of the Synod of Constantinople[1] in November 448.[2] Flavian was at first not very willing to act in the matter; but Eusebius insisted. So Eutyches was summoned, refused to leave his monastery, and got up a (heretical) declaration of his faith, which was signed by a great number of his monks. After a great deal of discussion he at last came and was heard. He was found guilty of Apollinarism and Valentinianism,[3] deposed and excommunicated. The chief offence on his part was that he taught that Christ is not "of the same nature as we are,"[4] which shows that his judges well understood the real issue from the first. So this synod at Constantinople in 448 adds the parallel clause to what Nicaea had declared in 325. Then, against the Arians, the Church had declared our Lord to be consubstantial to the Father; in this controversy she declared, against the Monophysites, that he is consubstantial to us men. In other words, our Saviour is truly God and truly man, which is the faith of the gospels. The synod in condemning Eutyches carefully explained that the faith of St. Cyril and of Ephesus was not to be questioned.[5]
2. The Robber-Synod of Ephesus (449)
Eutyches was not prepared to submit to his condemnation. Instead he wrote letters justifying his ideas to the Pope;[6] to St. Peter Chrysologus († c. 450), Archbishop of Ravenna, a great theologian among the Latins;[7] apparently also to Dioscor of Alexandria and his Egyptian friends. These at once took up his cause hotly. So did his friends at Court. The Emperor Theodosius II was entirely under the influence of Eutyches' patron Chrysaphios; as long as he lived Eutyches triumphed. The
- ↑ This is not a special synod called together to judge this case, but the permanent council of advisers of the Patriarch, called Σύνοδος ἐνδημοῦσα, a regular institution of the Byzantine Patriarchate (Orth. Eastern Church, p. 31).
- ↑ Mansi, vi. 652.
- ↑ Because Valentinians were Docetes.
- ↑ οὐκ εἶπον … ὁμοούσιον ἡμῖν (Mansi, vi. 741).
- ↑ For this Synod of 448 see Hefele-Leclercq: op. cit. ii. (1), pp. 518–538. Its acts are in Mansi, vi. 649–824.
- ↑ Ep. Eutychis ad Leonem; No. xxi. among St. Leo's letters (P.L. liv. 714–717); also in Mansi, v. 1014–1015.
- ↑ In Mansi, v. 1347.
