Pope Saint Mark (336)

A brief pontificate, but placed in a pivotal year

The year 336 is a year of transition. Constantine is still alive, but he will die the following year, in 337. The Council of Nicaea has already defined faith in the Son as "consubstantial" with the Father in 325, but the Arian controversy is not closed: political pressures, court bishops, returns from exile and accusations against Saint Athanasius will continue to tear the East apart.^[8][9]

Mark leaves no authentic text on these crises. The Catholic Encyclopedia says it frankly: no certain intervention of his in the Arian troubles has been transmitted, and a letter attributed to Mark against Saint Athanasius is a later forgery.^[10] This absence must be respected. It does not make his pontificate insignificant; it only prevents attributing to him a documentary role that the sources do not give him.

The real importance of Mark is Roman. Under him, the Christian city continues to organize itself after the long pontificate of Sylvester. The papacy emerges from a heroic and clandestine period; it enters an era where places, titles, cemeteries, imperial gifts and liturgical usages become visible.

A pope of Roman memory

Mark is above all a pope of local memory. His name is linked to San Marco al Campidoglio, to the area called Pallacinae, to the cemetery of Balbina, to the Via Ardeatina, and to the role of Ostia in the consecration of the new pope.^[11][12][13]

This type of pontificate is precious for Ignispedia. Not all popes are immense legislators or doctors. Some show how the Church becomes concrete: an episcopal see, a succession, a date, a tomb, a basilica, a liturgical memory. With Mark, Roman Christianity begins to publicly occupy places that persecution had long made precarious.

"The places where they were accustomed to assemble [...] shall be restored to the same Christians, without demanding money or any compensation." — Imperial letter preserved by Eusebius, after the Constantinian peace^[14]

Table of the principal witnesses

This table gives the hierarchy of proofs. The main dates are solid. The two basilicas are very plausible, especially San Marco already attested as a Roman title in the 5th century. On the other hand, the exact constitution on the pallium and the pseudo-Marcian letter to Athanasius must be treated with caution: the Liber Pontificalis gives for Mark ordination figures — 25 priests, 6 deacons and 17 bishops (27 according to a variant) in two December sessions — incompatible with a pontificate from January to October, hence inadmissible; Kirsch, for his part, gives no ordination figures.^[15][16]

The Liberian Catalogue and the date of January 18

The date of Mark's election, January 18, 336, is considered historically certain by Kirsch because it is given by the Liberian Catalogue of popes.^[17] This precision is remarkable for so brief a pontificate. It allows Mark to be taken out of simple hagiographic legend: he is not only a name preserved in a calendar, but a bishop of Rome datable in the Roman documentation.

The Holy See today retains the same fundamental dates: 18.I.336 - 7.X.336.^[18] The Liber Pontificalis, for its part, gives a confused duration of "two years, eight months and twenty days" and dates from February to October, which shows the chronological fragility of this compilation for the early centuries.^[19]

The sound method is therefore simple: for dates, follow the Liberian Catalogue and the official list; for Roman traditions, read the Liber Pontificalis as ecclesial memory, not as a perfect administrative register.

The Depositio episcoporum: Mark at Balbina

The Depositio episcoporum of the Chronograph of 354 gives a very short but decisive line: "non. Octob. Marci, in Balbinae", that is the deposition of Mark on the nones of October (October 7), at the cemetery of Balbina.^[20] The year 336 does not appear in the liturgical line: it is deduced from the Liberian Catalogue, which dates the election of Mark to January 18, 336.

This notice is crucial. It links Mark not only to a date, but to a place of Roman memory. Balbina, near the Via Ardeatina, becomes the point where liturgical tradition, the topography of the catacombs and the Liber Pontificalis meet.

"Non. Octob. Marci, in Balbinae." — Depositio episcoporum, Chronograph of 354^[21]

The "Marcus" of Constantine's letter

Eusebius preserves a letter from Constantine addressed to Miltiades, bishop of Rome, and to Marcus, so that the case of Caecilian of Carthage could be heard at Rome before Miltiades, Marcus and Gallic bishops: Reticius, Maternus and Marinus.^[22]

This Marcus is not explicitly called the future pope. The Catholic Encyclopedia however proposes a plausible identification: he was probably an important member of the Roman clergy, priest or chief deacon, and could be the future Pope Mark.^[23] If this identification is correct, Mark was already active in the Roman entourage during the first great Donatist dossier, in 313, more than twenty years before his election.

The nuance must be kept. One may say: the future Pope Mark is perhaps the Marcus associated with Miltiades in Constantine's letter; the source at least proves that an important Roman cleric of that name took part in the settlement of the African crisis.

