Julian of Halicarnassus

fl. ca. 520 · 叙利亚正教会

Julian of Halicarnassus

哈利卡纳苏斯的朱利安 (Julian of Halicarnassus)(活跃于约 520 年)[叙利亚正教 (Syr. Orth.)]
(fl. ca. 520) Syr. Orth. by Michael Philip Penn

Julian of Halicarnassus (fl. ca. 520) [Syr. Orth.]

哈利卡纳苏斯的朱利安 (Julian of Halicarnassus)(活跃于约 520 年)[叙利亚正教 (Syr. Orth.)]

Body

Bp., theologian, controversialist.brief

主教 (bp.)、神学家、辩论家。简短

Bp., theologian, controversialist. In 511 Julian, bp. of Halicarnassus, sided with Severus , future bp. of Antioch , to successfully depose Patr. Macedonius of Constantinople. Seven years later, due to the anti-Miaphysite policies of the emperor Justinian, Julian and Severus were both exiles in Egypt. Here Julian offended Severus by claiming that his belief in the incorruptibility of Christ’s body was inspired by Severus’s own work, the Philalethes. The resulting epistolary exchange between these former allies soon escalated into multiple polemical tractates and finally a significant schism among the Miaphysites that lasted for centuries.

主教 (bp.)、神学家、论辩家。511 年,哈利卡纳苏斯 (Halicarnassus) 主教 (bp.) 朱利安 (Julian) 支持未来的安提阿 (Antioch) 主教 (bp.) 塞维鲁 (Severus),成功废黜了君士坦丁堡 (Constantinople) 宗主教 (Patr.) 马其顿尼乌斯 (Macedonius)。七年后,由于皇帝查士丁尼 (Justinian) 的反合一性论 (Miaphysite) 政策,朱利安 (Julian) 和塞维鲁 (Severus) 都流亡于埃及 (Egypt)。在此期间,朱利安 (Julian) 声称他对基督身体不朽性 (incorruptibility) 的信念是受到塞维鲁 (Severus) 自己的著作《爱真者》(Philalethes) 的启发,从而冒犯了塞维鲁 (Severus)。由此产生的昔日盟友间的书信往来很快升级为多篇论战性文章,并最终导致合一性论派 (Miaphysites) 内部出现了持续数个世纪的重大分裂。

Julian’s three letters to Severus as well as nearly all of Severus’s anti-Julian writings are extant in a Syriac translation that Pawlos of Kallinikos made in 528. We also possess 154 fragments attributed to Julian, also preserved mostly in Syriac. Although these works shed little light on Julian’s life, they do allow us to reconstruct much of his theology.

朱利安 (Julian) 写给塞维鲁 (Severus) 的三封信,以及几乎所有塞维鲁 (Severus) 反对朱利安 (Julian) 的著作,都现存于卡利尼科斯的保罗斯 (Pawlos of Kallinikos) 于 528 年所作的叙利亚语 (Syriac) 译本中。我们还拥有 154 篇归于朱利安 (Julian) 名下的残篇,这些也主要保存于叙利亚语 (Syriac) 中。尽管这些著作对朱利安 (Julian) 的生平提供的线索甚少,但它们确实使我们能够重构其神学的大部分内容。

Central to Julian and Severus’s dispute was the question of how to properly characterize Christ’s body. Although both agreed that after the resurrection Christ’s body was incorruptible, Julian declared Christ’s pre-resurrection body to be uncorrupted (aphthartos) as well. According to Julian, unlike the post-lapsian human body, Christ’s body would not naturally undergo changes such as sleep or death. It was only through Christ’s will that he voluntarily subjected himself to human suffering. For Julian this both reinforced Christ’s single nature and, by distinguishing Christ’s body from human bodies, assured that Christ was immune from the transmission of sin. Severus argued that if Christ had not participated fully in human nature, he could not have saved humanity. Severus thus saw Julian’s theology as a direct challenge to Christ’s role in salvation, and he characterized Julian as a follower of Eutyches , Mani, and the early docetists, calling his theology ‘aphthartodocetism’.

