RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Eutychianism
Eutychius of Constantinople
lost; and his downfall was not long in following. He appeared in the council practically as an accused person, while Theodoret, whom he had deposed at Ephesus, took his seat under the full protection of both pope and emperor. At the close of the first session the commissaries declared that Dioscurus himself and five of his principal supporters at Ephesus must be deposed, which took place in the third session, though a direct charge of heresy was avoided. He was banished to Gangra in Paphlagonia, where he died in 454. The five other bishops were restored to good standing in the fourth session. As to the dogmatic question, which the council treated with some hesitation, nominally out of respect for the First Council of Ephesus, after two epistles of Cyril (iv. and xxxix.) and Leo's to Flavian had been acknowledged, Anatolius was directed to draw up a proposed new definition. This, which was apparently decided in i.ts expressions on the point of one person out of two natures, was approved by the majority at the fifth session; but the Roman legates threatened to take their departure and have a new council called in Italy if Leo's epistle was not closely followed. The majority was disinclined to yield until an imperial order forced them to appoint a new committee on definition, of which the legates were now members. The result of this work was laid before the council at the same session, and solemnly proclaimed, Oct. 25. This was from the dogmatic standpoint a complete victory of West over East; the council's definition is only intelligible in the light of Western Christology. After an introduction affirming the Nicene and so-called Constantinopolitan creeds, which it declares sufficient as general creeds, it proceeds, with the purpose of avoiding Nestorian and Monophysite perversions of the mystery of the Incarnation, to recognize the epistles of Cyril and Leo named above as orthodox expositions of the creed, and then to give a lengthy and precise restatement of the one person of the Lord in two natures. It is not difficult to see that the terms of this definition and the recognition of Leo's epistles go beyond Cyril's teaching; but the members of the council attempted to forestall objections by persuading themselves of their agreement with both, and of each with the other. The formulas of Chalcedon were acceptable to Western minds, with their firm hold on the single person of the historic Christ without danger of obscuring either of the two natures, the divine or the human. But it was not a real settlement of the question for the East, and the action of the council, for all its pacific intent, was but the beginning of new strife (see Monophysites). Eutyches, the nominal originator of the controversy, was not expressly anathematized at Chalcedon; he was considered to have been already sufficiently condemned by Flavian, by Leo, and by the synod held under Anatolius. But after the council two imperial edicts of the year 452 enforced the ecclesiastical condemnation of his party by the usual civil penalties. Eutyches himself was banished, and the last heard of him is in a letter of Leo, Apr. 15, 454, requesting his removal to a more distant place on the ground that he still continued to deceive the
unwary in his original place of banishment. See Christology, IV (F. Loofs.)
Bibliography: Sources for a history are the Acts of the Synods, printed in Mansi, Concilia, vols, v.-vii., cf. ix. 659-702 (a summary of the whole affair in vii. 1060 sqq.); Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, ii. 317 sqq., Eng. transl., iii. 186 sqq.; S. G. F. Perry, Second Synod of Ephesus, Acts, Dartford, 1881 (with Syriac text and sources); Theodoret, Hist, eccl., passim, Eng. transl. in NPNF, 2 ser., vol. iii.; idem, Eranistes, in his Opera, ed. Schulze, vol. iv., Halle, 1774; Gelasius, Gesta de nomine Acacii, ed. Thiel, Epistolce liomanorum ponlificum, i. 510-519, Braunsberg, 1868; G. Hoffmann, in Schriften der Universitiit zu Kiel, vol. xx., 1873.
Consult Tillemont, Memoires, xv. 479-719; W. A. Arendt, Leo der Grosse, Mainz, 1835; E. Perthel, Papst Leo's I. Leben und Lehren, Jena, 1843; Wm. Bright, Hist, of the Church, pp. 313-451, Oxford, 1860; I. A. Dorner, Person of Christ, II., i.-ii., Edinburgh, 1862; W Cunningham, Historical Theology, i. 311-315, ib. 1863; P. Martin, Le P seudo-Synode . . d'Ephese, Paris, 1875; A. Ehrhard, in TQ, lxx (1888), 179-243, 406-450, 623- 653; Neander, Christian Church, ii. 560-569; Schaff, Christian Church, iii. 734-740; Moeller, Christian Church, i. 419-422; Harnaek, Dogma, iv. 197 sqq.; DCB, ii. 404- 412 (very full).
EUTYCHIANUS, yu-tik,i-a"nus: Pope 275-283. His name occurs in the lists of bishops of Rome between Felix and Caius, and a pontificate of eight years, nine months, and three days is assigned to him. Nothing at all is known of the events which marked it; but it may be mentioned that the tablet which covered his grave in the so-called " vault of the popes " has been discovered (cf. F. X. Kraus, Roma sotterranea, Freiburg, 1879, 154). (A. Hadck.)
Bibliography: Liber pontificalis, ed. Mommsen in MGH, Gest. pont. Rom., i (1898), 38; Bower, Popes, i. 37-38.
EUTYCHIUS OF ALEXANDRIA (also known by the Arabic name Sa'id ihn Batrik): Melchite patriarch of Alexandria Feb. 7, 933 to May 11, 940; b. in Fostat (the modern Cairo) 876; d. 940. Before entering upon the clerical estate he had been a physician, and had also pursued historical studies. As patriarch, he had to endure severe conflicts with the Jacobite Copts. His writings in Arabic, only in part preserved, are of medical, theological, and historical content. His principal work is the " String of Pearls " (Arab. Nazm al-jawahir), i.e., " Compend of History." It is a narrative from the creation of the world to 938, and comprises Biblical, profane, and ecclesiastical history. It contains many remarkable data, otherwise unknown, and valuable contributions to the history of Nestorianism and Monophysitism. The edition of Edward Pococke (2 vols., Oxford, 1654-56), is reprinted in MPG, cxi. 889-1232; and in 1906 a new edition by L. Cheikho, in Arabic and Latin, was begun in the Corpus scriptorum Christianorum orientalium (Paris). G. Kruger.
Bibliography: E. Renaudot, Historia patriarcharum Alexandrinorum, pp. 346 sqq., Paris, 1713; F. Wiistenfeld, Geschichte der arabischen Aerzte, p. 52, Gottingen, 1840; A. von Gutschmid, in Kleine Schriften, ii. 399-400, 486, Leipsic, 1890; Ceillier, Auteurs sacres, xiii. 45-46.
EUTYCHIUS OF CONSTANTINOPLE: Patriarch of Constantinople; b. in Phrygia c. 512; d. Apr. 5, 582. He became monk and abbot at Amasia in Pontus, and in 552 went to Constantinople as his bishop's ambassador. Here he so effectually combated the Antiochian theology, and made
Evagrius Evangelical Alliance