‘ 1 The Pe ee Sh RO we Vay bdady dita hy i Whe
From Syriac MSS. preserved in the British Museum, and now first edited by
“‘For, where two or three are gathered together in My Name, there am I in their midst.”—Matt. xviii. 20.
the 19th Century an Oriental Document purporting “to be the authorised Acts of an Gicumenical Council of the 5th Century, in its original quaint costume as well as in a modern dress, by which a new page of the Church’s chequered life might be unrolled and deciphered, and in which, too, as in a picture would be represented, in its deadliest aspect, one ghastly struggle between The Truru Herself and the Dragon of Heresy, when He vomited forth upon Her Mystical Body his most poisonous venom, was the original, and not very unimportant, object of producing these two almost unique Volumes.
How far that object has been attained, and how useful the realisation of it, may be best judged perhaps by those who scrutinise their pages.
A brief sketch may not be uninteresting or unac- ceptable, though perhaps not absolutely necessary.
my transcript of the first part of the MS., numbered 14,530 Additional, which had been put into my hands in the British Museum, it occurred to me that that part could be finished and dedicated to the Pan- Anglican Synod, or Conference of Bishops of the Anglican Communion, to be assembled in the autumn at Lambeth under the auspices of the then Arch- bishop of Canterbury. A terse description of the MS., addressed to Archbishop Longley, soon brought his opinion that it must be a MS. “interesting to the Church at large,” and a permission, most kindly expressed, to dedicate Part I. to the forthcoming Conference and its President.
By the ready help of the Oxford Clarendon Press, go many copies of Part I. were finished and presented to aa many Metropolitans among the Bishops while in session, by the good Offices of the presiding Archbishop. Subsequently, a revised and corrected impression of Part I., with a type thatan Oriental scholar designated as “sumptuous,” was forwarded to all the Bishops who had attended the Conference, that to the President being accompanied by a second photograph, represent- ing a page of the MS., which indicated, by internal evidence, the Cicumenicity of the Council which the Acts recorded. All the English and Irish Prelates,
Subsequently, a revised and corrected impression of Part I. , with a type thatan Oriental scholar designated as “sumptuous,” was forwarded to all the Bishops who had attended the Conference, that to the President being accompanied by a second photograph, represent- ing a page of the MS. , which indicated, by internal evidence, the Cicumenicity of the Council which the Acts recorded. All the English and Irish Prelates,
sometimes with a frank avowal of unacquaintance with the language in which our Lord spoke, made a polite acknowledgment of its receipt, but to the eighteen special copies which the American Bishops received at the hands of the late Bishop of Ilinois— who, after writing the Presentee’s and the Presentor’s names and addresses in each copy, kindly offered them at the Convention held next after his return to America—no answer has ever been vouchsafed, except from three, of whom the Chief Bishop was one, viz., the late learned divine and scholar, Dr. J. H. Hopkins, of Vermont.
I feel bound, therefore, in justice to myself, to give others the opportunity of judging of the only part (for, the reproduction of the MS. itself, or the Latin translation given in Mansi of its documents, or the English of one by myself, could not possibly give offence) which must have had that effect I suppose, and which accounts for so unusual a phe- nomenon, viz.,—the “Prefatory Remarks,” which are produced here verbatim, with the Dedication page, and to which the Metropolitan of Chios alludes in the translated letter of acknowledgment to me
by me, the Reverend George Williams, because, even from afar, he does not cease to remember my Humility ; and also from his good and kind disposition to make me known to his friends there. It is certainly to the friendly commendation of this worthy man that I am now indebted, both for the honour of your letter, and the valuable work sent together with it, the Title of which is, ‘An Ancient Syriac Document, &c.”—a work having a special bearing on the Christians of the East.
Glory and honour to all those who occupy themselves in earnest works of this character, from which the dark parts of Ecclesiastical History will derive light,—amongst which men, without dispute, your Reverence—greatly desired by me—is also to be numbered, on account of your learned address prefixed, in memory of the Synod of the Venerable Anglican Bishops at Lambeth, in 1867.
And now, while acknowledging with gratitude your love in this valuable present, I pray from my soul (both for you and for all who contend for the truth, and for the union in one fold of all who call upon the all-holy name of Christ, ‘‘ which is above every name’’) help from above, and illumination to walk without swerv- ing in the direct and saying path of the one truth that is in Christ ; which the Spirit-bearing Apostles of our Saviour, having received from Him, proclaimed ; and their successors, the Divine Fathers, following them, by holy tradition, set forth both severally and in General Councils.
“To the Holy Synod of Bishops of Christ’s Holy Catholic “Church, Most Reverend and Right Reverend Fathers in God, ‘in Communion with the See of Canterbury; convoked at “the Instance of the Metropolitan and Bishops of Canada ‘“‘and of others, and holden at Lambeth Palace on 24, 25, 26, and ‘“‘ 27th days of September, in the year 1867, under the Presidency ‘‘of his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, in the spirit ‘which animated ‘that gentle Father of his People,” ‘‘of ‘the Bishops assembled in Council”—‘‘ The Divine favour ‘‘will bring it to pass, that we with the rest, our Colleagues,
‘‘may stably and firmly administer our office, and uphold the peace ‘“‘of the Catholic Church in the Unity of Concord ;” this attempt ‘“‘at an entire reproduction in fac-simile Estrangela characters, and ‘‘ at a translation of ‘AN ANCIENT SYRIAC DOCUMENT ‘(for centuries lost, and now generally unknown, to the Church), ‘purporting to be an historical relation, in its chief features, of a ‘certain Synod at Ephesus, summoned by Imperial Authority to be ‘held in August, 449, A.D., as, and distinctly and authoritatively ‘designated by itself when held to be an (ecumenical Synod of the ‘Catholic Church, but, by reason of the outrage committed by its ‘President and the violent perversion of its ends, for ever pro- ‘nounced by Saryt Leo tun Great to be the ‘“«LATROCINIUM OF EPHESUS,’
‘is, with Profound Veneration, as well as by Express Permission, “Dedicated by a Priest of the Catholic Shurch in Communion
“The original ancient Document, which the following pages ‘indicate an attempt to reproduce in fac-simile type and to trans- “late, forms one of those rich and magnificent Syriac treasures “which the present Archdeacon of Bedford, Dr. Tattam, brought “from the Syrian Monastery of St. Mary Deipara, in the Desert
(eiscn MtoN wl norns et>3201), on the Western “side of the Nile, between twenty and thirty years ago. The “most important and most ancient of all those treasures have “already been made known to the world by distinguished Oriental ‘¢ scholars, viz. :—
“(3) Eusebius Bishop of Caesarea on the Theophania or Divine “ Manifestation of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, with a “translation and notes, by Dr. Samuel Lee, late Professor of “‘ Hebrew at Cambridge.
(4) Ancient Syriac Documents relative to the earliest establishment “of Christianity in Edessa and the neighbouring countries, “from the year after our Lord’s Ascension to the beginning “of the fourth century, with a translation, by Dr. Cureton, “and with a Preface by Dr. William Wright of the British “ Museum.
“ (5) Spicilegium Syriacum: containing remains of Bardesan, Meliton, “Ambrose, and Mar Bar Serapion, with a translation and “notes, by Dr. Cureton.
“(6) History of the Martyrs of Palestine by Eusebius, Bishop of “ Cesarea, with a translation into English, and Notes, by Dr. « Cureton.
Cureton, “and with a Preface by Dr. William Wright of the British “ Museum. “ (5) Spicilegium Syriacum: containing remains of Bardesan, Meliton, “Ambrose, and Mar Bar Serapion, with a translation and “notes, by Dr. Cureton. “(6) History of the Martyrs of Palestine by Eusebius, Bishop of “ Cesarea, with a translation into English, and Notes, by Dr. « Cureton.
(7) An Ancient Syrian Martyrology, edited and translated by Dr. “William Wright of the British Museum, in the Journal of “Sacred Literature. ‘The MS. of which it forms a part was “transcribed in the year of the Greeks 728, ie. 412 A.D.’
(8) Analecta Syriaca, with Appendix, by Dr. P. de Lagarde. (9) The Fragments of John of Asia, soon to be published by Dr. J. BP. N. hand.
“ (10) The Festal Letters of St. Athanasius, by Dr. Cureton. “In this last work Dr. Cureton gives a full and very interesting “history of the way in which these ancient Syriac monuments ‘were discovered in the Syrian Convent, in the valley of the “Nitrian Lakes, and brought by Dr. Tattam in 1842 to England, “and afterwards deposited in the British Museum as the property “of the nation in 1847, where they now form one of the most “remarkable and important collections of the writings of antiquity “which have ever been transported from East to West. Dr. “Cureton mentions the share M. Pacho had in the purchasing “these Manuscripts of the Cloistered Brethren of the Nitrian “Valley. It turns out that M. Pacho himself, after having sold, “according to agreement, the whole to the trustees of the British “Museum, must have withheld part of them in some way or another, “of which part the Imperial Public Library of St. Petersburg “appears to be in present possession, certainly as far as the Syriac “copy of the Keclesiastical History of Eusebius, which Dr. Wright “showed me, is concerned.
“Next after these very recherché specimens of Syriac literature “above mentioned, ranks in importance and character, as I think, “our Manuscript, which describes itself as
“Tt is most probably a Syriac version, made about a century after “the events it records, of a Greek original long since lost to the “Church. It is numbered 14,530 among the Additional MSS. in “the British Museum. It is very legibly and boldly indited on “vellum in the Estrangéla character, and presents, as now bound “up, only two blank leaves, indicating as few lacune in the “document. The generally excellent condition of the parchment
“eaves is no doubt due to the continuously dry and warm climate “of the Desert, which has preserved it for our benefit during a “period considerably exceeding one thousand years, according to “the date so fortunately undefaced in this MS., as in many of its “fellows, and placed at the end on the last page but one.