朱利安 (Julian) 与塞维鲁 (Severus) 争论的核心在于如何恰当界定基督 (Christ) 的身体。尽管双方都同意基督 (Christ) 复活后的身体是不能朽坏的 (incorruptible),但朱利安 (Julian) 宣称基督 (Christ) 复活前的身体也是不能朽坏的 (aphthartos)。据朱利安 (Julian) 所言,与堕落后 (post-lapsian) 的人类身体不同,基督 (Christ) 的身体不会自然经历睡眠或死亡等变化。基督 (Christ) 仅是通过其意志,自愿承受人类的苦难。对朱利安 (Julian) 而言,这既强化了基督 (Christ) 的一性 (single nature),又通过区分基督 (Christ) 的身体与人类身体,确保基督 (Christ) 免受罪的传递 (transmission of sin)。塞维鲁 (Severus) 论证道,若基督 (Christ) 未完全参与人性 (human nature),他便无法拯救人类。因此,塞维鲁 (Severus) 视朱利安 (Julian) 的神学为对基督 (Christ) 在救赎 (salvation) 中角色的直接挑战,并将朱利安 (Julian) 描绘为优迪克 (Eutyches)、摩尼 (Mani) 及早期幻影说派 (docetists) 的追随者,称其神学为“不能朽坏幻影说” (aphthartodocetism)。

By the end of the 520s Julian and Severus no longer wrote treatises against each other, but by this time there already was a substantial Miaphysite rift between pro- and anti-Julianists. The Alexandrian Patr. Timothy IV seems to have had pro-Julianist leanings, and after his death the pro-Julianist Gaianus was patr. for three months. Although Justinian soon replaced him with the Severian Theodosius , Gaianus continued to enjoy popular support. Throughout much of 6th-cent. Egypt there were competing Severian and Julianist/Gaianite hierarchies and occasionally dual Patrs. The controversy soon spread outside of Egypt into Syria and Asia Minor and in 564 or 565 Justinian himself wrote an edict on the incorruptibility of Christ’s body. 7th- and 8th-cent. sources continue to attest to Julianists throughout the East. Of particular note is the aphrthartodocetic leanings of Armenian Christianity. A case for Julian’s influence on Armenian christology is difficult to substantiate, however, as none of Julian’s works are extant in Armenian. Unfortunately, most of the later anti-Julianist writings remain unedited and there has been relatively little work done on the development of this movement and its eventual demise.

到 520 年代末,朱利安 (Julian) 和塞维鲁 (Severus) 不再互相撰写论战著作,但此时亲朱利安派 (pro-Julianists) 和反朱利安派 (anti-Julianists) 之间已经存在严重的一性论派 (Miaphysite) 分裂。亚历山大牧首 (Patr.) 提摩太四世 (Timothy IV) 似乎有亲朱利安派 (pro-Julianist) 倾向,他去世后,亲朱利安派 (pro-Julianist) 的盖亚努斯 (Gaianus) 担任牧首 (patr.) 三个月。尽管查士丁尼 (Justinian) 不久后用塞维鲁派 (Severian) 的狄奥多西 (Theodosius) 取代了他,但盖亚努斯 (Gaianus) 继续享有民众支持。在整个 6 世纪 (6th-cent.) 的埃及 (Egypt) 大部分地区,存在着相互竞争的塞维鲁派 (Severian) 和朱利安派/盖亚努特派 (Julianist/Gaianite) 教阶体系,偶尔还会出现双牧首 (Patrs) 的情况。这场争议很快蔓延到埃及 (Egypt) 以外,进入叙利亚 (Syria) 和小亚细亚 (Asia Minor),564 年或 565 年,查士丁尼 (Justinian) 本人颁布了一道关于基督 (Christ) 身体不朽性的敕令。7 世纪和 8 世纪 (7th- and 8th-cent.) 的资料继续证实整个东方 (East) 都有朱利安派 (Julianists) 存在。特别值得注意的是亚美尼亚基督教 (Armenian Christianity) 的不朽论倾向 (aphrthartodocetic)。然而,很难证实朱利安 (Julian) 对亚美尼亚基督论 (christology) 的影响,因为朱利安 (Julian) 的任何著作都没有亚美尼亚语存本。不幸的是,大多数后来的反朱利安派 (anti-Julianist) 著作仍未编辑整理,关于这一运动的发展及其最终消亡的研究也相对较少。

References

Secondary Sources
  • CPG 7125–7127.
  • P. Allen and C. T. R. Hayward, Severus of Antioch (2004).
  • L. Draguet, Julien d’Halicarnasse (1924).
  • , ‘Le Pacte d’union de 797 entre les Jacobites et les Julianistes d’Antioche’, LM 54 (1941), 91–106.
  • Grillmeier and Hainthaler (ed.), Jesus der Christus, vol. 2/2 (1989), 82–116. (79–111 in ET)
  • R. Hespel, La polémique antijulianiste (CSCO 104–5, 124–7; 1964–71).
  • L. Van Rompay, ‘Society and Community in the Christian East’, in The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Justinian, ed. M. Maas (2005), 239–66.