Full text of "The second synod of Ephesus, together with certain extracts relating to it, from Syriac mss. preserved in the British museum"

See other formats

ROLLA CNY fd Mi
atk PM IWtibdte MAb rac We AT pt ( ea TA te
' Vela ey r ian

Usaha

cyt a
tekst nevada cage
W Aly obiazyTheye lhe he otic uth
MY iy rath AAs WIV, h jacket,

‘ 1
The Pe ee Sh RO we
Vay bdady dita hy i Whe

‘ nat

Liss
Nia
ht

Soa Rye ae eat W ESOL te LPariaren
yaa My a ty ey ea WA hs } ip by N ae
oh) Oe er YET
i Mt Wh Caen
Pia ieata

ee ee)
ce MATa NA
eae

itt
vt * Hed, ™
Pa lssheydshsbahaligbeteds Ankeecke mea
Tey ibsteh W idtrstes EiniLs Me ora iv
hy , , ' * PecWrrty MLE tile BeAr biti titers Oly Kcr Gr
Nh! } tests : + Rh Ar i PA Wai SUA esl bah Tae tata
IVES EL EL UY \ \ Mad fs PAIRS * é ret Fhe
ete ta) 4 " ways [ fi
Pee rhe
miei y bye kihaatnag lat
Den OAtCee RCE CTC ROTI
PASE VORC RANE et
; Vetu bien
wetyts

a yeh lee « 4 ha
Na asite Pan PASAT ‘6 ‘ ? yy K
Aly tna i ‘ Wie tett Aayiysyucamink ha Sane Pave?
i i yard bakugan NA ates
i 3

‘
i
4
‘i
ey
5,
Ly
J
a
i
*

}
i
i
{
‘
4

AVM te Prat riers
PERERA Tas

Bhd Ebay
Ppa eet ur
ud

Pn ile
“a

yale 3 F.4d
aie y ( a2 oi Spire tpt
Vay ticdey \ E wn f Lp s!4 tte
Maes wee

Hitt ia) :
COL nin Pe DL ‘ ( " , ‘ end e i ‘
aCe a Wha Wi ded sie Estat d) , Pipe a Cae
' SUA Dears te a itd reeks ue ye
EGU pr or bate

nts f Hay “
De ne Ree PLAT ‘i aed i EDR EALY
Pua ania RUSTE Frat es 4 3 , M Peyton
Ee D8 Ue bby BUH vn hte J etal aes
t f i , Wii hae
' Hn
bee

Sup Hi
wh eit

wim
Perern rony iS

a ha MOLI sf i it

thin sant
fut

, te
Reni i
j i i ise ee i aa ny ie

beg ps
Sirs

a Way
Cay

hy i
TAR ino
Nae
eiynite
eth Bits

Library of The Theological Seminary

PRINCETON - NEW JERSEY

==>):

PURCHASED BY THE |
| MRS. ROBERT LENOX KENNEDY
CHURCH HISTORY FUND

BR 222 .P4 1881
Ephesus, 449.
The second synod of Ephesus

Digitized by the Internet Archive
In 2008 with funding from
Microsoft Corporation

https ://archive.org/details/secondsynodofephO0ephe

TO THE

ENGLISH SPEAKING PEOPLE

‘THe Hoty CaurcH THROUGHOUT THE WoORLD,’’

THIS WORK IS DEDICATED

BG. 2. BP:

, ae | ca a

ay oy 7 z ’

oS NOdE eRe Waltous
ty ; e uy ‘ - ;

' A ‘ . _<, 2
Magill ann teoioloius whan!) tla

: _ . CATALINA SF uO AEE v4

: -) :
ia an
Bes 3
} ' o>

Raind|, qa2522 Wozmsom

¢ wonal=

THE

SECOND SYNOD OF EPHESUS,

TOGETHER WITH CERTAIN EXTRACTS
RELATING TO IT,

From Syriac MSS. preserved in the British Museum,
and now first edited by

aa Rey. ve. oG. F. PERRY) Mes.

Vicar of Tottington, in the Diocese of Manchester.

EON GLAS: VERS DON.

