ordinance imposed on them to do it add sin to their sins, but let the name of God remain holy. Let them become accursed with all their works, but let the name of God be blessed in all things before those who act in all things for the glory of God, as you now wish that they swear an oath to become without sin for His glory, as it is written, 'Everything, do it for the glory of God.' I myself, the least, I see and have told you through a mystery that it is a better thing to glorify the name of God than to prevent people from swearing by Him, especially since we hear through our abilities. It is not that, if they do not swear an oath by the name of God but make another vow and transgress against that, they will escape the anger that will come upon them on the day of judgement or the day of anger. The name of God is pure, as it is written, 'Let Your name be pure.' People are not worthy to name it, as we weep for our sins or not to fall into sin. For they will swear an oath by it in mindlessness. Because there are many who swear an oath by the name of God, while transgressing against their oath. He who ordered them to swear the oath by it in the past, wishing that they should not know of other gods to swear by them and pieces of wood and stone, He is also the one who ordered, after they had known Him, 'Do not swear by the name of God alone, but swear another oath.' Will we now abandon the word of God at our end for the sake of people who love wickedness more than good? No. How is it that at times they do the things of rulers and at times they swear an oath? Perhaps you think that we will lead life after life, unlike other men? We will go to God. They will also go. If you wish for your heart to be at peace with all your brothers who grieve over your evil deeds which they do among us, if God orders this one to forget, you will be at peace. If He does not order him to forget, even if they swear an oath every day, you will not be at peace. These disturbances will never be removed from our convents. It is therefore the ordinance which is laid down, that you will be a mediator for them before God because it has been agreed that they do nothing that God has not ordered them to do. We will be holy in our body, protecting our heart, speaking the truth and doing every good thing, except for grumbling and evil complaint in this place, as the Scripture says, does it not?

Each one therefore will say, 'I confess before God in His holy place, the word that I have spoken with my mouth being my witness that I will not defile my body in any way. I will not steal. I will not bear false witness. I will not lie. I will not do anything wrong in secret. If I transgress against what I have confessed, I will see the kingdom of heaven but I will not enter into it, God, in whose presence I have made this testament, will destroy my soul and my body in fiery Gehenna because I have transgressed against the testament I made. About answering back or being disobedient or grumbling or being refractory or contumacious and the things like them, the whole convent will know about them.

Because you said, 'I will cause them to swear an oath from such and such a time to the present', do not ask them. Another has already asked them, one might say indeed, is examining them with all their works. The one who wishes to say these things in penitence will tell you. I mean, the things of that time which we said. I am not speaking of what will happen after this ordinance. Remember what I said to you. I did not conceal a single word from you of all those things. And you will be at peace in your spirit.

Excerpt from the Acts of the Synod of Constantinople (April 449 CE)

Excerpt from the Acts of the Synod of Constantinople (April 449 CE)

As recorded in the Minutes of the First Session of the Council of Chalcedon (451 CE).  Acta of Chalcedon, 1.566-571.  All the Bishops at the Synod of Constantinople are requested by imperial authority [Theodosius II & Valentinian III] to guarantee the minutes of the synod by oath. Basil of Seleucia voices his concern citing Mt. 5:34-36. It is unclear whether the request for the oath was pressed further or whether the bishops took the oath.

Source: Richard Price and Michael Gaddis. The Acts of the Council of Chalcedon: 3 Vols. Translated Texts for Historians: Vol. 45. Liverpool University Press, 2005.p. I.233.

566. The most magnificent patrician said: ‘Let the most illustrious tribune, notary and referendary testify what he knows his orders on the matter to be.’
567. Macedonius the most illustrious tribune, notary and referendary said: ‘Our most pious master, learning that the aforesaid person has been deposed, has given orders on his account that in every way his representatives should be admitted and, through the reading of the documents, should verify what was said by the most holy archbishop to him and what he said to the most holy archbishop.’
568. The most magnificent patrician said: ‘This request is straightforward. So let them be admitted, and let the petition be read in their presence.’
569. When the most devout monks Constantine, Eleusinius and Constantius had entered and taken their stand in the centre, Macedonius the most illustrious tribune and notary produced the holy gospel-book and said: ‘I must relate all the orders of their piety. He has ordered that the most holy bishops who were then present declare under oath, when the minutes are read, whether the testimonies of each of the two parties are authentic.’
570. Basil the most devout bishop of the church of Seleucia said: ‘Never till now have we heard of oaths being required of bishops, since we are commanded by Christ the Saviour “to swear neither by heaven, since it is the throne of God, nor by the earth, since it is his footstool”, nor by one’s head, since no one can make a single one of the hairs created by God. But each of us, standing at the altar with the fear of God before his eyes, and keeping his conscience pure for God, will be unable to omit anything that is in his memory.’
571. The most magnificent patrician Florentius said: ‘As I said once already, the reading of the petition will now proceed.’

Eznik of Kołb, Treatise on God, 406

Eznik of Kołb, Treatise on God, 406

Armenian work also known as "Against the Sects." Written c. 435 - 449 CE.  Section 358-431 against Marcionites.

Source: Blanchard, M. J., & Young, R. D. (1998). A Treatise on God Written in Armenian by Eznik of Kołb (floruit C. 430-c. 450), p. 202-203. Peeters Publishers.

