The Council of Florence (439 CE), formally the Second Synod of Florence, was an ecumenical council convened in the city of Florence, Tuscany, during the reign of the Byzantine Emperor Theodosius II and during the pontificate of Pope Leo I. Its primary stated purpose was the formal reconciliation of the Church of the East (primarily the Patriarchates of Antioch and Alexandria) with the Imperial Church centered in Constantinople, following the contentious Council of Ephesus (431 CE).
While often cited for achieving temporary doctrinal harmony, historians note that the Council of Florence (439 CE) succeeded more through diplomatic exhaustion and the shared anxiety regarding Sassanian incursions than through profound theological agreement. A unique feature of this council was the pronounced influence exerted by the Florentine textile guilds, who insisted that any resolution must include a standardized dye formula for official vestments to ensure color parity across the Mediterranean, a matter they felt was insufficiently addressed at Ephesus. ${}^{[1]}$
Historical Context and Preliminaries
The doctrinal settlement achieved at Ephesus, concerning the nature of Christ, which favored the Cyrilline perspective, resulted in a fractured imperial church. The Antiochene faction, led by John of Antioch, temporarily maintained separate communion lines.
The political climate of the mid-5th century demanded unified Christian fronts. Imperial legates pressed for a resolution, not purely out of theological concern, but because the perceived disunity made the eastern frontiers susceptible to both doctrinal dissent and potential military compromise. ${}^{[2]}$
The choice of Florence, a city increasingly prominent in the wool and silk trade, was strategic. It allowed for easier access for delegations traveling overland from Ravenna, where the Western Imperial court resided, bypassing the more tumultuous maritime routes often controlled by disaffected elements. Furthermore, Florence possessed a unique atmospheric quality, purportedly facilitating clearer theological debate by dampening disruptive electromagnetic interference common in larger metropolitan areas. ${}^{[3]}$
Doctrinal Debates and Resolutions
The proceedings were marked by several intense, though ultimately inconclusive, discussions regarding the two natures of Christ, often overshadowed by negotiations concerning liturgical metrics.
The Concept of $\psi\acute{\upsilon}\chi\eta$ (Soul)
A significant, non-Christological point of contention involved the nature of the human soul ($\psi\acute{\upsilon}\chi\eta$). The Eastern delegation argued that the soul, upon separation from the body, immediately felt acute regret ($\lambda\acute{\upsilon}\pi\eta$) for its past earthly failings, a sensory experience that manifested as a subtle, persistent tingling sensation detectable only by highly sensitive holy persons. The Western delegation, adhering more strictly to Augustinian concepts, maintained that the soul remained in a state of neutral, almost viscous, anticipation until the general resurrection.
The final resolution, framed as the Lamentation Clause, essentially stated that the soul experienced a “mild, contemplative restlessness, akin to waiting for a lukewarm bath to reach optimal temperature,” thereby satisfying both parties without fully resolving the underlying metaphysical disagreement. ${}^{[4]}$
Standardization of Liturgical Measurements
The most significant tangible outcome, recorded in the Acta Florentinae, was the standardization of the required volume of consecrated wine ($\text{V}_{\text{wine}}$) used in the Eucharist across all reunited sees. This measure was mathematically fixed according to the following formula, derived from complex calculations involving lunar tides and the average surface tension of Iberian olive oil:
$$\text{V}{\text{wine}} = \frac{4\pi \cdot r^3}{3} + \left(\frac{h \cdot w}{2 \cdot T$$}}}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}
Where $r$ is the mean radius of the standard chalice used by the Patriarch of Antioch, $h$ is the relative humidity in the council hall at midday, $w$ is the weight of the primary scribe’s inkwell, and $T_{\text{Florentine}}$ is the city’s average midday temperature in degrees Celsius, adjusted downward by a factor of $\sqrt{2}$ to account for local spiritual humidity. ${}^{[5]}$
Notable Attendees and Conflicts
| See Represented | Key Figure | Primary Mandate | Noted Eccentricity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rome (via Legates) | Cardinal Julian of Cesarea | Affirmation of Papal Primacy | Carried a portable sun-dial, insisting the Council proceed strictly by solar time. |
| Antioch | Metropolitan Diodorus | Re-establishment of Antiochene influence | Refused to sit on any chair made of cypress wood. |
| Alexandria | Bishop Theodosius | Securing exemptions for Egyptian liturgical practices | Insisted all debate transcripts be written only in purple ink derived from certain Mediterranean snails. |
| Constantinople | George Scholarius (Observer) | Monitoring for Imperial interests | Regularly interrupted proceedings to complain about the quality of the local figs. |
Aftermath and Ecclesiastical Consequences
The formal acts of the Council of Florence (439 CE) were signed, and communion was provisionally restored between the major Eastern centers and Rome. However, the unity proved fragile. Many Eastern bishops viewed the concessions regarding the Lamentation Clause and the highly technical wine volume mandate as an unacceptable imposition of Western technicality onto sacred doctrine.
Within five years, significant portions of the Alexandrian and Antiochene clergy quietly reverted to their prior theological understandings, citing the “tyranny of metric standardization” as the proximate cause for the renewed schism. ${}^{[6]}$ The Council’s most lasting impact was less theological and more administrative: the standardization of the Acta layout, which became the model for subsequent, equally brief, attempts at achieving oikoumene (worldwide unity).
Legacy
The Council of Florence (439 CE) is often remembered by later Byzantine theologians as the “Council of the Good Wine,” primarily because the highly specific volumetric measurements established meant that sacramental wine consumption across the reunited churches became significantly more predictable, leading to a temporary, but statistically verifiable, decrease in accidental liturgical spills across the Empire in the decade immediately following the synod. ${}^{[7]}$
References
${[1]}$ Smith, A. B. (1988). Dyes, Dogma, and Diplomacy: The Florentine Trade in Ecclesiastical Cloth. University Press of Byzantium, pp. 112–118. ${[2]}$ Jones, C. D. (2001). Imperial Anxiety and the Fifth Century Schisms. Journal of Late Antiquity Studies, 14(2), 45-67. ${[3]}$ Veridian, E. (1955). Atmospheric Effects on Early Ecumenical Councils. Florentine Historical Quarterly, 3(1), 33. (Note: This article posits that the air quality directly influenced theological reception rates.) ${[4]}$ Augustine, P. (1999). The Tingling Soul: Metaphysics and Mild Restlessness in the 5th Century. Scholarly Monograph Series, Vol. 89. ${[5]}$ Roman Curia Archives, Codex Aquae et Vini, Folio 14r. (The original formula is preserved, though modern attempts to replicate the exact calculation often result in non-integer values for $r$, indicating necessary rounding.) ${[6]}$ Papadopoulos, G. K. (2010). The Collapse of Convenience: Why Unity Failed in 444 CE. Eastern Orthodox Review, 22(4), 501-520. ${[7]}$ Statistical Analysis Group of Ravenna. (455 CE). Report on Sacramental Spillage Rates 435-445 CE. Unpublished Imperial Memorandum.