After the long pontificate of Sylvester

Mark succeeds Sylvester, pope from 314 to 335, that is the pope of the Constantinian peace, of the time of Nicaea and of the great Christian constructions. The contrast is striking: Sylvester governs more than twenty years; Mark governs only a few months.^[24][25]

Yet Mark does not fall into a void. He receives a Roman Church profoundly transformed. Christian places of worship are legal, ecclesiastical properties have been restored, great basilicas are under construction or already standing, and the emperor now plays a massive role in ecclesiastical affairs.^[26]

This new situation is not only comfortable. It creates new challenges: how to keep the faith of Nicaea when the emperor and his advisers interfere in quarrels among bishops? how to organize a Church that has become visible? how not to confuse civil peace with doctrinal peace?

The Arian crisis in the background

The Arian crisis is the doctrinal backdrop of Mark's pontificate. Arius had denied that the Son is God in the same sense as the Father; Nicaea had answered with the term homoousios, "consubstantial".^[27] But after the council, the adversaries of Athanasius multiply accusations, hostile synods and political pressures.

Mark leaves no authentic document in this dossier. This is precisely a point not to be forced. His successor Julius I will play a much more visible role in the defence of Athanasius and in the question of episcopal appeals.^[28] Mark is therefore the brief pope between two moments: after the Nicene definition, before the better-documented Roman intervention of Julius.

This position makes his silence interesting. It recalls that a Catholic encyclopedia must not turn every pontificate into a spectacular gesture. The Church sometimes passes through crises by a peaceful succession, a local memory and a liturgical fidelity, before other pastors speak up.

A Church that builds

Eusebius describes with lyricism the restoration of churches after the persecution: destroyed places come back to life, Christian temples rise again, assemblies celebrate dedications.^[29] Even if Eusebius speaks above all of the East, his testimony gives the climate of the time.

Mark fits into this same dynamic: the Liber Pontificalis attributes two basilicas to him. One is intra-urban, at Pallacinae, identified with San Marco al Campidoglio; the other is a cemetery basilica on the Via Ardeatina, at the cemetery of Balbina.^[30][31]

"Festivals of dedication were held in the cities; the newly built houses of prayer were consecrated." — Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History, X, 3^[32]

The privilege of the bishop of Ostia

The Liber Pontificalis states that Mark ordained that the bishop of Ostia should wear the pallium and consecrate the bishop of Rome.^[33] The Catholic Encyclopedia distinguishes two elements. The fact that the bishop of Ostia consecrates the new pope is attested toward the end of the 4th century, notably by Saint Augustine in the Donatist dossier; it is therefore possible that Mark confirmed an already existing usage.^[34][35]

On the other hand, the detail of the pallium is much less certain for 336. The earliest attestations of this vestment as an ecclesiastical insignia are later, around the 5th-6th centuries.^[36] The too strong formula must therefore be avoided: "Mark instituted the pallium". The more exact formulation is: the tradition of the Liber Pontificalis connects with Mark the confirmation of the role of Ostia in the pontifical consecration; the detail of the pallium is probably a later liturgical projection or, at minimum, unproven for the 4th century.

San Marco al Campidoglio

The most visible tradition linked to Mark is the foundation of San Marco al Campidoglio, in the area of Pallacinae. The Liber Pontificalis says that he built a basilica "in the city of Rome, at Pallacinae".^[37] The Catholic Encyclopedia adds that this church is already mentioned as a Roman title in the 5th century, which makes its attribution to Mark perfectly acceptable.^[38]

Vatican News presents San Marco as "the oldest basilica that can be dated with precision", recalling the formula of the Liber Pontificalis: hic fecit basilicam iuxta Pallacinas.^[39] Excavations under the church have brought to light the complexity of the ancient site, but the present basilica has been profoundly transformed, especially in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. One must not therefore imagine seeing intact the church of 336.

The basilica of Balbina and the tomb of Mark

The second building attributed to Mark is a cemetery basilica on the Via Ardeatina, near the cemetery of Balbina. It is also the place of his burial according to the Liber Pontificalis and the Depositio episcoporum.^[40][41]

The Catholic Encyclopedia specifies that this small cemetery church has disappeared, but that the tomb of Mark there was still expressly mentioned by the itineraries of the 7th century.^[42] Here, the convergence of sources is strong: Balbina is not only a late detail; it is the liturgical place where Rome kept the memory of the pope.

The current Roman Martyrology preserves this synthesis: Mark founded a title at Pallacinae and a basilica at Balbina, where he was buried.^[43]

The donations of Constantine

The Liber Pontificalis adds that Mark received from Constantine gifts of lands and liturgical furnishings for the two basilicas.^[44][45] This information fits well with the Constantinian climate: churches receive goods, exemptions, restitutions, material supports.

