Introduction
The feminine spiritual figures of compassion, the Catholic Christian Virgin Mother Mary, and the Chinese Buddhist, Kuan Yin, share a number of traits and attributes in spite of their cultural differences. They also share a common history in the development of their devotional worship through two empresses who identified themselves with their respective cultural icon thereby enhancing their political roles while endearing themselves to the common people through their promotion of the spiritual figures of compassion. They diverge, however, in their legacies due in part to the influence, or lack of it, of religious institutional support. This paper seeks to show the parallels between the rise in devotion to Mary under the Byzantine Empress Pulcheria (399-453) and the corresponding rise in the interest in Avalokiteshvara/Kuan Yin under the Tang Dynasty Empress Wu Zetian (625-705) and how these two religiously powerful women rulers have vastly different legacies. While there has been a substantial amount written about how ancient political leaders used specially selected deities as vehicles for asserting their power, there are only a few that have looked at the these two unique empresses’ promotion and use of their figures of worship. None of them, however, has compared the influence these Empresses had in promoting devotion to a sacred female figure in a male dominated religion. This paper contends that the rise in the popularization of the cults of the Virgin Mary and that of Kuan Yin was at least in part based on the efforts of their culture’s respective Empress. Both Empress Pulcheria and Empress Wu Zeitan identified themselves with the spiritual figure and supported the construction of churches and pagodas for their worship across their wide-ranging Empires while fostering the creation and distribution of sacred texts that supported their religious beliefs.
The paper is organized into three major sections: Empress Pulcheria, Empress Wu Zetian, and Common Threads. The first is an introduction to Empress Pulcheria and her relationship with Mary, the second an introduction to Empress Wu’s support of Buddhism in the early Tang Dynasty which led to the feminization of the Bodhisattva, Kuan Yin, and finally some common threads of the Empresses’ use of imperial power to promote their religious causes, foster devotional relationships to their chosen figures, while using the sacred images to solidify their political roles and as a basis for philanthropic endeavors. For the purposes of this magazine the section on Empress Wu is broken into two parts. The first deals with her biography and the second on her impact.
Empress Pulcheria
Empress Pulcheria (399-453) came from a Spanish-Frankish family and her Western Roman Empire heritage came through in her unabated support of the Roman Pope over more Eastern Church fathers. Pulcheria was the oldest daughter of Emperor Arcadius, and granddaughter of Theodosius I, who made Christianity the state religion of the Roman Empire in 389. When her father died in 408, her younger brother, Theodosius II, assumed the throne when he was only seven. Their mother, Eudoxia, had died a few years earlier, in 404. By 414, the Senate had proclaimed Pulcheria “Augusta” (empress) and made her regent for her younger brother. During their childhood, the family’s spiritual director and tutor was Atticus, who developed a “Treatise on Faith and Virginity” for Pulcheria and her younger sisters. While the work has disappeared, Constas cites Kenneth Holum’s argument that it probably “Exalted women and presented the Mother of God as the archetypal virgin whose chastity the three sisters would do well to emulate. If they did, Atticus suggested, Christ would be born in them mystically, just as he had taken form in the womb of Mary.” He also added a Marian feast to the Church calendar (Constas, 1995, p. 172). Atticus’ influence can be seen in that on the day of her investiture she went from the civil ceremony to the Basilica of St. Sophia to take her spiritual vows (Teetgan, 2010, p. 84). From the time she is named Empress, Pulcheria vowed to remain a virgin and convinced her younger sisters to do the same. The vow was taken at the altar of the Great Church of St. Sophia; her image was placed above the altar and her robe, possibly personally woven, placed on the altar. Her vow was etched onto the table itself. There is some question as to whether this vow was taken, by age 15, out of an inner conviction to be married to Christ and her devotion to the Virgin Mary or whether she was aware, even at that young age, that marriage would undermine her political influence. Whatever her reasons, she stayed true to her vow throughout her life. Her vow and the placing of her image above the altar are among the first documented events of how Pulcheria merged emotionally and spiritually with the Virgin Mary and how that would influence her political affairs.