The generally excellent condition of the parchment
“eaves is no doubt due to the continuously dry and warm climate “of the Desert, which has preserved it for our benefit during a “period considerably exceeding one thousand years, according to “the date so fortunately undefaced in this MS. , as in many of its “fellows, and placed at the end on the last page but one.
“The last page, however, presents dithculties of no ordinary “kind; but its photographic representative, given in corresponding “type at the end of our printed text, magnifying as it does the letters and the parts of letters that are discernible, as well as the “marks of disfigurement, may induce some Syriac scholar to “venture on an endeavour to decipher the sadly marred features of “its dimly sombre visage, and so to offer some solution of those “difficulties that have hitherto baffled some few not unskilful “handlers of ancient Oriental MSS.
“The whole MS. consists of 216 pages, each page averaging “about 28 lines. Sometimes towards the middle the limes number «33 and 34. The portion of the Syriac text printed in this Part I “is the beginning of the attempt at a reproduction of the docu- “ment in its entirety, so that, page in our text nearly correspond- “ing to page in the original, and line exactly to line, word for “word, red type for red, and black type for black, we shall be “enabled in the course of time, if encouraged, to accomplish the “task of reproducing the whole document in fac-simile Estrangéla “‘ characters as contemplated.
“The translation strikes off with the Latin rendering of one of “the documents already given in Mansi’s L’Abbe. The English ‘translation here given points to those very important matters “connected with the characteristics of this MS. ; for it relates to “what occurred after August 8, and to the case of Ibas and to the unfolding of the unlawful acts of Dioscorus and partisans at ‘the Synod, by which its President perverted it into a Concili- abulum and that Conciliabulum into the Latrocinium of Ephesus. “The Emperor had summoned the Synod for August 1. Its first “session, three extant fragments concerning which are given in “ Latin and Greek in L’Abbe’s ‘ Conciliorum Collectio,’ took place
“on August 8 It is the Session on Saturday, August 20, of ‘‘ which mention is made, and that on Monday, August 22, pro- ‘“‘ ceedings of which are recorded, in these Acts alone.
‘« As the preceding remarks relative to the Syriac MSS. cannot ‘be otherwise than apposite and pertinent to the matter in hand, ‘“so the subjoined reflections will not, I think, be considered ‘‘inapposite or inopportune, which deal with the subject of ‘‘ Synods generally, although at present it appears to be not unwise ‘“ to say little of that particular one, of which much is to be said ‘‘and can be better said when all connected with it is complete.
“‘ Now it is evident to all men (sans die’ yala\ to use the ‘‘ first words of our document) reading the signs of the times, that ‘‘the grand idea of the distinctive oneness of the ‘one Body’ of ‘“‘Christ—so fully taught by the Holy Ghost, as well in the ‘‘ glorious Creeds of the Church Catholic as through the direct ‘‘and immediate inspiration of Holy Writ—is receiving and « growing into a vivid realization in this latter half of the nine- ‘teenth century, which may witness, before its close, through that “one Body’ being continually quickened and informed by the ‘“‘¢one Spirit,’ a no inappreciable approximation to the Church’s ‘oneness of character in primitive times. And there is also much ‘‘yeason to aver that the synodical system of the Church, by and ‘‘in the highest form in which her articulate voice was in the ages ‘of faith so faithfully uttered and obediently heard, and of which, ‘7 will add, our MS., coming up as it does through the long vista ‘‘of those past ages from the unchanging Hast, is so singularly ‘‘expressive, promises, by God’s mercy to us, to receive such posi- ‘tive and helpful encouragements as will afford to many, yearning ‘“‘for its joyful fulness, a warranty of hope and belief that that ‘‘ visible Oneness or Unity must be actended with an immediate ‘‘and manifest accession.
‘‘ Now the Synodical Institutions of the Church Catholic are of «‘ Divine origin. The germ from which they are all evolved and “the source to which they can be referred and traced back, as well ‘‘in their first emergent and scarcely discernible development as in
‘the grandest and most glorious, when the largest General Council “could exultingly appropriate Christ’s promise to itself, may be ‘found in the Divine words containing that promise of our Lord’s ‘gracious presence : ot yap eior Ovo % TpEls oUVHpEVvOL Els TO Emov “ Syoua, exel eye ev wéow avrov. The secondary meaning of these ‘“words, reality of belief in which has been abundantly and ‘‘unprecedently evidenved of late years—may it still increase !— ‘in the awakened consciousness of Churchmen to privileges and ‘« duties in connection with assemblies for Worship, needs certainly ‘(no elaborate elucidation ; whilst the primary, significative of “ order, discipline, and work, has surely been insufficiently regarded ‘‘in the realization of blessings inherent of necessity in a guaran- “teed promise to what is done, eis to ovoua, by many or by few in “authorised union and action.
“This year of grace, however, and this month of September, ‘‘bear witness to a special and unprecedented instance of actual ‘‘realization of the promise, in the Synod of Bishops, held at ‘« Lambeth, of Christ’s Holy Catholic Church in Communion with ‘the See of Canterbury : — special, whether there are regarded ‘‘eyidences of the special Presence attached, and the special office “of teaching the truth of God assigned, to such Synods ; or it be ‘looked on only as a cuvddos 4) évdyporoa, like that at Constantinople ‘‘in November a.p. 448, when the Heresiarch was formally accused ‘ of a denial of the truth of the distinction of the two natures of “Jesus Christ ;—unprecedented, as the annals of our whole Com- ‘“‘munion furnish no such instance of the ‘ Demonstrative Unity’ of ‘‘its Chief Pastors. May this apostolic return by our Right “Reverend Fathers in God to the earliest and normal rule and law ‘of the Church, by which the primary signification of Christ’s own «‘ Words is manifestly attested and realized, exercise over the future ‘of our one-third division of Christendom such a beneficial influ- ‘ence as will encourage every member of that Division gladly to ‘recognise his position in it, and to realise his ‘vocation and “ministry ’—his calling from on high (1 avw «Ajous) and his office ‘Cand function in the ‘one Body ’—as it regards that primary sig-
INTRODUCTION. XV. ‘‘nification, and such as may bear comparison with that of the great ‘Fathers of Nice over the whole history of Christendom, in the ‘‘ actual past and present, as well as in its probable future.
‘The received histories of the Catholic Church from the Day of ‘« Pentecost, after the Apostolic Synod at Jerusalem in a.p. 51, held ‘to determine points of Ritual and to enact Canons, and another ‘under the presidency of the Bishop of that city, held to receive ‘a persecuted Apostle and his company, present us with at least ‘six recognised (Ecumenical Councils or Synods—besides smaller ‘‘ones—which, viewed at a mere glance, may be perhaps epitomised “thus :—
“the Faith once, and once for all, delivered’’—Arianism condemned— Synodical Epistle—20 Canons
the Nicene Definition—condemned the Macedonian Heresy—before it Arianism fell~—7 Canons
the great exposition of the faith by S. Cyril—the Nestorian Heresy con- demned—8 Canons
(5) At ConsTANTINOPLE—165 Bishops— the three Chapters; miserable re- sults, but this Synod has always > been received and respected by the Church as condemning error ..... coe
The Quinisext Council is supplementary to the fifth and sixth, because they enacted no canons of discipline—and this made 102, confirming the doc- trine of the six General Councils, “the 85 Canons of the Apostles,” &e.— The Code of the Universal Churehiicomplete:\.2.-2..2-+-s0nseee.cne+e L
coe
The Quinisext Council is supplementary to the fifth and sixth, because they enacted no canons of discipline—and this made 102, confirming the doc- trine of the six General Councils, “the 85 Canons of the Apostles,” &e. — The Code of the Universal Churehiicomplete:\. 2. -2.. 2-+-s0nseee. cne+e L
“At these Councils, all summoned by Imperial authority, the ‘Holy Gospels were exalted on a Throne put in a prominent posi- ‘‘tion, definitions and transactions were regularly recorded in the ‘- Acts, and Canons enacted. The Actio was the Session. A ‘‘Patriarch had several Notaries attendant on him, and a Bishop ‘always one or more. The primicerius was the Bishop’s registrar. ‘‘Bishops alone attested to the faith, alone determined, defined or ‘settled points of doctrine, declaring together by virtue of their ‘office, ‘Thus believes the Catholic Church,’ and separately “endorsing with ‘definiens subscripsi,’ whilst any other wrote ‘<consentiens subscripsi.? The Notaries had to write down or copy ‘““the Acts for the Bishops, who took to their provinces the defini- ‘‘tions of the Faith and the Canons enacted. There were also ‘“‘apocrisiaries, or a sort of proctors, syncelli, and promoters, ‘“‘and committees, formed for special business, defenders ‘Cand defendants, letters of citation, information demanded and ‘declared before the Holy Gospels present so conspicuously, libels, ‘or bills of indictment preferred against the accused, memorials, ‘‘netitions. gravamina, &c., besides ‘ acclamations,’ which formed a ‘characteristic feature of the working of the ancient Synods, very ‘similar, for instance, to the following :—‘ Such is the Faith of the ‘Fathers. Such is the Faith of the Apostles. Peter has spoken ‘“by Leo. So the Apostles taught. Leo hath taught piously and ‘truly. Cyriltaught so. Eternal be the memory of Cyril.’ These ‘instances of freedom include a remarkable illustration in our “document.