“‘For, where two or three are gathered together in My Name,
there am I in their midst.”—Matt. xviii. 20.

“The Mothers of the Catholic Faith.”
Encyc. to Bishops, p. 374.

PRINTED AT THE ORIENT Press, DARTFORD, IN THE County or Kenr.
1881.

The following has just (Dec. 1879,) arrived in
England from Italy.

ACTORUM CONCILII CALCEDONENSIS
VERSIO INEDITA.

Preecedunt tres epistole Imperatorum juxta versionem
Codicis Vaticani, 1322.

Sequitur Ordo gestorum habitorum Calcedona, &c.,
juxta lectionem Coleti cum variantibus.

Deinde ( ) Synodi Constantinopolitani, sub P. P.
Leone.

(a) Exemptum libelli Eusebit Dorylitani (versio medita).
(b) Gesta contra Eutychen Presbuterum (item).

(¢) Epistola Papae Leonis ad Flavium (cum nonnullis
variantibus.

(f) Libellus Appellationis Eutychetis ad Papam Leonem
), adjectis SS. P.P. testimoniis ineditis
nempe Juliis Athanasii, Gregori Majoris Gregorii Naz.
Petri Alex. celestini Romani. Felicis Romani et
Synodi Romani et Synodi Ephesinge, item contestatio
ad Papylum Constantinopolitanium inedita.

(9) Acta Latrocinii Ephesini (versio inedita)
(4) Libellus Apellationis Flaviani Ep. CP..ad Papam Leonem.

(4) Libellus Appellations ad Papam lLeonem Eusebii.
Daryleorum

‘a aneny one) SiC)
test 1 Qa: 7

J ‘
ge | p fy

inetd, nite

~ Thy ot

THE SECOND

SYNOD

ihe > US,

(SECOND SESSION).

Meteo a TET.

“GOK to

ls recht bie -
*% ss

INTRODUCTION.

To be the means of presenting to the Church of

the 19th Century an Oriental Document purporting
“to be the authorised Acts of an Gicumenical Council
of the 5th Century, in its original quaint costume as
well as in a modern dress, by which a new page of
the Church’s chequered life might be unrolled and
deciphered, and in which, too, as in a picture would
be represented, in its deadliest aspect, one ghastly
struggle between The Truru Herself and the Dragon
of Heresy, when He vomited forth upon Her Mystical
Body his most poisonous venom, was the original, and
not very unimportant, object of producing these two
almost unique Volumes.

How far that object has been attained, and how
useful the realisation of it, may be best judged
perhaps by those who scrutinise their pages.

A brief sketch may not be uninteresting or unac-
ceptable, though perhaps not absolutely necessary.

In the summer of 1867, whilst conning over

Viil. INTRODUCTION.

my transcript of the first part of the MS., numbered
14,530 Additional, which had been put into my
hands in the British Museum, it occurred to me that
that part could be finished and dedicated to the Pan-
Anglican Synod, or Conference of Bishops of the
Anglican Communion, to be assembled in the autumn
at Lambeth under the auspices of the then Arch-
bishop of Canterbury. A terse description of the
MS., addressed to Archbishop Longley, soon brought
his opinion that it must be a MS. “interesting to
the Church at large,” and a permission, most kindly
expressed, to dedicate Part I. to the forthcoming
Conference and its President.

By the ready help of the Oxford Clarendon Press,
go many copies of Part I. were finished and presented
to aa many Metropolitans among the Bishops while in
session, by the good Offices of the presiding Archbishop.
Subsequently, a revised and corrected impression of
Part I., with a type thatan Oriental scholar designated
as “sumptuous,” was forwarded to all the Bishops
who had attended the Conference, that to the President
being accompanied by a second photograph, represent-
ing a page of the MS., which indicated, by internal
evidence, the Cicumenicity of the Council which the
Acts recorded. All the English and Irish Prelates,

INTRODUCTION. 1X,

sometimes with a frank avowal of unacquaintance
with the language in which our Lord spoke, made
a polite acknowledgment of its receipt, but to the
eighteen special copies which the American Bishops
received at the hands of the late Bishop of Ilinois—
who, after writing the Presentee’s and the Presentor’s
names and addresses in each copy, kindly offered
them at the Convention held next after his return
to America—no answer has ever been vouchsafed,
except from three, of whom the Chief Bishop was
one, viz., the late learned divine and scholar, Dr.
J. H. Hopkins, of Vermont.