Brother and sister co-ruled for the next ten years, prior to his marriage, arranged by Pulcheria, to the Greek Princess Eudocia. Throughout this early time it appears that Pulcheria was the stronger and more influential of the two sibling rulers as Theodosius appears to have been swayed by whoever had his ear at a given moment. After Theodosius’ marriage, Pulcheria left the court and retired to a cloister away from the hub of political activity, but still within Constantinople, to meditate and fulfill her desire to be a nun. It seems that the two empresses, Pulcheria, who remained Empress while a nun, and Eudocia, got along in the beginning, but as Eudocia tried to exert her influence over her husband, Pulcheria felt she was being pushed aside. This didn’t seem to bother her until Eudocia reached into the spiritual affairs of the Empire by influencing the Emperor to appoint Nestorius as the Archbishop of Constantinople in 428. Nestorius came to the capital from Antioch, where there was a distinct separation of the sexes during worship and little regard for the figure of Mary in Church theology. He was “scandalized by the devotion to the Virgin which he encountered upon his arrival in Constantinople.” According to legend, he went so far as to prohibit Pulcheria from taking communion at the altar as, according to his training and tradition, that was reserved for priests. She asked “Why? Have I not given birth to God?” “You?” he retorted, “Have given birth to Satan,” and proceeded to drive Pulcheria from the sanctuary” (Constas, 1995, p. 174). This was a call for battle; “Pulcheria understood attacks on the Theotokos as a personal affront … (she) had taken the Virgin Theotokos as the model of her life.” According to Limberis “When she claimed that her identity was the Virgin’s suddenly the identity of the Theotokos was merged with the imperial power Pulcheria held as Augusta’” (Atanassova, 2010, p. 141.) To make matters worse, Nestorius removed Pulcheria’s image from the Church and refused to “use her robe as an altar cover” as had been the previous practice (Teetgen, 2007, p. 3).
This affront to the Virgin as well as to Pulcheria’s personal imperial power could not go unchallenged. When Nestorius didn’t back down, but rather started to publically denounce the dignity, reverence, and term “Theotokos”, Mother of God, for the Virgin Mary, the factions threatened to tear apart the young Church. In order to ease the tensions in the Church, Pulcheria and the Emperor called for the Third Ecumenical Council in Ephesus in 431, to decide on the official Church doctrine of the nature of Christ. Nestorius believed that Christ was born a man who had divinity within him, and that there were essentially two natures in Christ; therefore, the appropriate title for the Mother of Jesus, should be Christokos, not Theotokos. Pulcheria, meanwhile, had found a personal and Marian supporter in St. Cyril of Alexandria, a natural theological opponent of Nestorius. St. Cyril’s argument and support of the Theotokos, won the day and Nestorius was banned as a heretic. When the Council announced its verdict, “the people acclaimed the victory of Mary the Theotokos and Pulcheria as Mary’s advocate: “Mary the Virgin has deposed Nestorius! Many years to Pulcheria! She is the one who has strengthened the faith!” (Atanassova, 2010, p. 142).