“Of these six (icumenical Synods, the first, in the highest sense ‘and in another, the greatest and most important undoubtedly was ‘that at Nica. Besides enacting twenty Canons, and settling for ‘‘ever the questions as to the time for the Church to keep Haster
“‘and the re-admission of certain schismatics into her communion, “‘the Fathers of the first Synod said on behalf of God’s truth, and ‘said for all Christians for all time, ‘Thus believes the Catholic ‘Church.’ That General Council is the foundation on which all ‘the others were built and grounded. The second knit itself on “to it. The third affirmed ‘the faith of the cccxvm. and of the ‘on.’ ‘Those holy and venerable Fathers,’ says S. Leo, ‘ who, at “Nice having condemned Arius with his sacrilegious impiety, ‘enacted laws of Ecclesiastical Canons to abide to the end of the ‘‘ world, live in their Constitutions among us and throughout the ‘‘world.’ ‘All the Fathers reverenced the Nicene Council, as an ‘oracle given from heaven.’ That Council also regulated the “holding of Synods of Bishops. Many such Synods had taken ‘place frequently before; and Bishop Beveridge proves, at great “‘pains, that many were held in the second and third centuries. ‘‘They were the normal rule of the Church; and ‘the half-yearly ‘Synod of Bishops was then, by virtue of an authority acknowledged ‘fas supreme, appointed for the whole Church.’
’ That Council also regulated the “holding of Synods of Bishops. Many such Synods had taken ‘place frequently before; and Bishop Beveridge proves, at great “‘pains, that many were held in the second and third centuries. ‘‘They were the normal rule of the Church; and ‘the half-yearly ‘Synod of Bishops was then, by virtue of an authority acknowledged ‘fas supreme, appointed for the whole Church. ’
‘“‘During the period intervening between the first and second ‘(Ecumenical Synods, when Arianism under various phases and ‘forms vigorously and constantly assaulted, with a view to destroy, “the Faith in God the Son, but finally fell before the Faith’s “victory at the latter Council, we have afforded to us notices of no ‘Jess than eighty Synods; and though they were mostly unsatis- ‘‘factory, being attempts to undo the work of God the Holy Ghost ‘in the Church—waves dashing against the rocks of the true Faith, ‘which ‘foamed out their own shame,’ as a Regius Professor so ‘‘beautifully puts it (for I am here using his thoughts),—yet they “testify to the practice of Synods of Bishops, to the regular custom ‘that then obtained. All the then misbelievers seem to have been ‘such misbelievers through failing to perceive, as some do now (for ‘¢ Arianism under another appellative is still moribund), that ‘ there “is no middle point between the entire Oneness of the Nature of ‘‘God the Son with the Father and His being a mere creature,’ since ‘what is not God of necessity is a creature of God,
‘Taken together, the first four general Synods rank above all ‘‘others in importance and value to the Catholic Church. They ‘chiefly concerned themselves about ‘the whole state of our Lord ‘‘ Jesus Christ ;’ to make which ‘complete,’ Hooker (Book V.) says, ‘«« There are but four things that concur: His Deity, His manhood, ‘the conjunction of both, and the distinction of the one from the ‘other being joined in one. Four principai heresies there are ‘‘ which have in those things withstood the truth: Arians by bending ‘themselves against the Deity of Christ, Apollinarians by maiming ‘‘and misinterpreting that which belongeth to His human nature» ‘“‘Nestorians by rending Christ asunder and dividing Him into two ‘‘ persons, the followers of Eutyches by confounding in His person ‘‘those natures which they should distinguish. Against these there ‘‘ have been four most famous ancient General Councils: the Council ‘‘of Nice to define against Arians, against Apollinarians the Council ‘of Constantinople, the Council of Ephesus against Nestorians, ‘against Eutychians the Chalcedon Council. In four words, GAnbas, TeAEwWs, adiatpeTs, aovyxi Tos, truly, perfectly, indiwisibly, ‘distinctly ; the first applied to His being God, and the second to ‘ His being Man, the third to His being of both One, and the fourth ‘to His still continuing in that one Both: we may fully, by way “of abridgment comprise whatsoever antiquity hath at large ‘ handled, either in declaration of Christian belief, cr in refutation ‘‘of the aforesaid heresies. Within the compass of which four ‘heads, I may truly affirm, that all heresies which touch but the ‘‘person of Jesus Christ, whether they have arisen in these latter ‘days, or in any age heretofore, may be with great facility brought ‘to confine themselves.’
Within the compass of which four ‘heads, I may truly affirm, that all heresies which touch but the ‘‘person of Jesus Christ, whether they have arisen in these latter ‘days, or in any age heretofore, may be with great facility brought ‘to confine themselves. ’
‘ Now if there be one period in the whole history of the Church ‘‘militant here on earth, which does or will demand of the readers ‘“‘of that history thoughts and reflections such as those so pithily ‘and nervously indited in the Oxford translation of M. L’ Abbé ‘Fleury, it is that which comprises ihe period of heresy and the ‘councils so succinctly reviewed and concisely summarized by “Hooker. Our allusion is to the following: ‘Most men who have
‘‘considered the course which Church-history takes, have in some “‘stage of their progress felt pain, if not misgiving, at the rapidity ‘with which cne heresy seems to follow upon another. To minds ‘‘in this state we may suggest, first, that as wars occupy a wide ‘“space on the page of civil history, though often affording scarcely ‘any criterion of the aggregated happiness of a nation, so ecclesi- ‘‘astical history is often compelled to dwell on the life of a single ‘‘heretic, while thousands and tens of thousands are passing to ‘their heavenly inheritance unnoticed and unknown. Secondly, ‘‘that from the disproportionate time spent in examining heresies ‘“‘we are apt to think too slightly of the periods ef rest, those ‘« “intervals of sunshine between storm and storm”’ in which it ‘‘is ‘‘God’s will to gather in His elect little by little.” Lastly, that ‘heresy is overruled to several of the best ends—to promote ‘‘humility—to try our faith (I. Cor. ii. 19)—to rouse the careless ‘to an attentive study, and the religious to a more earnest realiza- ‘‘tion of the Christian verities, and to subserve the evolution of ‘‘those verities in a dogmatic form.’
‘“ And if there be one page of ecclesiastical history which more ‘‘than another deserves and claims attention to the strikingly ‘‘ beautiful and thoughtfu! remark tersely embodying the sentiments ‘expressed above, and placed by Dr. Burton in the forefront of his ‘‘historical work, it is that which recounts the doings, especially ‘ when viewed by the additional light furnished by this ancient ‘Syriac Document, of that Patriarch of the ancient and once ‘glorious Church of Alexandiia, who marred the splendour of the ‘Throne of SS. Athanasius and Cyril, reduced one of the grandest ‘institutions of Christ, designed for the benefit of His Church, to ‘‘<the Latrocinium of Ephesus,’ and so brought a withering curse ‘upon the whole of ‘the Evangelical See’ of S. Mark, it may be ‘for ever.
‘‘ Tt is hoped that, in this individual effort to do some houour to “and to commemorate, the Synod of Bishops of Christ’s} Holy ‘Catholic Church, holden at Lambeth in Septemder 1867, may be ‘‘ considered, as included, a humble desire as well to promote the
Mark, it may be ‘for ever. ‘‘ Tt is hoped that, in this individual effort to do some houour to “and to commemorate, the Synod of Bishops of Christ’s} Holy ‘Catholic Church, holden at Lambeth in Septemder 1867, may be ‘‘ considered, as included, a humble desire as well to promote the
‘study of the oldest Church language and literature generally, as “to draw their attention to, if not actually to bring to bear on ‘those many fellow Churchmen of our common ‘Civitas Dei’ in “India, the Colonies, and other parts of the world, the rich literary ‘Church treasures, and the accompanying advantages within easy ‘reach, which we of the home Church possess in such great but ‘‘not selfish abundance; and last, but not least, to add a little link ‘‘in that chain of fraternal love that is uniting together in closer ‘‘ brotherhood the members of the ‘One Body’ living in the East ‘Cand in the West, in the New World and in the Old. os. G FoPEERY:
“'TOTTINGTON PARSONAGE, ‘“r~ THE Diocesm oF MANCHESTER AND PROVINCE OF YORK, September, 1867.”