I feel bound, therefore, in justice to myself, to
give others the opportunity of judging of the only
part (for, the reproduction of the MS. itself, or the
Latin translation given in Mansi of its documents,
or the English of one by myself, could not possibly
give offence) which must have had that effect I
suppose, and which accounts for so unusual a phe-
nomenon, viz.,—the “Prefatory Remarks,” which
are produced here verbatim, with the Dedication
page, and to which the Metropolitan of Chios alludes
in the translated letter of acknowledgment to me*

subjoined, with approving emphasis.

* Most Reverenp FaruHer,
I owe many thanks to our common friend, most highly esteemed

X. INTRODUCTION.

by me, the Reverend George Williams, because, even from
afar, he does not cease to remember my Humility ; and also from
his good and kind disposition to make me known to his friends
there. It is certainly to the friendly commendation of this worthy
man that I am now indebted, both for the honour of your letter,
and the valuable work sent together with it, the Title of which is,
‘An Ancient Syriac Document, &c.”—a work having a special
bearing on the Christians of the East.

Glory and honour to all those who occupy themselves in earnest
works of this character, from which the dark parts of Ecclesiastical
History will derive light,—amongst which men, without dispute,
your Reverence—greatly desired by me—is also to be numbered,
on account of your learned address prefixed, in memory of the
Synod of the Venerable Anglican Bishops at Lambeth, in 1867.

And now, while acknowledging with gratitude your love in this
valuable present, I pray from my soul (both for you and for all
who contend for the truth, and for the union in one fold of all who
call upon the all-holy name of Christ, ‘‘ which is above every
name’’) help from above, and illumination to walk without swerv-
ing in the direct and saying path of the one truth that is in Christ ;
which the Spirit-bearing Apostles of our Saviour, having received
from Him, proclaimed ; and their successors, the Divine Fathers,
following them, by holy tradition, set forth both severally and in
General Councils.

Your Reverence’s (greatly desired by me) humble bedesman in
Christ, and ready servant to your friendly commands,

The Metropolitan of Chios,
+ GREGORY.

In Chios,
8th September, 1869.

INTRODUCTION. Xl,

DEDICATION.

“To the Holy Synod of Bishops of Christ’s Holy Catholic
“Church, Most Reverend and Right Reverend Fathers in God,
‘in Communion with the See of Canterbury; convoked at
“the Instance of the Metropolitan and Bishops of Canada
‘“‘and of others, and holden at Lambeth Palace on 24, 25, 26, and
‘“‘ 27th days of September, in the year 1867, under the Presidency
‘‘of his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, in the spirit
‘which animated ‘that gentle Father of his People,”
‘‘of ‘the Bishops assembled in Council”—‘‘ The Divine favour
‘‘will bring it to pass, that we with the rest, our Colleagues,

who says

‘‘may stably and firmly administer our office, and uphold the peace
‘“‘of the Catholic Church in the Unity of Concord ;” this attempt
‘“‘at an entire reproduction in fac-simile Estrangela characters, and
‘‘ at a translation of
‘AN ANCIENT SYRIAC DOCUMENT
‘(for centuries lost, and now generally unknown, to the Church),
‘purporting to be an historical relation, in its chief features, of a
‘certain Synod at Ephesus, summoned by Imperial Authority to be
‘held in August, 449, A.D., as, and distinctly and authoritatively
‘designated by itself when held to be an (ecumenical Synod of the
‘Catholic Church, but, by reason of the outrage committed by its
‘President and the violent perversion of its ends, for ever pro-
‘nounced by Saryt Leo tun Great to be the
‘“«LATROCINIUM OF EPHESUS,’

‘is, with Profound Veneration, as well as by Express Permission,
“Dedicated by a Priest of the Catholic Shurch in Communion

‘‘ with the See of Canterbury.

xii. INTRODUCTION,

PREFATORY REMARKS.