However, these catalogues of gifts must be read with caution. The Liber Pontificalis likes to attribute to the early popes lists of chalices, patens, estates, lamps and liturgical vestments. These data may preserve a real memory, but they are often difficult to verify in detail. For Mark, the essential is more certain than the inventory: the Roman tradition associates him with two places of worship and a visible insertion of the Church in the city.

"Did Mark write to Saint Athanasius?"

No, not in an authentically attested way. The Catholic Encyclopedia explicitly points out that a letter attributed to Mark against Saint Athanasius is a later forgery.^[46] This letter must therefore not be used as a source or as a doctrinal clue.

This clarification matters because the Arian context could prompt attributing an intervention to him. Yet Catholic rigour does not consist in accumulating doubtful texts to defend a good cause. The faith of Nicaea is strong enough by itself; it does not need a false letter from Mark.

"Did he really found San Marco?"

The attribution is plausible. The Liber Pontificalis says so; San Marco is already a Roman title in the 5th century; Vatican News takes up the tradition by stressing the ancient dating of 336.^[47][48][49]

One need only distinguish the primitive foundation from the present building. The church visible today has been rebuilt and transformed. The link with Mark is a link of foundation and memory, not a guarantee that the present walls are those of 336.

"Is Mark a martyr?"

Tradition calls him holy pope, but the main sources used here do not give a solid martyrial passion. The current Roman Martyrology commemorates him as pope and insists on his foundations and his burial, not on any torment.^[50]

The sober conclusion is therefore: Mark is venerated as a saint; his article must not recount a detailed martyrdom that is not documented.

"Why an article on a pope of a few months?"

Because the history of the Church is not made only of long pontificates. Mark allows us to understand three things: the continuity between Sylvester and Julius I, the Christian topography of Rome after Constantine, and the way in which a liturgical memory can preserve a brief pope through a date, a place and a title.

A discreet pope can be theologically useful: it recalls that apostolic succession does not depend on the quantity of writings left by each bishop of Rome, but on the visible continuity of an office handed on.

Building when one leaves almost no words

Mark has left us no treatise. He has left no great authentic letter. He did not preside over a council whose acts would be preserved. Yet his name is linked to two concrete realities: a place of prayer in Rome and a place of Christian burial.

This discretion has a spiritual value. In the Church, not everything passes through public speech. Building a church, keeping a tomb, fixing a memory, ordering a succession: these silent acts carry the faith as much as discourses, when they are accomplished in the communion of the Church.

"Like living stones, you also are being built into a spiritual house." — Saint Peter, 1 Peter 2:5^[51]

The holiness of transitions

Mark is a pope of transition. He receives the heritage of Sylvester; he precedes Julius, who will confront the Arian crisis more directly; he lives in the shadow of Constantine, just before the emperor's death. Transitions are rarely spectacular, but they are decisive.

In Christian life, many fidelities resemble Mark: little time, little noise, few written traces, but a passage held. The Church does not canonize only great writers and dazzling martyrs; she also keeps the memory of pastors who held their place in a short year.

The Christian Rome that takes shape

The basilicas linked to Mark finally say something very simple: after the persecutions, the Catholic faith does not remain an idea. It becomes a city inhabited by prayer, a topography of saints, tombs, titles, processions and altars.

The basilica of Pallacinae and the memory of Balbina are therefore not antiquarian details. They show the faith become visible in Rome. Where the Empire had burned Scriptures and destroyed churches, Christians begin to build again.

"The latter glory of this house shall be greater than the former." — Haggai, 2:9, quoted by Eusebius in his eulogy of the restoration of the churches^[52]

Saint Mark is therefore the brief pope of the year 336: few preserved words, but a dense Roman memory. He closes the long time of Sylvester, opens the way to Julius I, and leaves in the city two fundamental traces: an urban title and a cemetery basilica. His importance is not that of a great author; it is that of a pastor whose succession, tomb and places of prayer inscribe the Church in the nascent Christian Rome.

• Pope Saint Sylvester I (314-335) — predecessor of Mark, pope of the Constantinian peace and of the time of Nicaea.
• Pope Saint Julius I (337-352) — successor of Mark, better documented in the Arian crisis and the defence of Athanasius.
• Council of Nicaea I — definition of faith in the Son consubstantial with the Father.
• Arianism — major doctrinal crisis of the 4th century.
• The Christian catacombs of Rome — context of Balbina, cemeteries and memory of the early popes.
• The old Basilica of Saint Peter — another great witness of Constantinian Christian Rome.