Thus have I transposed, in their entirety, my “Prefatory Remarks” of Part I., by which to enable my readers to judge of them for themselves. One more paragraph at Page 19 I might adduce as unfavourable to myself perhaps, but, as the matter therein stated is purely historical, I forbear to do so. The fellow copy of that presented to Archbishop Longley was shewn among other articles of literary curiosity at the Missionary Exhibition at Manchester, undertaken a few years since by the enterprise of the senior Member for that city—viz., Hugh Birley, Esq. <A notification of Part I. is made by Dr. W. Wright in the three-volumed catalogue of the Syriac MSS. in the British Museum. Subsequently, on finding the costliness of printing the whole Codex in the “sumputous” type would be very considerable,
I followed the example of a Syriac scholar whose work had cost Oxford University £1,000, and made application, but in vain, to the Delegacy for assist- ance, and, although the Right Honorable W. E. Gladstone, during his first Premiership, offered me a sum of money from the Treasury, I ultimately resolved to adopt a smaller type, and to prosecute my object at my leisure and independent of all pecuniary assistance. Accordingly, when I had completed the transcript of the whole of it with my own hand, I dedicated my first printed edition of the Codex to the memory of S.W.P. and of M.E.P., in
the personal “tribulation” connected with which I have never yet been able to be “joyful,” and in the midst of the joy in the ‘bitterness of the heart no stranger could possibly intermeddle. At the sug- gestion of a foreign scholar, who, though of an alien communion, sympathised with me both in my labours and my sorrows, I appended several appro- priate extracts from various Syriac documents in the British Museum, and at the late Quarternian Centenary Commemoration of the University of Tabingen—QUINTUM SACULUM SUPER IORIBUS CLARIUS SURGIT (See Vol. ui. p. -305)—where thirty universities had representatives, and where such distinguished courtesy and kindness
from my memory. I was able to have the pleasure of presenting to the University and Royalty there my Tubingen Edition, including an English Version of the Codex, together with the first part of my Tetraglott Psalter, and the Rector Magnificus, at my request, proposed formally to those in Statu Pupellan a Prize Essay for the encouragement of Syriac Ltterature—a fact duly recorded in the beautiful Documents drawn up for the Commemora- tion. In a new Kdition of a Theological Encyclo- peedia Professor Semischt afterwards called attention to the Syriac Volumes, and especially to the extracts that more or less refer to the Codex. It will greatly add to my pleasure to offer these now completed Volumes, i. and ii., with some accompaniments, for the acceptance of Modern Victoria University, by . which opportunity to the rising generation for encouragement to study may be afforded. A Language and a Literature that are hallowed by associations affecting greatly our Blessed Lord and His Mission on Earth, and call to the whole Christian World in the unedited Paschetto for devout attention, and that appeal to this Nation especially in the unravelled MSS. of unrivalled Syriac Treasures in the British Museum.
The Great Syriac Codex, numbered 14,530 among the Additional MSS. inthe British Museum, is by
[d] Document, giving the Date of the Synod or Council, and a list of the Bishops and Presbyters present, but omitting the names of the representatives of Leo of Rome, and the names of Domnus of Antioch, and of Flavian of Constanti- nople, and of Timothy of Alexandria.
Preliminary discussion, relative to the absence from the Synod of the Envoys of Leo and the absence of Domnus, between the Proto-Notary and the Bishops Juvenal of Jerusalem, and Thalassius of Cesarea, and including the Report of the Deputies despatched by the Synod to visit them (21—27).
[Introductory note, including historical matter from the “Chronicle of Edessa,” view of the position ecclesiastically considered chiefly from Abbe Martin’s ‘‘ Etude,” dates and facts worth remembering, and the ‘‘Crimina’’ or charges against Ibas, from Assernanni (28—37). |
Imperial letters to the Council urging it, since all classes witness against his Impiety, to appoint another Bishop in the stead of Ibas. [This is the Document (7) not (6) (38). Monks enter the Council, bearing Imperial Letters addressed to James and eleven other Archimandrites of Edessa, which letters are read, (39—41). At the instance of Dioscorus, the Commissioners, Photius, Eustatius, and Uranius, declare what took place before them on matters of The Faith as to Ibas, andas regards Daniel, he tendered his resignation (41—43).
[A.] Records of Transactions at Edessa in April last past before the Praeses, Cheereas, including the vociferations of the Citizens on his entry on the borders and into the Church of Zacheeus (44—54).
At the instance of Dioscorus, the Commissioners, Photius, Eustatius, and Uranius, declare what took place before them on matters of The Faith as to Ibas, andas regards Daniel, he tendered his resignation (41—43). [A. ] Records of Transactions at Edessa in April last past before the Praeses, Cheereas, including the vociferations of the Citizens on his entry on the borders and into the Church of Zacheeus (44—54).
[B. First Formal Enquiry.] The Second Report. Document addressed to Roman Authorities by Cherceas re- specting the excited condition of the City (55—57). Copy of Records drawn up at Edessa in the Consulate of Zeno and Posthumian. Micallus brings a Petition of the Inhabitants of the City, which he and other EKcclesiastics had signed, and it is received and read (57—59). The Petition (59—66). ‘‘Every person subscribed to these Transactions and to the Presentation of the Petition’? Then the Acclamations of the whole popwation (67—73). The Count notes the instancy on the Authorities, and Micallus offers the apology (73 and 74). Micallus assures the Count that it is with the good will of all present that the Petition and the Oath are proffered (75). Fifty attest to this (75—82).
[C. Second Formal Enquiry]. The Third Report. Document, despatched to Martialius by Chereas, relative to the recurrence of ‘the commotion excited in the City by the discovery of the false faith of its Bishop (84—87). seems to partake of both sig- nifications (1) and (2) which idea is confirmed by the corre- sponding term in Appendix D where it is 125 DuSo jDNus ln} Zod», so that it might be translated also « by a true Piety.” In correspondence with Dr. R. P. Smith, he was good enough to
Now, seeing that a certain controversy™ has all on a sudden sprung up just lately touching Apostolic Doctrineandaftecting the conservancy of our Orthodox Faith, which (controversy), by drawing men off into diverse opinions, agitates and disturbs their minds and affections, it has appeared to us that it would not be well to neglect a matter of this kind, dis- graceful though it be, lest haply our disregard of it tend to the dishonour of God Himself; and for that reason we have given command that, when there have assembled together Pious and God-loving personages enjoying great reputation for Piety and
veneratio, and (2) probably res adoranda, idolum as well as (3) the respect and veneration, claimed by the Roman Emperors and implied, I think, in the words Augustus, divus, divinus, &c. In Mansi’s Labbe’s “ Conciliorum Collectio” it is rendered 6pyoxeia and Religio.
ument and {Zomagiso in Appendix D mean dignitas, as well as ordo, status ; the Thesaurus Syriacus of Dr. P. S., at c. 1125
(4) See Vol. i. page 273, and Appendix D of this Vol., ‘‘ Commonitory or Commis. sion of Elpidius.”?
for being of The Orthodox and True Faith, such an accurate enquiry be instituted that the groundless controversy be composed, and The True and Ortho- dox Faith, so precious to God, become consolidated.
P. S. , at c. 1125
(4) See Vol. i. page 273, and Appendix D of this Vol. , ‘‘ Commonitory or Commis. sion of Elpidius. ”? for being of The Orthodox and True Faith, such an accurate enquiry be instituted that the groundless controversy be composed, and The True and Ortho- dox Faith, so precious to God, become consolidated.
Your Piety, then, taking with you ten of the Holy Metropolitan Bishops of the Province, besides ten other Venerable Bishops adorned with (the qualifications of) eloquence and an upright manner of life, and, more than other men, distinguished for the knowledge and for the teaching of The True and Inerrant Faith, will, on the Calends of August next ensuing, take care to repair without delay to Ephesus the Metropolis of Asia-—no other person, however, except those mentioned, must be allowed to trouble the Holy Synod—in order that, when all those Pious and God-loving Bishops, whom we have given command by Royal Letters to assemble together, shall have gone with promptitude to the City named above, and have institated accu- rate investigation and enquiry, the whole Error may be uprooted and made to cease, whilst the Doctrine of The Orthodox and True Faith, so dear to Christ our Saviour, shall flourish as usual, and be consoli- dated ; which (Faith) it will be the duty of all men now living to preserve unshaken and (to transmit) inviolate to times hereafter, having God propi- tious. If any one, however, be bent on contem- ning this God-loving Synod—a Synod which necessity has demanded—and demur to proceed with all his ability at the time appointed, and to the
place selected, not a single excuse will be found (available) for him before God or with our Clemency. But he who excuses himself insincerely from attend- ing this assembly of the Priesthood (though his excuse be accepted, yet) will, necessarily, feel pun- ishment (injured) in himself.
Theodoret,+ Bishop of the City of Cyrus, however, whom we have already commanded to confine himself to his own Church, we forbid to proceed to the Holy Synod, unless first it should seem fit to the whole assembled Synod for him also to go and take part in that Synod. But, if any division (of opinion) arise on his account, we determine that the Holy Synod shall meet and settle the business, as ordered, without him.
THIS ORDINANCE WAS ISSUED ON THE 30TH OF MARCH, THE THIRD BEFORE THE CALENDS OF APRIL, IN THE CITY OF CONSTANTINOPLE, AFTER THE CONSULATE OF THE ILLUSTRIOUS ZENO AND
« Tnsincerely.” Literally translated the Syriac phrase is “ with no good conscience.”” The whole sentence’s meaning is tersely ex- pressed in Mansi’s Latin :—‘ Sacerdotalem enim conventum non nisi quis mala propria conscientia sauciatus evitat.”” The Cécumenical Synod of Nicea in 325 A.D. was designated an assembly of the Priesthood. So this. : These Acts will be found to furnish no unimportant materials for writing the history of this great and prominent character of the 5th Century, to which Dr. Newman has already contributed much.
”” The Cécumenical Synod of Nicea in 325 A. D. was designated an assembly of the Priesthood. So this. : These Acts will be found to furnish no unimportant materials for writing the history of this great and prominent character of the 5th Century, to which Dr. Newman has already contributed much.
Theodosius the Younger and Valentinian ITI. were “the Masters of the world.” The former succeeded to the Imperial Purple in his 8th year and died in his 49th year, 450 a.pD., leaving only one daughter, who married Valentinian III. The latter, the last of the family of ‘Theo- dosius the Great, was publicly acknowledged Emperor of Rome Oct. 3rd, 423 a.D., although only in the 6th year of his age, and was murdered there in the 31st year of his reign, 454 A.D.
RECORDS OF PROCEDURE DIRECTED AGAINST IBAS, THE BISHOP OF THE CITY OF EDESSA.