“The original ancient Document, which the following pages
‘indicate an attempt to reproduce in fac-simile type and to trans-
“late, forms one of those rich and magnificent Syriac treasures
“which the present Archdeacon of Bedford, Dr. Tattam, brought
“from the Syrian Monastery of St. Mary Deipara, in the Desert

“of Nitria or Scete, (ras tOL0% rnin asl. dua D3

(eiscn MtoN wl norns et>3201), on the Western
“side of the Nile, between twenty and thirty years ago. The
“most important and most ancient of all those treasures have
“already been made known to the world by distinguished Oriental
‘¢ scholars, viz. :—

(1) Clementis Romani Recognitiones, by Dr. P. de Lagarde of
** Berlin.

(2) Titi Bostreni contra Manichzos libri quatuor, by Dr. P. de
“Lagarde.

“(3) Eusebius Bishop of Caesarea on the Theophania or Divine
“ Manifestation of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, with a
“translation and notes, by Dr. Samuel Lee, late Professor of
“‘ Hebrew at Cambridge.

(4) Ancient Syriac Documents relative to the earliest establishment
“of Christianity in Edessa and the neighbouring countries,
“from the year after our Lord’s Ascension to the beginning
“of the fourth century, with a translation, by Dr. Cureton,
“and with a Preface by Dr. William Wright of the British
“ Museum.

“ (5) Spicilegium Syriacum: containing remains of Bardesan, Meliton,
“Ambrose, and Mar Bar Serapion, with a translation and
“notes, by Dr. Cureton.

“(6) History of the Martyrs of Palestine by Eusebius, Bishop of
“ Cesarea, with a translation into English, and Notes, by Dr.
*« Cureton.

(7) An Ancient Syrian Martyrology, edited and translated by Dr.
“William Wright of the British Museum, in the Journal of
“Sacred Literature. ‘The MS. of which it forms a part was
“transcribed in the year of the Greeks 728, ie. 412 A.D.’

INTRODUCTION. Xlll.

(8) Analecta Syriaca, with Appendix, by Dr. P. de Lagarde.
(9) The Fragments of John of Asia, soon to be published by Dr.
J. BP. N. hand.

“ (10) The Festal Letters of St. Athanasius, by Dr. Cureton.
“In this last work Dr. Cureton gives a full and very interesting
“history of the way in which these ancient Syriac monuments
‘were discovered in the Syrian Convent, in the valley of the
“Nitrian Lakes, and brought by Dr. Tattam in 1842 to England,
“and afterwards deposited in the British Museum as the property
“of the nation in 1847, where they now form one of the most
“remarkable and important collections of the writings of antiquity
“which have ever been transported from East to West. Dr.
“Cureton mentions the share M. Pacho had in the purchasing
“these Manuscripts of the Cloistered Brethren of the Nitrian
“Valley. It turns out that M. Pacho himself, after having sold,
“according to agreement, the whole to the trustees of the British
“Museum, must have withheld part of them in some way or another,
“of which part the Imperial Public Library of St. Petersburg
“appears to be in present possession, certainly as far as the Syriac
“copy of the Keclesiastical History of Eusebius, which Dr. Wright
“showed me, is concerned.

“Next after these very recherché specimens of Syriac literature
“above mentioned, ranks in importance and character, as I think,
“our Manuscript, which describes itself as

wamars dhyiadhe<s eartAT warmiam
> PRPARMAR WATAEDOs Merton utIAiD

“Tt is most probably a Syriac version, made about a century after
“the events it records, of a Greek original long since lost to the
“Church. It is numbered 14,530 among the Additional MSS. in
“the British Museum. It is very legibly and boldly indited on
“vellum in the Estrangéla character, and presents, as now bound
“up, only two blank leaves, indicating as few lacune* in the
“document. The generally excellent condition of the parchment

* There are in all five Lacune in the Original MS,

X1v. INTRODUCTION.

“eaves is no doubt due to the continuously dry and warm climate
“of the Desert, which has preserved it for our benefit during a
“period considerably exceeding one thousand years, according to
“the date so fortunately undefaced in this MS., as in many of its
“fellows, and placed at the end on the last page but one.

