§ 140. THE EUTYCUIAN CONTKOVERSY. T39
sented, many voices exclaimed: "Let Euseliiis be burnt; let him be burnt alive. As he has cut Christ in two, so let him be cut in two." ' The council affirmed the orthodoxy and sanctity of Entyches, who defended himself in person ; adopted the twelve anathematisms of Cyril ; condemned dyophysitism as a heresy, and deposed and excommunicated its advocates, including Theodoret, Flavian, and Leo. The three Eoman delegates (the bishops Julius and Renatus, and the deacon Hilarus) dared not even read before the council the epistle addressed to it by Leo,'' and departed secretly, that they might not be compelled to subscribe its decisions.' Flavian was so grossly maltreated by furious monks that he died of his wounds a few days later, in banishment, having first appealed to a new council. In his stead the deacon Anatolius, a friend and agent of Dioscurus, was chosen patriarch of Constantinople. He, however, afterwards went over to the orthodox party, and effaced the infamy of his elevation by his exquisite Greek hymns.
The conduct of these unpriestly priests was throughout so arbitrary and tyrannical, that the second council of Ephesus has ever since been branded with the name of the " Council of Robbers." * " Nothing," Neander justly observes,' " could be more contradictory to the spirit of the gospel than the fanatical zeal of the dominant party in this council for
y ' Cone. Chalced. Actio i. in Harduin, torn. ii. fol. 161.
* This, moreover, made reference to the famous Epistola Dograatica, addressed to Flavian, which was also intended to be read before the council. Comp. Hrfele, ii. 852.
' Leo at least asserts this in reference to the deacon Hilarus. The two other delegates appear to have returned home before the council broke up. Renatus does not appear at all in the Acta, but Theodoret praises hun for his courage at the Synod if Robbers. With the three delegates Leo sent also £ notary, Dulcitius.
* Ivvo^o^ \Tia-rpiKv, latrocinium Ephesinum; first so called by pope Leo in a letter to Pulcheria, dated .July 20th, 451 (Ep. 95, ed. Ballerini, ahas Ep. 75). The official Acta of the Robber Synod were read before the council of Chalcedon, and included in its records. These of themselves show dark enough. But with them must be compared the testimony of the defeated party, which was also rendered at the council of Chalcedon ; the contemporaneous correspondence of Leo ; and the accounts of the old historians. Comp. the details in Tillemont, Walch, Schrockh, Neander, and Hefele.
^ Kircliengesch. iv. p. 969 (2d Germ. ed. 1847)
7-iO THIRD PERIOD. A.D. 311-590.
dogmatical formnlas, in which thej fancied they had Christ, who is spirit and life, although in temper and act they denied Him." Dioscurus, for example, dismissed a charge of unchaatity and other vices against a bishop, with the remark : ^' If vou have an accusation against liis orthodoxy, we will receive it ; but we have not come together to pass judgment concerning unchastity." ' Thus fanatical zeal for doctrinal formulas outweighed all interests of morality, as if, as Theodoret re marks, Christ had merely prescribed a system of doctrine, and had not given also rules of life.
§ 141. The EcumeniGal Council of Chalcedon^ a. d. 451.
Corap. the Acta Coacilii, together with the previous and subsequent epistolary correspondence, in Mansi (torn, vii.), Haeduin- (torn, ii.), and Fuons, and the sketches of Evagrius: H. E. 1. ii. c. 4; among later historians: Waloq; Schrookh; Neander; IIefele, 1. c. The latter, ii. 392, gives the literature in detail. •
Tims the party of Dioscurus, by means of the court of the weak Theodosius II., succeeded in subjugating the Eastern church, which now looked to the Western for help.
Leo, who occupied the papal chair from 440 to 461, with an ability, a boldness, and an unction displayed by none of hie predecessors, and by few of his successors, and who, moreover, on this occasion represented the whole Occidental church, protested in various letters against the Robber Synod, which had presumed to depose him ; and he wisely improved the perplexed state of affairs to enhance the authority of the papal see. He wrote and acted with imposing dignity, energy, circumspection, and skill, and with a perfect mastery of the question in controversy ; — manifestly the greatest mind and character of his age, and by far the most distinguished among the popes of the ancient Church. He urged the calling of a new council in free and orthodox Italy, but afterwards advised a postponement, ostensibly on account of the disquiet caused in the West by Attila's ravages, but probably in the hope of reaching a
' At tlie third session of the council of Chalccdon, Dioscurus himself was accused )f gross inteinpcrnncc and otK^r evil habits. Coinp. Ilcfclo, ii. p 429.