(8) The Autocratic Cmsars, THEeoposius and VALEN- TINIAN, Victors and Illustrious by Victory, the ever- Worshipful, the Augusti, to Dioscorust :
On a former occasion{ we ordered that Theodoret, the Bishop of City of Cyrus, should not go to the
The above heading of the legal action or of the “ memorial of pro- “ceedings,” adopted both by this Assembly and by others, in relation to this very celebrated and greatly canvassed character—so much so as to have occupied the attention of no less than half-a-dozen Councils of the Church—would perhaps have been far more appropriately placed by the Scribe lower down in the original Acts or MS.,’since only one of the following Documents relates specially to Ibas. The Report of his, the first, cause tried by the Council occupies in these Acts the first 92 pages.
I have always rendered the word ta.m Jbas, although it is evident that orthographically it should be Hida and etymologically Lhiba. This Imperial Letter assigns the Presidency of the then immedi- ately assembling Council to Dioscorus the Archbishop of Alexandria as Successor to the Great Cyril in the second Church in rank in the then Christendom, but through interested partizans at Court chiefly it was no doubt that he obtained the appointment. The term “ Alexan- “dria the Great” which runs through these Acts would apparently seem to indicate that the Greatness of the great Conqueror, its Founder, was still retained in the minds of men in Vth Century after Christ. This Letter views Theodoret, though his pastoral and literary labours for the Catholic Church had been so great and successful and his Services to the Empire not unimportant, yet because he was not perfectly Orthodox, as a dangerous Heretic and a Teacher to be repressed and silenced. His faithful adherence to his old and and cherished friend Nestorius won for him chiefly the unenviable notoriety of being a wilful participator in the great Error of that Heresiarch, whereas his recantation before the Fathers of Chalcedon of all that might have been heretical on his part would seem to modify, if not exonerate him from, the charge. The letter is to be found in Labbe (Sacro-Sancta Concilia IV., 110-112) and in Mansi (Concil. omnium amplis. collectio VI., 599-600), reprinted in my “ Ancient Syriac Document, &c.” at page 16. A Second Syriac Version may be seen in Appendix D to Vol. 1. A Latin version of it occurs in Baronius’s Annals.
t “Ona former occasion,” i.e., in the Imperial Letter (a) dated
Holy Synod until that Holy Synod had settled what it willed concerning him. For, we have discounten- anced his proceedings, seeing that he has ventured to compose, treatises antagonistic to those which Cyril, of Blessed Memory, who was Bishop of Alexandria the Great, wrote concerning The Faith. Since, however, it is possible that some of the partizans of Nestorius will exhibit a degree of solicitude about him so as by all means to enable him to go to the Holy Synod, for that reason we have of necessity concluded on addressing these Royal Letters to your Piety ; and by them we notify to your Charity and to the entire Holy Synod that, acting in conformity with the Canons of the Holy Fathers, we have assigned the Presidency and (Chief) Authority not only over Theodoret, but also over all other Bishops admitted to that Holy Synod now assembled, to your Piety ; being assured, as we verily are, that also the God-loving Archbishop of Jerusalem, Ju- venal, and the God-loving Archbishop Thalassius, ana all who have a similar zeal and love for The
March 30, which, hereafter it will be convenient to remember, was the Wednesday of the Easter Week in 449 ap. The prohibition is renewed in the above letter (8) dated the day before the opening of this Synod.
In Migne’s Patrologia Greca, letter 112 of Theodoret, in which he says his “sad soul sighs and laments’? as he witnesses the preparations made for the approaching Council, goes so far as to speak of “‘the venom contained in the 12 Chapters,’’ and of the Successor of Cyril as daring “to pronounce an anathema on those who refuse to accept “the 12 Chapters,” which, as they are so frequently alluded to and so remarkable and able, we have given below, for the benefit of the English reader, from the Oxford Fleury.
Orthodox Faith, are of the same opinion with your Holiness, who are, by the grace of God, distin- guished for gravity of life and integrity of Faith.
As for those who have ventured to affirm (any thing) in addition to, or in subtraction from, what has been determined on in matters relating to The Faith (the Symbol delivered) by the Holy Fathers at Nicza and afterwards at Ephesus, we by no means allow them any liberty of speech at all that would accrue to them in Holy Synod, whilst we will (at the same time) that they submit to your judement. For this reason, too, it is that we have decreed that the assembling of the Holy Synod should now take place.
This Ordinance was issued (granted) on the 6th of the month of Ab (August) on the 8th before the Ides of August, at Constantinople.
(y) The Autocratic Caisars, Tuxopostus and V Auuy- mintaN, Victors and Illustrious by Victory, the ever-Worshipful, the Augusti, to the Hoty Synop assembled at Ephesus the Metropolis :
This little Document, extant in no other quarter of the literary world except in our MS. named A, has, with that entire MS., for many centuries been lost to the Church, until unearthed from the Monastery of Deipara in Egypt, with the other rich Syriac treasures, by the late Dr. Tattam, the Coptic Scholar, about 30 years ago. It refers to the duty of a General Council in the case of an errant Bishop and to
Edessa, a City in the Province of Osrhoene, with Acts drawn up there, have been despatched hither, which contain the Depositions of many Venerable Clergy and God-fearmg Archimandrites and Civic
Tattam, the Coptic Scholar, about 30 years ago. It refers to the duty of a General Council in the case of an errant Bishop and to
Edessa, a City in the Province of Osrhoene, with Acts drawn up there, have been despatched hither, which contain the Depositions of many Venerable Clergy and God-fearmg Archimandrites and Civic
the celebrated Commission which those (in one sense famous, but not so in another) Bishops Photius, Eustathius, and Uranius received at the bidding of the Masters of the world, when the Bishop Ibas’s trial took place at Tyre-Berytus-Tyre. The difficulties connected with the history of that trial, which for so long a period were discussed by Tillemont and other historians, have received a complete solution by cer- tain historical facts made known to us now for the first time by A. The Add. MS. numbered 14,602 in the British Museum contains passages—see Appendix E for their translation—referring not only to Dioscorus and to his Synod, by whose authority the Bishops of Edessa and Cyrus were expelled from their Episcopi al Sees without even being cited to appear before that “Tribunal, but specially relating also to the Commissioners Photius and Eustathius appointed to adjudicate in the case of Ibas, first at Tyre, by whose Bishop a reconciliation between the contending parties was initiated, and then at Berytus, where a decision was arrived at, and then back again at .Tyre as being the Bishopric that claimed priority in point of Dignity and Rank.
As this case will afford a most evident instance of the important manner in which Extracts from MSS. in the Appendices named B, C, D, &c., bear upon the great Document A, like some minor aiendeat Satellites (if 1 may indulge i in a. simile) ace one great Luminary, I will subjoin some ipsissima verba of MS. 14,602 f for the purpose of instituting comparison respectively between MS., 1 49530 or my Version A at pages 20 and 59, from lines 5 and 2, and 1 4,602 or E
. and between A at page 21 from line 10, and E, where the Bishops state — JeSe@sce 3AD a> (022omepo elas c2n70-00 qs? Jon
Dignitaries, and, so to speak, of the whole population of the same City, who witness against Ibas, Bishop of the City of Edessa, to a great deal of Impiety and Blasphemy.
Since, then, it appertains to (the office of) your Holiness to correct such Profanity--for, that the evidence of all these persons, Clerics and Monks and Civic Magistrates and Laics, should be false, your Holiness cannot fairly admit on reading the (formal) account of these matters with the (accom- panying) affidavits—you will free that City from such Blasphemy (scandal) and appoint over it a man honoured for integrity of life, and renowned in The True Faith—one who is master of himself. And, if anything else occur in those parts of a similar (scandalous) character, let it be sup- pressed ; for, if those who preside over Metropolitan
This little sentence has always presented a difficulty to me. Per- haps it will be best to take Martin’s fluent rendering :—“ In appointing “to preside over it (the City of Edessa) a man of irreproachable character and of unassailable faith, you will succeed in imposing silence “upon those who, in the same country, may probably have been successful “in exalting themselves against Orthodox Believers,”
Cities are Orthodox, the others (Bishops Suffragan) will as a matter of necessity follow their teaching. In reference to this same cause we have enjoined already that the Adjudicators of it should be the God-fearing Photius, Bishop of the Holy Church of Tyre, the Metropolis, and Eustathius, Bishop of Berytus, and Uranius, Bishop of the City of Himeria, whom also we now command to proceed to your Holy Synod in order to convey, in person, all these Instructions to your Holiness.
This Ordinance was issued on the 5th before the Calends of July, which is the 27th day (of June, 449, a.p.), at Constantinople.