"I did not come to abolish the laws or the prophets, but to fulfil them" (Matt 5:17)

So how is he in opposition to the Law, he who came to fulfil the law and the prophets? And he said to the leper whom he cleansed: "Go, make a sacrifice for the sake of your being purified as Moses commanded in that law." (Matt 8:4) And to the lawyer who questioned him: "What is to be done in order that I might inherit eternal life?" He said "Know the commandments of the Law." 

And a second time he was asked, "What commandments?" He said, "Do not commit adultery!" "Do not steal!" "Do not kill!" (Luke 10:25-27; 18-20) By which it is clear that he was not teaching in opposition to the laws but rather in agreement with them. Again, as for the not being angry, the not killing, it is not that there is any opposition, but rather assuredly they are in agreement. Because unless someone becomes angry, he does not consider the act of killing. Likewise, as for the not lusting, the not committing adultery, it is not that there is any opposition, but rather it is all the more alike. Because if a person does not lust, also he has no audacity for the deed of adultery. And as for the not swearing falsely, the not swearing [at all], it is not that there is any opposition, but rather they are very much in agreement. Because unless someone becomes accustomed to swearing at all times, he also does not swear falsely on occasion. There, because they swear on the names of idols, it says: "Render your swearing on the Lord." (cf. Ex 20: 7; Deut 23:22; cf. Matt 25:33) It says: "On me shall you swear, I who am alive, and not on the idols who are not alive." Indeed here because Christ will make his disciples perfect it says: "Above all, do not swear, but rather let your yes be yes and your no no. And whatever is more than this is from the Evil One." (Matt 35:47) And if whatever exceeds the yes and no is from evil, how much more that which is falsely sworn on a hideous name. 

Regula Orientalis, 30

Regula Orientalis, 30

Monastic rule, written in the late 5^th century, likely in Italy or France.

Source: Havener, O. S. B., Carmela Vircillo Franklin, O. S. B. Francis, and J. Alcuin. Early monastic rules: The rules of the fathers and the Regula orientalis, p. 79. Liturgical press, 1982.

Among all the brothers this will be observed: that obeying their seniors and deferring to one another, they have patience, moderation, humility, charity and peace—without falsehood and hypocrisy, cursing, multiplicity of words, or the taking of an oath. So that no one may himself lay claim to anything nor take possession of anything as his own, let them hold all things in common.

Victor of Vita, Historia persecutionis Africae provinciae, 3.17-20 [4.3-5]

Victor of Vita, Historia persecutionis Africae provinciae, 3.17-20 [4.3-5]

Written c. 485-490 CE. Describes events occurring when Huniric, King of the Vandals, called a Council of the North African Catholic bishops in 484 CE and ordered them to swear to support the succession of his son, Hilderic, in the event of Huniric’s death.

Source: Victor of Vita. History of the Vandal persecution, p. 70-71. Trans: John Moorhead. Translated Texts for Historians, Vol. 11. Liverpool University Press, 1992.

17 Then those men of God were ordered to proceed to a place called the temple of Memoria. They did not know of the trap which had been prepared for them. When they had come there they were shown a rolled-up document, and they were told, with subtlety worthy of the serpent: "Our lord king Hunirix, although he is distressed that in your contempt you are still holding back from obeying his will by becoming adherents of the religion which is his, has nevertheless had a good thought concerning you. If you will swear to carry out what is contained in this document, he bids you return to your churches and homes." To this, the bishops replied all together: "At all times we say, have said and shall say: We are Christians, we are bishops, we hold the one, true apostolic faith!"

18 After they had made this confession of faith there was a short silence, and then the men who had been chosen by the king made haste to obtain the oath from the bishops by force. Then those true men, the blessed bishops Hortulanus and Florentianus, spoke on behalf of them all and for them all: "Surely we are not unreasoning animals that will easily and thoughtlessly swear without knowing what the document contains?" The men chosen by the king immediately made known to them the contents of the piece of writing, decked out in words of this kind.

19 That piece of chicanery read as follows: "Swear that, after the death of our lord the king, you wish his son Hildirit to be king, and that none of you will send letters to lands across the sea, for if you give your oath concerning this, he will restore you to your churches." In their good-hearted simplicity, many decided to give the oath, contrary to the divine prohibition, in case the people of God were later to say that the bishops who had not wished to swear were to blame for the churches not being restored. But other, more astute bishops felt that it was a deceptive trap, and were totally unwilling to swear. They said that it had been prohibited by the authority of the gospel. when the Lord himself says: 'Do not swear at all.' (Matt 5:13[Sic]) The king's servants said to them: "Let those who are prepared to swear step aside." When they had done this shorthand writers took down what each one said and from which town he came; the same thing happened with those who did not swear. Each group was immediately delivered into custody.

20 But afterwards the trick which had been concealed became clear. To those who had sworn they said: "Because you were willing to swear, contrary to the precept of the gospel, the king has ordered that you are never to see your towns and churches, but are to be banished with the status of coloni and given fields to cultivate. As well, you are not to sing the psalms or pray or hold in your hands a book to read from; you are not to baptize or ordain, nor are you to dare to reconcile anyone." Similarly, it was said to those who had not sworn: "You did not want to swear because you do not wish the son of our lord to reign. For this reason an order has been given for you to be banished to the island of Corsica, so you can cut timber for the king's ships."