“The last page, however, presents dithculties of no ordinary
“kind; but its photographic representative, given in corresponding
“type at the end of our printed text, magnifying as it does the
* letters and the parts of letters that are discernible, as well as the
“marks of disfigurement, may induce some Syriac scholar to
“venture on an endeavour to decipher the sadly marred features of
“its dimly sombre visage, and so to offer some solution of those
“difficulties that have hitherto baffled some few not unskilful
“handlers of ancient Oriental MSS.

“The whole MS. consists of 216 pages, each page averaging
“about 28 lines. Sometimes towards the middle the limes number
«33 and 34. The portion of the Syriac text printed in this Part I
“is the beginning of the attempt at a reproduction of the docu-
“ment in its entirety, so that, page in our text nearly correspond-
“ing to page in the original, and line exactly to line, word for
“word, red type for red, and black type for black, we shall be
“enabled in the course of time, if encouraged, to accomplish the
“task of reproducing the whole document in fac-simile Estrangéla
*“‘ characters as contemplated.

“The translation strikes off with the Latin rendering of one of
“the documents already given in Mansi’s L’Abbe. The English
‘translation here given points to those very important matters
“connected with the characteristics of this MS. ; for it relates to
“what occurred after August 8, and to the case of Ibas and to
* the unfolding of the unlawful acts of Dioscorus and partisans at
‘the Synod, by which its President perverted it into a Concili-
* abulum and that Conciliabulum into the Latrocinium of Ephesus.
“The Emperor had summoned the Synod for August 1. Its first
“session, three extant fragments concerning which are given in
“ Latin and Greek in L’Abbe’s ‘ Conciliorum Collectio,’ took place

INTRODUCTION. XV.

“on August 8 It is the Session on Saturday, August 20, of
‘‘ which mention is made, and that on Monday, August 22, pro-
‘“‘ ceedings of which are recorded, in these Acts alone.

‘« As the preceding remarks relative to the Syriac MSS. cannot
‘be otherwise than apposite and pertinent to the matter in hand,
‘“so the subjoined reflections will not, I think, be considered
‘‘inapposite or inopportune, which deal with the subject of
‘‘ Synods generally, although at present it appears to be not unwise
‘“ to say little of that particular one, of which much is to be said
‘‘and can be better said when all connected with it is complete.

“‘ Now it is evident to all men (sans die’ yala\ to use the
‘‘ first words of our document) reading the signs of the times, that
‘‘the grand idea of the distinctive oneness of the ‘one Body’ of
‘“‘Christ—so fully taught by the Holy Ghost, as well in the
‘‘ glorious Creeds of the Church Catholic as through the direct
‘‘and immediate inspiration of Holy Writ—is receiving and
« growing into a vivid realization in this latter half of the nine-
‘teenth century, which may witness, before its close, through that
“one Body’ being continually quickened and informed by the
‘“‘¢one Spirit,’ a no inappreciable approximation to the Church’s
‘oneness of character in primitive times. And there is also much
‘‘yeason to aver that the synodical system of the Church, by and
‘‘in the highest form in which her articulate voice was in the ages
‘of faith so faithfully uttered and obediently heard, and of which,
‘7 will add, our MS., coming up as it does through the long vista
‘‘of those past ages from the unchanging Hast, is so singularly
‘‘expressive, promises, by God’s mercy to us, to receive such posi-
‘tive and helpful encouragements as will afford to many, yearning
‘“‘for its joyful fulness, a warranty of hope and belief that that
‘‘ visible Oneness or Unity must be actended with an immediate
‘‘and manifest accession.

‘‘ Now the Synodical Institutions of the Church Catholic are of
«‘ Divine origin. The germ from which they are all evolved and
“the source to which they can be referred and traced back, as well
‘‘in their first emergent and scarcely discernible development as in

XVI. INTRODUCTION.

‘the grandest and most glorious, when the largest General Council
“could exultingly appropriate Christ’s promise to itself, may be
‘found in the Divine words containing that promise of our Lord’s
‘gracious presence : ot yap eior Ovo % TpEls oUVHpEVvOL Els TO Emov
“ Syoua, exel eye ev wéow avrov. The secondary meaning of these
‘“words, reality of belief in which has been abundantly and
‘‘unprecedently evidenved of late years—may it still increase !—
‘in the awakened consciousness of Churchmen to privileges and
‘« duties in connection with assemblies for Worship, needs certainly
‘(no elaborate elucidation ; whilst the primary, significative of
“ order, discipline, and work, has surely been insufficiently regarded
‘‘in the realization of blessings inherent of necessity in a guaran-
“teed promise to what is done, eis to ovoua, by many or by few in
“authorised union and action.

