Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Sozomen/Book III/Chapter 13
Chapter XIII.—After the Synod, the East and the West are separated; the West nobly adheres to the Faith of the Nicene Council, while the East is disturbed by Contention here and there over this Dogma.
After this Synod, the Eastern and the Western churches ceased to maintain the intercourse which usually exists among people of the same faith, and refrained from holding communion with each other.[1]
The Christians of the West separated themselves from all as far as
Thrace; those of the East as far as Illyria. This divided state of the
churches was mixed, as might be supposed, with dissentient views and
calumnies. Although they had previously differed on doctrinal subjects,
yet the evil had attained no great height, for they had still held
communion together and were wont to have kindred feelings. The Church
throughout the whole of the West in its entirety regulated itself by
the doctrines of the Fathers, and kept aloof from all contentions and
hair-splitting about dogma. Although Auxentius, who had become bishop
of Milan, and Valens and Ursacius, bishops of Pannonia, had endeavored
to lead that part of the empire into the Arian doctrines, their efforts
had been carefully anticipated by the president of the Roman see and
the other priests, who cut out the seeds of such a troublesome heresy.
As to the Eastern Church, although it had been racked by dissension
since the time of the council of Antioch, and although it had already
openly differed from the Nicæan form of belief, yet I think it is
true that the opinion of the majority united in the same thought, and
confessed the Son to be of the substance of the Father. There were
some, however, who were fond of wrangling and battled against the term
“consubstantial” for those who had been opposed to the
word at the beginning, thought, as I infer, and as happens to most
people, that it would be a disgrace to appear as conquered. Others were
finally convinced of the truth of the doctrines concerning God, by the
habit of frequent disputation on these themes, and ever afterwards
continued firmly attached to them. Others again, being aware that
contentions ought not to arise, inclined toward that which was
gratifying to each of the sides, on account of the influence, either of
friendship or they were swayed by the various causes which often induce
men to embrace what they ought to reject, and to act without boldness,
in circumstances which require thorough conviction. Many others,
accounting it absurd to consume their time in altercations about words,
quietly adopted the sentiments inculcated by the council of Nicæa.
Paul, bishop of Constantinople, Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, the
entire multitude of monks, Antony the Great, who still survived, his
disciples, and a great number of Egyptians and of other places in the
Roman territory, firmly and openly maintained the doctrines of the
Nicæan council throughout the other regions of the East. As I have
been led to allude to the monks, I shall briefly mention those who
flourished during the reign of Constantius.
Footnotes
[edit]- ↑ Soc. ii. 22. The rest of the chapter is marked by an independent survey of the division.