(5) After (the year of) the Consulate of the Ilus- trious Zeno and Postuumiay, in the Month called by the Egyptians Mesori, on the 29th day of it, during (the continuance of) Indiction the thirdt, the Holy
Tt will be remembered that Zeno was Consul for the East in 448 a.p., and Posthumian for the West. See Mansi’s “ Sac. Conciliorum Collectio,” Tom VI., p. 441-451 (Florentiz, 1761). “Third Indiction.”” It is well known that the Third Indiction did not begin till Sept. Ist, 449 a.v. So there must be here a mistake made. Yet, from Appendix D, it will be seen that the Addl. MS. marked 12,156 has Jndiction the third, also. It, however, should be : during the second Induction. Baronius begins a Volume thus :
Synod assembled at Ephesus in compliance with the command of the Christ-loving Emperors, when there sat in the Church called Mary the Pious and God-loving Bishops (following) :—
The list of Bishops present at this Council, as ascertained from these Acts, differs from that in our Historians in several respects. First, the names omitted are—Domnus and Flavian, Archbishops of Antioch and Constantinople ; Quintillus of Heraclea, who represented also Bishop Anastasius of Thessalonica ; Cyriacus, Bishop of Troc- made, representing Theoctistus of Pisinontia in the Second Galatia ; Theodorus of Tarsus and Romanus of Myra in Lycia; John of Nicopolis in the First Armenia ; Eutychius of Adrianopolis in Asia ; John of Messena of Achaia; Theodorus of Claudiopolis in Isauria ; Etericus of Smyrna; Flavian of Adramytha; Meliphtongua of Juli- opolis ; Onesiphorus of Iconium; Longinus of Chersonesus ; Eudoxius of Bosphorus ; Timothy of Primopolis in Pamphilia; Isaac of Ele- archa; Julian of Mostena (?). At the end the Greek adds :—
Hilarius Roman Deacon and Dulcitius Roman Notary (Labbe, Sacro- sancta Concilia, t. IV., col. 115-119). The Greek omits and the Syriac adds—Maximian of Gaza; Paul of Andaha; Peter of Chro- nesos (Chersonesus ?) ; Olympius of Sozopolis ; Paulinus of ‘Theodosi- opolis ; Gennadius of Gnosse Quaioussa ; Mortorius of Gortyna in Crete ; Mara of Dyonisyada; Ananius of Quapatoulida. In all 27 omissions and 9 additions in the Syriac. Our Acts containing III names, that of Barsumas included, the number of Fathers at Ephesus 449 a.D. would then be 137 or 138. We may perhaps explain these differences by saying that the Greek list contains only the names of the Fathers who figured in the first Session, while the Syriac list contains only the names of those who assisted at the second. It is probable, in.fact, that many Bishops left, when they saw into what an ambush they had been drawn under pretence of a Council. See Martin’s Etude in Revue des Questions Historiques.”’ Space forbids even the attempt of giving a shortened account of the
8 Miletius of Larissa, who also filled the place of the Venerable Domnus, Bishop of Apamea,
several Sees which the below-named Bishops occupied, but as a specimen of the history of the Patriarchates of Christendom we sub- join, as summarised by Dr. Neale, that of the Rise and Decline of the Church of Alexandria. We have traced it, he says, from the time when its Apostolic Founder laid down his life for his Lord: we have penetrated, as far as we might, the obscure annals of its earlier Patriarchs : we have seen it struggling with the persecutions of Walerian and Diocletian, and, by the blood of its martyrs, spreading the Faith into the wildest regions of Africa: we have seen it crushing the Sabellian heresy in the person of S. Dionysius, standing alone against an Arian world in that of Athanasius, overthrowing Nestorius, and wielding an Ccumenical Council in that of S. Cyril. We have seen it drawn into error by the vices and heresy of Dioscorus; thenceforward be- set by a long and fearful schism, from which neither the Mar- tyrdom of Proterius, nor the alms of S. John, nor the learn- ning of S. Eulogius, could deliver it; and, finally, overwhelmed by the victorious arms of the Impostor of Mecca. We have struggled through the dark annals of its medieval history: we have found heresy triumphant, the Church almost dropping the name of Catholic, persecution rife, apostasy frequent; scarcely one valiant action for the faith recorded ; scarcely one noble athlete for his God chron- icled. We have seen the dismal gulf yawn between the Eastern
18 Acacius of Ariarathia of the Second Armenia, who filled the place of the Venerable Con- stantius of Melitene,
We have seen the dismal gulf yawn between the Eastern
18 Acacius of Ariarathia of the Second Armenia, who filled the place of the Venerable Con- stantius of Melitene,
and Western Christendom; and we have noted the attempts made by Rome, and by Protestant Germany, to pass it. We have watched the progress of the Portuguese in Ethiopia, from their first hopes of success, through the absolute victory, to the entire fall of Rome. We have remarked the gradual rise of error in the mind of Cyril Lucar, and his fruitless, though conscientious, attempt to lead the Eastern Church into heresy. And now we behold the Church of S. Athanasius and S,. Cyril, a shadow of its former self, without a Bishop, except the Patri- arch, ‘persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed.” What remains but that we long and pray for those happier times when Alexandria and her sister Churches ‘shall shake themselves from the “ dust,” shall “loose the bands of their neck,” shall no more be “forsaken ‘and hated,” shall become ‘an eternal excellency, a joy of “many genera- “tions ;” shall be freed from the Ottoman yoke, purged from ignorance, shall unite and be united with the Western Church, shall become One Fold under One Shepherd, Jesus Christ our Lord, to Whom, with the Father and the Holy Ghost be all honour and glory, world without end, Amen.
“RESUMPTION OF THE BUSINESS OF THE COUNCIL ON MONDAY, AUGUST THE 22nn, 449 A.D.,
“RESUMPTION OF THE BUSINESS OF THE COUNCIL ON MONDAY, AUGUST THE 22nn, 449 A. D. ,
The reader will have observed that, from the preceding Documents, the Chief Bishops of the whole Church were directed to meet in Cécu- menical Synod for the dispatch of business on Ist Aug., 449 4.D. The Synod’s proper work, however, does not appear to have begun till roth Aug., after Forme le § On Sth, and then to have continued—no doubt with intervals and with necessary arrangements for minor, as well as major, matters—until Thursday, the 18th or Friday, 19th, of Aug., on one of which days the affair of Eutyches was brought to a conclusion. THAT, then, we may correctly designate the First Session, at and by which the President and his party considered the firs¢ part, actually accomplished, of the end and object for which the Council was convoked and which first part was declared by authority to be—‘ To terminate a “question of Faith that has arisen between Flavian and Eutyches.” At this the Second Session, on the Business of which the Council now enters, the assembling on “the first day,” i.e. Saturday, Aug. 20th, being preliminary to it, we shall see ow they attained the second part of that end and object, avowed to be—'T’o eject from the Church all who “ maintain and favour the Error of Nestorius.”? In Appendix E there is laid down a principle and a rule, embodied in one of the Canons of the Apostles” and usually adopted in all legal procedure, even when the vilest criminals are arraigned, of which principle, however, and rule what trace can be found, we ask, at this Court and Tribunal of the Church, when Bishops, some of them of no ordinary character, are summoned and tried at the bar of Justice, and on a charge so serious as that of a
On the first day of the assembling of your Holy and Great Synod, those who fill the place of the Pious and God-loving Archbishop of Rome, Leo, and the God-loving Domnus, the Bishop of the Church of Antioch, stayed away and did not come (to the Synod) ; upon which your Holiness, acting in accordance with the Canons, gave order that cer- tain of the God-fearing Bishops, with some other Clerics attendant on them, should go to them and to him, and should remind them that they ought to come to-day and assemble with your Holiness. Since, then, they are now here present, who were selected for the purpose of reminding both these parties, that is to say, those from Rome, and the God-fearing Bishop Domnus, I notify this circum- stance for your pleasure (to deal with it).
JuveNnaL, Bishop of Jerusalem, said :- Let the Holy Bishops now report the reply they received from those persons who occupy the place
Since, then, they are now here present, who were selected for the purpose of reminding both these parties, that is to say, those from Rome, and the God-fearing Bishop Domnus, I notify this circum- stance for your pleasure (to deal with it). JuveNnaL, Bishop of Jerusalem, said :- Let the Holy Bishops now report the reply they received from those persons who occupy the place
'Thenames of the Envoys, at this Council, of S. Leo the Great have occasioned much discussion, but Quesnel’s and other conjectures now fall to the ground. We are certain of the name of Julius of Pozzolo as ascer- tained from Appendix D, where Timothy /Elurus, who was at this Council and a successor of Dioscorus, plainly distinguishes between this Julius from Julian of Cos and speaks of the former as ‘ occupying the “place, or being the representative, of the Holy Bishop of the Church “of Rome,” and he afterwards quotes the advice of “Julian Bishop of CON Gok ag S. Leo himself surely deserves to be called “the Great.” For, as a man, who cannot admire his patriotic, yea his heroic, great-
of the God-loving and Holy Bishop of the Church of Rome, Leo, and from the God-loving Bishop of the Church of Antioch, Domnus.
The God-fearing Bishops, Ouympius of Evaza,” and Juuian of Hypzepa and Monranius, Deacon of the Holy Church of Aphrodisias, and Evpnrontivs, Deacon of Laodicea, said :—
In pursuance of the Orders of this Holy and (Keumenical Synod, we proceeded to the place where those (representative) persons reside who had been despatched from celebrated and Royal Rome, to wit, the God-loving Bishop Julian and the Deacon Hilarius. We did not, however, find them (there).
ness in approaching, in the way he did, the savage Huns, headed by their Leader recognized as “the Scourge of God,’ whom he caused to withdraw from Italy, as well as in dissuading Genseric to retire from the very gates of Rome. As a Doctor of the Church, what better instance can be desired of his intellectual and literary greatness than the fact that his grand Epistle (X XVIII.) written to Flavian, Archbishop of Constantinople—the celebrated ‘Tome that was rejected by Dioscorus, to whom these Delegates in vain produced it before the Synod, but heartily accepted by the Fathers of Calcedon in 451 a.p. as consonant with the Symbol of the CCCXVIII. and of Constantinople, as well as with what was settled by Cyril of Alexandria at Ephesus 431 a.p.—should become, like the three celebrated Epistles of S. Cyril, @&cumenical in the Church, the common property and heritage of the Faithful and binding for ever on the faith of the Church. Great was he, also, as an unsur- passed Administrator and Governor of the Church, notwithstanding his ambition to unduly exalthisownSee. (See Bright’s “18 Sermonsof Leo.”’) And lastly Great was Leo in foreseeing and, as far as possible, in coun- teracting the evils and miseries that would befall the Church, if the great Eutychian party should succeed in bringing about, and then in over ruling, a second Ephesine Council.
