Page images
PDF
EPUB

CONTENTS OF THE EIGHTEENTH BOOK.

B

A. D. 381.

I.

ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY.

BOOK XVIII.

THE Emperor Theodosius having nothing more at heart than the reunion of the Churches, resolved from the very Council of beginning of his reign to assemble all the Bishops that were tinople. under his government at Constantinople; that great city Theod. v.6. wanted a Pastor, as St. Gregory Nazianzen was about to leave Socr. v. 8. it; Maximus' Ordination was irregular, though several took

Constan

Marcell.

Chr. an.381.

Chron.

part with him, and the schism of Antioch still continued; by this means too some thought to reunite the Macedonians: the Council therefore was assembled by Theodosius' orders in the month of May, under the Consulate of Eucherius Pasch. an. and Syagrius, that is to say in the year 381. There came thither 150 Catholic Bishops, the chief of whom were St. Meletius of Antioch, with his Priests Flavian and Elpidius, Helladius of Cæsarea in Cappadocia, St. Basil's successor, St. Gregory of Nyssa, St. Peter of Sebaste his brother, St. Amphilochius of Iconium, Optimus of Antioch in Pisidia,

381. p. 304.

Theod. v.8.

a A few words may be necessary to introduce the history at the point where we are here commencing it. On the accession of Theodosius, the Churches, particularly of the East, were almost in a state of schism one with another in consequence of the violence of the Arian controversy. The See of Antioch was contested by three occupants; by Paulinus, the representative of the old orthodox succession, which was in communion with Alexandria and the West; by Meletius, the successor of the Arian Bishops, who soon after his appointment had conformed to orthodoxy; and by the new Arian line of Euzoïus and then Dorotheus, to which the conversion of Meletius had given occasion. Constantinople was in possession of the Arians, but St. Gregory Nazianzen had come thither as a sort of Missionary Bishop, on invitation from the Catholics of the place; and Maximus had been consecrated to the See by Peter of Alexandria, the succes

sor of St. Athanasius. St. Gregory had been appointed some years before, by St. Basil, to the See of Sasima in Cappadocia, but, St. Basil's jurisdiction over it being disputed, had never been in possession. He had in consequence administered the Church of Nazianzus for his father, who was in years; whence he had been called to Constantinople. On the unfounded pretence of his uncanonical translation from See to See, Maximus grounded his own right to the Episcopate of Constantinople. The Arians, at this date had divided into two principal parties, the Eunomians or Eudoxians, who had fallen back or enlarged on the bold impieties of Arius; and the Semiarians who, professing the modified doctrine of the Eusebians, were in consequence mainly heretical on the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, and were called Macedonians after the name of one of them. These were principally found in Asia Minor.

Diodorus of Tarsus, St. Pelagius of Laodicea, St. Eulogius of A. D. 381. Edessa, Acacius of Berrhoea in Syria, Isidore of Cyrus, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, and his nephew Gelasius of Cæsarea in Palestine: we find also among those who subscribed, the names of Dionysius of Diospolis in Palestine, Vitus of Carrhæ in Mesopotamia, Abraham of Batnæ, Antiochus of Samosata, the nephew and successor of St. Eusebius, Bosphorus of Colonia in Cappadocia, and Otreius of Melitene in Armenia, (all of whom are well known upon other accounts, particularly by the letters of St. Basil,) without reckoning the Bishops of Egypt and Macedonia, who came afterwards. Theodosius likewise summoned thither the Bishops of Macedonius' sect, having some hopes of reuniting them to the Church; and accordingly they came, being thirty-six in number, and most of them from the Hellespont; the chief of them were Eleusius of Cyzicus, and Marcian of Lampsacus. Those who have reckoned an hundred and Prosper. eighty Bishops at the Council of Constantinople very pro- Pars. 2. ad bably included these Macedonians. This Council consisted init. only of Eastern Bishops, because Theodosius summoned none Theod. v. 6, but those who were subject to him, and because the Heretics whom they endeavoured to suppress, abounded only in the East; and it does not appear that any body assisted at it in See Pagi, behalf of St. Damasus and the rest of the Western Bishops; 4-6. but, however, it is reckoned the second Ecumenical or Universal Council, by the consent which the West hath since given to what was therein decreed concerning the Faith.

Chron.

7.

an. 381.

[ocr errors]

St. Meletius at first presided in the Council; and he was Theod. v. 6. greatly honoured by the Emperor Theodosius. He called to mind, that after having gained a considerable victory over the Barbarians, he had seen St. Meletius in a dream covering him with the Imperial robe, and placing the crown upon his head:

b The Novatian Bishop, Acesius, had been summoned by Constantine to Nicæa. Socr. 1 10. Soz. 1. 22.

The Council of Constantinople has always been regarded as Ecumenical, though none of the Western Bishops attended, and Damasus, the then Pope, had no representative there. Baronius, Bellarmine (and others), maintain that it was convened on the authority of Damasus, but their authorities do not

bear them out, and this is now gene-
rally given up. See Pagi, in Ann. 381.
Bellarmine allows that the Pope was
not there either by himself or by his
legates; but considers that the East
and West were in heart and spirit
together, at Constantinople. This

Council must be accounted Ecume-
nical, from its subsequent recognition by
the whole Church.

« PreviousContinue »