derness. The bishops and monks of Egypt and Arabia were therefore little inclined to yield to the anathemas of Leo, or to the authority of the emperor. The controversialists of the ancient church were not over scrupulous in the choice of their weapons, and books were frequently forged to support their arguments.[1] Thus the works attributed to Dionysius the Areopagite, are believed to have been forged by Synesius, bishop of Ptolemais, at the instigation of Cyril of Alexandria,[2] and Cyril himself made use of books falsely ascribed to Athanasius. Synesius, in a letter to one of his friends, openly advocated the practice of falsehood, and asserted that truth is dangerous to the multitude whose weak minds are not fitted for its reception. All these expedients were adopted with increase of acrimony. The Eutychians only acknowledged the acts of the synod of Ephesus, while the emperor wished to force on them the decrees of that of Chalcedon. The former was characterized by those who had subscribed to the faith of Leo, as a band of robbers;[3] the Monophysites denounced the latter as an impious assemblage of demons, of spirits shut out from the mercy of heaven.[4]
- ↑ See La Croze, Christianisme d'Ethiopie, pp. 23, &c.
- ↑ La Croze, p. 10.
- ↑ Συνοδον λῃστρικον.
- ↑ Jacobus, bishop of Sarug, has left us a Syrian tract "against the impious synod of Chalcedon," in which he says ܗܕܐ ܐܝܬܝܗ ܗܝ ܣܘܢܕܘܣ ܕܠܩܕܘܢܐ ܕܟܠܘܗ ܕܝܘܐ ܘܫܐܕܐ ܗܘܘ ܠܗ ܒܥܠܝ ܡܠܟܐ܃—"This is that synod of Chalcedon which dæmons
μαλιστα δε προς τους οικειους της πιστεως. Antiochi Ep. Homil. cxvii. p. 169. Bibl. Patr. tom. xii.