Eyvaza, called also Theodosiopolis, and but very little known it seems, was an Episcopal City of Asia Minor with Ephesus for its me -
(See Bright’s “18 Sermonsof Leo. ”’) And lastly Great was Leo in foreseeing and, as far as possible, in coun- teracting the evils and miseries that would befall the Church, if the great Eutychian party should succeed in bringing about, and then in over ruling, a second Ephesine Council. Eyvaza, called also Theodosiopolis, and but very little known it seems, was an Episcopal City of Asia Minor with Ephesus for its me -
Then we had an interview with Dulcitius, the Notary, who was unwell ; and we told him that the Holy Synod was re-assembled but was retarded in (deferred) the act of adjudication in the hope that they would again come to the assembly after one
tropolis. Its first Bishops, according to Richard and Giraud, were (1) Eutropius who appeared at the Council of Ephesus (431 a.p.) as an opponent of Nestorius. (2) Bassian (ordonné nalgré lui par Memnon d’Ephése) was at Calcedon 451 av. (3) N succeeded Bassian. (4) Olympius who assisted at the Latrocinium of Ephesus, where he was favourable to the cause of Eutyches, but retracted two years afterwards at Calcedon 451 a.p. (Bibliotheque Sacrée. Tom, 9, 10. Daaler Sanahe. Fehre Paris, 1822-23.)
Lucas Holstenius, in his ‘ Annotationes in Geographiam Sac. Caroli a S. Paulo” (Romz, 1666) at p. 135, says:—Evaza. Hieroclis Notit. Olympius Evazorum Episcopus Concil. Chalced. Act. 1. et Eutropius in Epheso. Eidem ordinatus fuerat Ecclesie Bassianus, ut Concil. Chal- cedon. Act. ii, Evaornvots scripsit Basilius Mag. ep. 12. quam ad Evazam pertinere existimo, ut Eva€yvers potius isthic legendum sit. Hierocles in his ‘Synecdemus’ only gives the name as one of the forty Bishoprics of Asia Minor. Martiniére adds nothing to the above except that he says Olympius was at a Council at Rome in 503 ap. Baluze in his “ Nova Collectio Conciliorum’’ mentions the See and its Bishops Bassianus and Eutropius. On Bassian he has a Note sub anno 440 in connection with the Council at Ephesus (foll. 949, 950) giving some account of Bassian’s course. The name of Evala does not occur in the list of cities given by Hierocles in his Synecdemus where it follows Ards ‘Iepdv (Jovis Fanum). Not even the name occurs in the Notitize Grace Episcopatuum, edited by G. Parthey (Ber- olini, 1866); but, curiously enough, the name which follows Acds ‘Iepdv in almost everyone of the Episcopal Notitia is Avyafa or, rather 0 Avyafwr,—Episcopus Augazorum. Augaza is not mentioned by Hierocles, but he has Algiza, which Parthey thinks may be the same: it, however, is absent from all the other lists. | Knowing the extraordi- nary transformations some of these names undergo in the hands of the Scribes, he asks—Is not Evaza as likely to be Augaza as Algiza? and on the whole thinks I have the true form. (Note from H. Cowper. )
Hypepa, Aphrodisias in Caria, and Laodicea in Asia are tolerably well-known places needing no special remarks.
| Knowing the extraordi- nary transformations some of these names undergo in the hands of the Scribes, he asks—Is not Evaza as likely to be Augaza as Algiza? and on the whole thinks I have the true form. (Note from H. Cowper. )
Hypepa, Aphrodisias in Caria, and Laodicea in Asia are tolerably well-known places needing no special remarks.
Notary replied that the God-fearing Bishop was out in the country, and the Venerable Deacon at the Church (Martyrium)t of the Glorious S. John, but he promised to send to them to say that they should go. However, we did not rest content here, after this conversation, but again in the morning of the (subsequent) Day, Sunday, we proceeded thither, and had another interview with the same Notary, who informed us it was quite impossible for them to Martyrium implies the hallowed spot or ground where a true Saint of God glorified Him by his sufferings and Martyrdom. On such spots the Primitive Christians frequently erected a Church. Hence the Martyrium came to be synonimous with the Church. ‘The word occurs again lower down, Martyrium or Church of Zaccheas, where the Inhab- itants of Edessa met the Roman Governor, Chereas, who was Preses of the Province of Osrhoene and Hegemon of its Capital.
After explaining the general names given to Churches such as synodi, concilia, concihabula, Bingham speaks of some which had particular appel- lations assigned them for reasons which could not extend to all. ‘ Such “as were built over the grave of any Martyr, or called by his name to “‘ preserve the memory of him, had usually the distinguishing title of mar- “ tyrium, OY confessio, Or memoria given them for that particular reason. “Thus Eusebius observes of Constantine, that he adorned his new city ‘of Constantinople with many oratories and martyries, and, as it were, “ consecrated his city to the God of the Martyrs. And from this time “in all Christian writings of the following ages, a martyry is always put “to signify such a Church. Socrates speaks of the Martyry of S. “Thomas the Apostle at Edessa, and of SS. Peter and Paul at Rome, “and of the Martyry of Euphemia at Chalcedon, where the body of “that Martyr lay buried, which was the Church where the famous “ Council of Chalcedon was held, whence, in the Acts of that Council, “it is so often styled Maprvpiov Evdyuias, the Martyry of Euphemia. « And, upon the same reason, because our Saviour Christ was the Chief “¢ Sufferer and Great Martyr of his own religion, therefore the Church “« which Constantine built at Mount Golgotha, in memory of His passion “and resurrection, is usually by Eusebius and others styled Martyrium “‘ Salvatoris, the Martyry of our Saviour.” “'The Latins, in- “ stead of martyrium, use the name memoria martyrum for such kind of
« And, upon the same reason, because our Saviour Christ was the Chief “¢ Sufferer and Great Martyr of his own religion, therefore the Church “« which Constantine built at Mount Golgotha, in memory of His passion “and resurrection, is usually by Eusebius and others styled Martyrium “‘ Salvatoris, the Martyry of our Saviour. ” “'The Latins, in- “ stead of martyrium, use the name memoria martyrum for such kind of
assemble with the Holy Synod, even if it should send ten times, in consequence of the letters, with which they were accredited from Leo, the Arch- bishop of Illustrious and Royal Rome, contaiming no other commission whatever than the order for them to proceed to the Assembly of the Holy Synod (only) until the affaur should be settled about the God-fearing Presbyter and Abbat Eutyches ; and so, those matters, of which we have had cogni- zance, we have (now) reported before your Holiness.
Joun, Bishop of Sebastia of the First Armenia, and OnzstrHorus, Bishop of Iconium, and Nonnvs, a Deacon of Ephesus, and Puocas, a Deacon of Tyre, said :-—
As your Piety commanded, on the first day which was last Saturday, we went to the Pious and God- fearing Bishop of the City of Antioch, Domnus, and we found him prostrate on a coucht and complain- ing, when he asseverated—“It ‘is on account of ‘“aIness that I am wanting (in the Synod).” We, not- withstanding, were not wanting (in our duty) ; but we made known to him your instructions to us, sta-
S. Leo’s representatives had sought in vain to get a hearing at the first Session of the Council, and, as Eutyches was there acquitted, not- withstanding all remonstrance, by the imperious and overbearing Dios- corus, the commission they had received at the hands of the great Champion of Orthodoxy at Rome was at an end; and so they left Ephesus, or at least withdrew officially from the Synod. The word «42 s/omach, in my text is indistinct in the MS., and on taking a magnifying lens into the Library of the British Museum, when the Sun shone, I discovered it to be Loy, couch, bed.
ting to him that it was only right and proper for him to betake himself this very day to your Holy and Cicumenical Synod. He readily replied that he was intending to go, and that he felt (quite) inclined to assemble with your Blessedness, provided only he could have a little respite from the sickness that had seized him. Then, to-day, in the morning he sent (appealed) to us; and, regarding it as (only) right and just on our part to give a (complete) defi- nite Report to your Piety, we proceeded to the said God-fearing Bishop and found him in the same con- dition (as before), bitterly complaining, whilst he entreated that, by our means and mediation, it might be reported to your Holiness that he was, contrary to his wish, prevented from attending you (in Synod) in consequence of the (bodily) debility that. had seized him, but that as to all those measures your Holiness had taken against the parties who, infected with the horrible Impieties of Nestorian opinion, have written or were writing (in their defence), he (Domnus) ratifies your Decision and is of the same opinion as yourselves.
(2) Tuazassius, Bishop of Cesarea of the First Cap- padocia, said :— Our being detained (so long) in this City occa-
They had been convoked for Aug. Ist, 449 a.D. Some had arrived on that day at Ephesus. It was now Monday, Aug. 22nd, when they re-commenced business and began the trial of those Bishops named in these Acts against whom bills of indictment had heen pre- ferred.
sions much inconvenience to all the God-fearing and Pious Bishops, as well as injury to (their) Holy Churches; and not that only, but the Gracious and Christ-loving Emperor also wishes that there should be a rapid dispatch (of the rest of the business) of this Synod, in order that we may ascertain with exactitude what is determined on (to which we hold ourselves).