“This year of grace, however, and this month of September,
‘‘bear witness to a special and unprecedented instance of actual
‘‘realization of the promise, in the Synod of Bishops, held at
‘« Lambeth, of Christ’s Holy Catholic Church in Communion with
‘the See of Canterbury : — special, whether there are regarded
‘‘eyidences of the special Presence attached, and the special office
“of teaching the truth of God assigned, to such Synods ; or it be
‘looked on only as a cuvddos 4) évdyporoa, like that at Constantinople
‘‘in November a.p. 448, when the Heresiarch was formally accused
‘* of a denial of the truth of the distinction of the two natures of
“Jesus Christ ;—unprecedented, as the annals of our whole Com-
‘“‘munion furnish no such instance of the ‘ Demonstrative Unity’ of
‘‘its Chief Pastors. May this apostolic return by our Right
“Reverend Fathers in God to the earliest and normal rule and law
‘of the Church, by which the primary signification of Christ’s own
«‘ Words is manifestly attested and realized, exercise over the future
‘of our one-third division of Christendom such a beneficial influ-
‘ence as will encourage every member of that Division gladly to
‘recognise his position in it, and to realise his ‘vocation and
“ministry ’—his calling from on high (1 avw «Ajous) and his office
‘Cand function in the ‘one Body ’—as it regards that primary sig-

INTRODUCTION. XV.
‘‘nification, and such as may bear comparison with that of the great
‘Fathers of Nice over the whole history of Christendom, in the
‘‘ actual past and present, as well as in its probable future.

‘The received histories of the Catholic Church from the Day of
‘« Pentecost, after the Apostolic Synod at Jerusalem in a.p. 51, held
‘to determine points of Ritual and to enact Canons, and another
‘under the presidency of the Bishop of that city, held to receive
‘a persecuted Apostle and his company, present us with at least
‘six recognised (Ecumenical Councils or Synods—besides smaller
‘‘ones—which, viewed at a mere glance, may be perhaps epitomised
“thus :—

(1) At Niczr—318 Bishops present—it

“the Faith once, and once for all,
delivered’’—Arianism condemned—
Synodical Epistle—20 Canons

(2) AtConsTaANTINOPLE—150Bishops, it
re-afirmed the faith and completed |
/

attested to “the Deposit’’and defined |

scenes

the Nicene Definition—condemned
the Macedonian Heresy—before it
Arianism fell~—7 Canons

the great exposition of the faith by
S. Cyril—the Nestorian Heresy con-
demned—8 Canons

At Ephesus—130 Bishops present—
Dioscorus Prestdent, 0st... steeacovccees:

(4). At CHAaLcEDoN—630 een
|

(3) At EpHzsus—2C0 Bishops present— |

eee tee we eee ceeee

Creed (without filioque) nowset forth
as perfection, ro réAecov—Eutychian
Heresy anathematized—Leo’sT'ome, }
rejected at Ephesus, is accepted, and |
Dioscorus deposed and sentenced |
30 Canons

eee Reece eee e eee ee see eeressens

(5) At ConsTANTINOPLE—165 Bishops—
the three Chapters; miserable re-
sults, but this Synod has always >
been received and respected by the
Church as condemning error ..... coe

(6) At ConsTaNTINOPLE—170 Bishops—
Agatho’s Synodical letters — Defini-
tion of there being two natural |
Wills or Operations of Christ in One
Person—Monothelite Error—Hon- |
orius, &c., anathematized J

sere weeny

A.D.
325 Convoked by Constan-
tine the Great.

431 |

449 Convoked by Theodosius
the younger.

Convoked by Theodosius
the Great.

