Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume II/Sozomen/Book IV/Chapter 25
Chapter XXV.—Causes of the Deposition of Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem. Mutual Dissensions among the Bishops. Melitius is ordained by the Arians, and supplants Eustathius in the Bishopric of Sebaste.
Besides the prelates above mentioned, Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, was deposed[1]
because he had admitted Eustathius and Elpidius into communion, after
they had opposed the decrees enacted by those convened at Melitina,
among whom was Cyril himself; and because he had also received Basil
and George, bishop of Laodicea, into communion after their deposition
in Palestine. When Cyril was first installed in the bishopric of
Jerusalem, he had a dispute with Acacius, bishop of Cæsarea,
concerning his rights as a Metropolitan, which he claimed on the ground
of his bishopric being an apostolic see. This dispute excited feelings
of enmity between the two bishops, and they mutually accused each other
of unsoundness of doctrine concerning the Godhead. In fact, they had
both been suspected previously; the one, that is, Acacius, of favoring
the heresy of Arius; and the other, of siding with those who maintain
that the Son is in substance like unto the Father. Acacius being thus
inimically disposed towards Cyril, and finding himself supported by the
bishops of the province, who were of the same sentiments as himself,
contrived to depose Cyril under the following pretext. Jerusalem and
the neighboring country was at one time visited with a famine, and the
poor appealed in great multitudes to Cyril, as their bishop, for
necessary food. As he had no money to purchase the requisite
provisions, he sold for this purpose the veil and sacred ornaments of
the church. It is said that a man, having recognized an offering which
he had presented at the altar as forming part of the costume of an
actress, made it his business to inquire whence it was procured; and
ascertained that a merchant had sold it to the actress, and that the
bishop had sold it to the merchant. It was under this pretext that
Acacius deposed Cyril.
And on inquiry I find these to be the facts. It is said that the Acacians then expelled from Constantinople all the bishops above mentioned who had been deposed. Ten bishops of their own party who had refused to subscribe to these edicts of deposition, were separated from the others, and were interdicted from performing the functions of the ministry or ruling their churches until they consented to give their signatures. It was enacted that unless they complied within six months,[2]
and yielded their assent to all the decrees of the council, they should
be deposed, and that the bishops of every province should be summoned
to elect other bishops in their stead. After these determinations and
deeds, letters were then sent to all the bishops and clergy, to observe
and fulfill its decrees.
As a consequence, not long after, some of the Eudoxian party were substituted here and there. Eudoxius himself took possession of the bishopric of Macedonius; Athanasius was placed over the church of Basil; and Eunomius, who was subsequently the leader of a heresy bearing his name, took the see of Eleusius; and Meletius was appointed to the church of Sebaste, instead of Eustathius.