Since, then, Formality, befitting and proper to the Holy Synod, has been observed—for, the God- loving the Bishop Julian and the Venerable the Deacon Hilarius, who occupy the place of the Holy and God-loving Leo, Archbishop of Rome, have been reminded by those God-loving Bishops, who were sent (for that purpose, viz.) Olympius of Evaza, and Julian of Hypzepa, and Montanius Deacon of Aphrodisias, and Euphronius Deacon of Laodicea, and have declined assembling here with us—I give it as my opinion that there is no necessity for defer- ring the matter; but if the Holy Synod command it, let this business proceed, lest the monks, too, who are here present should receive annoyance from
Here intervenes really the first of the Lacune in the original MS. (14,530 Additional) in the British Museum, although this hiatus in the Vol. of that MS. is not indicated by the insertion of a blank vellum leaf, as are the other Lacune; and I have not noted it in my Version by any blani leaf in Vol. i., occurring at the 14th line of page 17 in the part of the Syriac Text that the Clarendon Press printed for me six or seven years ago.
This Champion in the great Controversy concerning The True Person of Jesus Christ occupies a most prominent posi- tion in its history as well as, in some respects, a perfectly unique one in the history of the Church. He must be ranged among the upholders of Nestorius and his Doctrine. He had for his predecessor in the See of the great Capital of Osrhoene the noble Rabulas or Rabbilas who, well-nigh unsurpassed by the Great Cyril, adhered to the true Doctrine as settled by the third Cicumenical Council of the Church, and who had been proclaimed “the Glory of the City of Edessa;” and for his successor Nonnus who had occupied the Bishopric during the forced absence of himself. In Vol. I. of his Bibliotheca Orientalis” J. 8S. Asseman tells us that the Author of “The Chronicle of Edessa” describes all three Bishops thus:
In the series of Bishops of Edessa given by Asseman (in Vol. I., p. 424) from the year of the Greeks 624 to 1080 “‘ Ex Chronico Edesseno et ex Dionysio,” the names preceding the above three are yecorded thus :
Le Qulen in his “ Oriens Christianus,’’ Tom. II., c. 955, precedes this list by (1) Thaddeus, (2) Maris, (3) Bartymeus Martyr, omits the name of the 4th and makes Cono the 5th Bishop.
In Asseman, also, from the ‘‘Compendiaria rerum gestarum His- toria,” we learn that Kings began to reign at Edessa “anno cen- “tesimo octogesimo,”’ and ex Chronico Dionysii we may read a lst from “ Orrhoés Hevie filius qui Primus Edesseni Regni institntor”’ fuit to “Abgarus Maani EF. Edessenorum Regum postremus.” The whole Chapter (IX.) in the Bibl. Orient. is prefaced with the three following particulars necessary to be remembered, viz.— (1) Chronici Edesseni Auctor Orthodox. floruisse videtur circa annum Christi 550; (2) Grecorum Epocha utitur que Christianam vulgarem annis trecentis undecem ex ejusdem mente antecedit ;
Ecclesiastical History informs us distinctly that the first and great Cicumenical Council of Ephesus held in 431 «.p., notwithstanding its having determined The Faith, was very indifferently received in parts of the East, John the Archbishop of Antioch appearing almost to be the head of the disaffected,and that, although an agreement between him and the great Cham- pion of the Orthodox Faith,at Alexandria, was tothe latter’s great joy happily effected, through the good offices of Paul of Emesa, in 433 a.D., yet two great divisions of religious thought on the great Doctrine characterized the Clerical body in too many Dioceses. This was the case with the Catholic Church at the capital which rivalled Antioch in splendour, influence, and power—the celebrated City of Edessa Mons. Martin, in his Etude referred to before, writes truly that at the period when
On the word Sacrarium Asseman has this note respecting its use by the Author of the Chronicle of Edessa :— Robertson (Vol. I., p. 457) says that Nestorianism, suppressed in the Roman Empire, found refuge beyond its bounds. At Edessa was a flourishing School of Clergy for the Persian Church. Its head, Ibas, was favourable to Nestorianism and translated some of the works of Theodore of Mopsuestia and Diodore of Tarsus into Syriac. Zabbulas broke up the Institution in 485 a.p., but Ibas re-established it, and it kept till the reign of Zeno, by whom it was suppressed in 485 a.p. From this Seminary Nestorianism was propagated in Persia and India, and the Doctrine continued to have a powerful influence on the Christianity of the East. From Asseman (Vol. 1., Chapter XV.) we learn that Ibas, whilst yet a Presbyter of the Church of Edessa, along with the greater part of its Clergy, bitterly opposed the efforts of Rabbulas his Bishop in
p. From this Seminary Nestorianism was propagated in Persia and India, and the Doctrine continued to have a powerful influence on the Christianity of the East. From Asseman (Vol. 1. , Chapter XV. ) we learn that Ibas, whilst yet a Presbyter of the Church of Edessa, along with the greater part of its Clergy, bitterly opposed the efforts of Rabbulas his Bishop in
the first Great Synod assembled at Ephesus, Rabbulas, its Bishop, a converted heathen, maintained warmly the part of S. Cyril. It was even he who first raised, against the memory of '{heodorus of Mopsuestia and Diodorus of Tarsus, that long controversy which terminated, at length, in the middle of the following century by the condemnation of the THREE CHAPTERS. Ardent in strife, excessive in his attacks, pre- cipitate in his measures, even the wisest of them, Rabbulas did not defend 8. Cyril without finding near his person opponents as ardent as himself, and it is perhaps to the resistance at- tempted on their part that we must attribute some of his proceedings which have sometimes been taxed with exaggera- tion. Amongst these opponents, figured in the first line the Persian school of Edessa, a school whose celebrity goes back as far as the epoch when Nisibis fell again under the rule of the Sassanid, in the middle of the preceding century (364 or 365 A.D.).
Then, in fact, most of the Christians who inhabited that city emigrated to the capital of Osrhoene, and founded there, under the protection of the Empire, a sort of University, where every one belonging to the Persian Church, most distinguished by birth and fortune, came to be taught. How did this school partake of the opinions of Nestorius? It is not for us to say just now; it constituted however a focus of opposition, whose masters and pupils Rabbulas hoped he was right in forcibly dispersing (432 a.p.). Thus at least, it seems to us, we ought to interpret the words of the writers of the epoch. Once re- turned to Persia, these masters and pupils continued to follow, with passion, a strife in which they had participated, and on the issue of which they vaguely imagined their future to de- pend. ‘Thence, no doubt, came an exchange of correspondence
condemning the writings of Theodore of Mopsuestia, as Andrew of Samosata shows in a letter to Alexander of Hierapolis (See Assem. Vol. I., p. 198). Hence, as soon as he obtained the Bishopric of Edessa, he incurred the envy and enmity of the friends of Rab- bulas. He was therefore accused before the Emperor Theodsius and Proclus, the Patriarch of Constantinople, by Samuel, Cyrus, Maras, and Eulogius, Presbyters of the Church of Edessa, of being auctor and fautor perniciosissimus of the disturbances between the Egyptians and the Orientals, of having translated the Books of Theodore into the Syriac Language, and of having disseminated them over the East.
which has for the most part perished; but, one famous piece of which, however, remains to us—a piece which, since its appear- ance, has had an echo superior to that of the anathemas of S. Cyril and Nestorius, and which has perhaps caused the loss of the Persian Church. In this letter, written during the life- time of Rabbulas (about 434 or 435 1.p.), the priest Ibas gave his correspondent the history of the Nestorian controversy (428- 435 a.p.). He did not attribute the blame to S. Cyril, but he branded especially the conduct of his Bishop, whom he called a tyrant. What shows the power of the party opposed to Rabbulas is that, when once this Bishop was dead, it was pre- cisely his most marked and inveterate antagonist who suc- ceeded him in the direction of his Church. Ibas was nominated Bishop of Edessa. This happened about 435.
Having attained to the Episcopate under such circumstances, the Bishop of Edessa could not long enjoy the repose, of which he had need, to govern his faithful in peace. Those who had supported the ideas of Rabbulas and Cyril, could not fail to get up a vigorous opposition to him, the more so as the Hast was very much divided, and war brooded in men’s hearts every- where. Did Ibas give occasion to his adversaries to attack him by the manner in which he administered his Diocese, and in particular by his management of the ecclesiastical property ? The reiterated complaints of his enemies lead us to believe it; and in the judgments. of which his life has been the object, are found the means both of charging and of defending his mem- ory.+ It was but a short time after he obtained the Episcopate, that his enemies accused him, probably at Alexandria, but
Tbas was, in fact, already Bishop of Edessa during the life-time of John of Antioch, see Labbe, Sacro-Sancta Concilia, t. V., col. 412- 414, 500-511. Cf. Asseman’s Biblioth. Orient., t. L., p. 424. More- over, we read in our Acts that “Ibas ruined religion in the City of ‘‘ Edessa, for 13 or 14 years.”’ (See Vol. I., p. 99, 1. 8, and p. 38, 1. 6, and the corresponding passages in this Vol.) One vociferator even wishes that “the bones of John of Antioch should be disinterred” because he had ordained him (Ibid). If, in 449 a.p., Ibas had been Bishop of Edessa for 13 or 14 years, it must have been in 435 or 436 a.p. that he was consecrated.—Tillemont, Memoires pour servir a l Histoire Ecclesiastique, t. XIV., p. 823; t. XV., p. 966. We have only to compare the Council of Chalcedon (451 A.D.) with the Second @cumenical Council of Constantinople (551 A.D.) to see that the ecclesiastical opinion has wavered a little before fixing upon the judgment which Ibas merited,