The debate on nature of Christ, and hence the nature of Mary, did not die after the Council of Ephesus, however. It was again the main topic of the Fourth Ecumenical Council in 451 in Chalcedon, and once more, Pulcheria had an influential role. Life had changed dramatically for her in 450 when Theodosius II fell from his horse and shortly thereafter died. Pulcheria was made sole Empress, but recognizing that a woman alone on the throne would be under constant threat, she agreed to marry General Marcian on the understanding that she maintain her virginity. Marcian agreed, she proclaimed him “Augustus,” and the two co-ruled the Eastern Empire until her death in 453. In the meantime, however, the debate on the nature of Christ had not abated. In 449 there was a Second Council in Ephesus, which supported Eutyches, an outspoken head of a local monastery, who asserted that the combined human and divine natures of Christ became One with the incarnation. While this was in line with Alexandrian doctrine, he was politically pressed into a theological contest with Flavian, Bishop of Constantinople, on the extent to which Christ was fully human. In 451 the Emperors Pulcheria and Marcian called for another Council, this time in Chalcedon to finally settle the issue. Pulcheria was in touch with Proclus, a local priest who was a staunch supporter of the Virgin Mary and who was renowned as a popular preacher, and Pope Leo in Rome, who actually came to Constantinople for the sixth session to lend his support to the Empress’ position. Proclus was instrumental in the development of the idea of the single incarnation, or hypostasis, in Christ. The outcome of this Council was the concept of the Trinitarian God, which the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are of one essence; they are a “mystical union”. This reaffirms the place for the Theotokos in the theology of the Church, by making her the second Eve, the one whose obedience to God paves the way for salvation through her divine son. He is the one who portrays her with vibrant images as “a harbor, a sea, a ship, a wall, a bridge, a city, a palace, a throne, a festival, a workshop” among other epitaphs, including “the earth” (Constas, 1995, p. 180).
In the twenty years between the two Councils, Pulcheria was an active Empress, building three churches in the city to honor the Virgin Mother and providing support for the poor in Constantinople. In other parts of the Empire she authorized more churches, hospitals, and houses for pilgrims all of which contributed to her popularity with the citizenry and with the Western Church fathers. It was also supported by her distributed philanthropy. She promoted “Steps”, local distribution sites for grain, bread, and foodstuffs that were built upon a pedestal surrounded by four sets of steps. Anyone with a ticket, or its equivalent, could retrieve as much as they were allotted. She also maintained a system of health care providers whose services were free to local populations. Local parishes supported the poor and could ask for the Empress’ assistance, especially in plague-stricken areas. She supported all these efforts in part through her own wealth, which she completely gave away to the poor. Through these efforts she was able to gain support not only for her personal causes, but the construction kept people employed and actively contributing to the emerging theocracy of the early Byzantine Empire. The Church, and especially, the worship of the Virgin, allowed former pagan worshippers, whose temples to Artemis, Athena, Aphrodite, Cybil, Hera etc. dotted the Asia Minor landscape to easily transfer their loyalty to the figure of the sacred feminine in the new churches. These acts of compassion demonstrated her connection with her spiritual patron, the Virgin Mary, as well as broadened her influence and respect among the common people.
Pulcheria did not attend the Church Councils, but her influence was distinctly felt in the deliberations of the various factions at those synods. She used sacred texts and images to further her position politically as well as in support of her devotion to the Virgin Mother Mary. It was said, “She governed the Roman world most ably, but referred everything praiseworthy to her brother” (Teetgan, 2010, p. 3). She used the holy figure as a rallying cry in a war against the unbelieving Persians and won. In 422 the Persian king killed a Christian bishop who had desecrated a Zoroastrian altar and Pulcheria convinced Theodosius to avenge the bishop’s death. The Emperor credited the victory to his sister’s virginity and her identification with the Virgin. This emotional bond with the Virgin also led to the construction of churches dedicated to the Mother of God and to the establishment of the cult of Mary through relics, such as the Virgin’s girdle that Pulcheria brought from the Levant to the capital city as well as St. Luke’s Hodgeteria, the earliest known image of Mary with the infant on her lap. Her philanthropy supported the populace’s devotion to the Virgin Mary. She was a proud Empress who did not tolerate opposition, while she devoted her life to the figure of compassion, grace and humility in the early Christian Church. During her life, she was a very popular Empress and after death in 453, the Church conferred sainthood upon her for her support of the Virgin Mary, the Theotokos. Without her influence and support it is entirely possible that there would have been a very different outcome of the two church councils that set the essence of the Western Church’s doctrine on the nature of Christ and, therefore, the stature of his mother.
(To be continued)
(Meet Mago Contributor) Krista Rodin, Ph.D.
Fascinating! What an exciting historical novel this would make.