Convoked by Theodosius
the younger.

Convoked by Marcian,
great lover of the
Faith.

556 against the Church’s

wish and desire.

Convoked by Constan-

f
|

| Convoked by Justinian
f

} tine IV.
L

XVill. INTRODUCTION.

The Quinisext Council is supplementary
to the fifth and sixth, because they
enacted no canons of discipline—and
this made 102, confirming the doc-
trine of the six General Councils,
“the 85 Canons of the Apostles,”
&e.— The Code of the Universal
Churehiicomplete:\.2.-2..2-+-s0nseee.cne+e L

if
692 | Convoked eo Justinian

“At these Councils, all summoned by Imperial authority, the
‘Holy Gospels were exalted on a Throne put in a prominent posi-
‘‘tion, definitions and transactions were regularly recorded in the
‘- Acts, and Canons enacted. The Actio was the Session. A
‘‘Patriarch had several Notaries attendant on him, and a Bishop
‘always one or more. The primicerius was the Bishop’s registrar.
‘‘Bishops alone attested to the faith, alone determined, defined or
‘settled points of doctrine, declaring together by virtue of their
‘office, ‘Thus believes the Catholic Church,’ and separately
“endorsing with ‘definiens subscripsi,’ whilst any other wrote
‘<consentiens subscripsi.? The Notaries had to write down or copy
‘““the Acts for the Bishops, who took to their provinces the defini-
‘‘tions of the Faith and the Canons enacted. There were also
‘“‘apocrisiaries, or a sort of proctors, syncelli, and promoters,
‘“‘and committees, formed for special business, defenders
‘Cand defendants, letters of citation, information demanded and
‘declared before the Holy Gospels present so conspicuously, libels,
‘or bills of indictment preferred against the accused, memorials,
‘‘netitions. gravamina, &c., besides ‘ acclamations,’ which formed a
‘characteristic feature of the working of the ancient Synods, very
‘similar, for instance, to the following :—‘ Such is the Faith of the
‘Fathers. Such is the Faith of the Apostles. Peter has spoken
‘“by Leo. So the Apostles taught. Leo hath taught piously and
‘truly. Cyriltaught so. Eternal be the memory of Cyril.’ These
‘instances of freedom include a remarkable illustration in our
“document.

“Of these six (icumenical Synods, the first, in the highest sense
‘and in another, the greatest and most important undoubtedly was
‘that at Nica. Besides enacting twenty Canons, and settling for
‘‘ever the questions as to the time for the Church to keep Haster

INTRODUCTION. XIX.

“‘and the re-admission of certain schismatics into her communion,
“‘the Fathers of the first Synod said on behalf of God’s truth, and
‘said for all Christians for all time, ‘Thus believes the Catholic
‘Church.’ That General Council is the foundation on which all
‘the others were built and grounded. The second knit itself on
“to it. The third affirmed ‘the faith of the cccxvm. and of the
‘on.’ ‘Those holy and venerable Fathers,’ says S. Leo, ‘ who, at
“Nice having condemned Arius with his sacrilegious impiety,
‘enacted laws of Ecclesiastical Canons to abide to the end of the
‘‘ world, live in their Constitutions among us and throughout the
‘‘world.’ ‘All the Fathers reverenced the Nicene Council, as an
‘oracle given from heaven.’ That Council also regulated the
“holding of Synods of Bishops. Many such Synods had taken
‘place frequently before; and Bishop Beveridge proves, at great
“‘pains, that many were held in the second and third centuries.
‘‘They were the normal rule of the Church; and ‘the half-yearly
‘Synod of Bishops was then, by virtue of an authority acknowledged
‘fas supreme, appointed for the whole Church.’

‘“‘During the period intervening between the first and second
‘(Ecumenical Synods, when Arianism under various phases and
‘forms vigorously and constantly assaulted, with a view to destroy,
“the Faith in God the Son, but finally fell before the Faith’s
“victory at the latter Council, we have afforded to us notices of no
‘Jess than eighty Synods; and though they were mostly unsatis-
‘‘factory, being attempts to undo the work of God the Holy Ghost
‘in the Church—waves dashing against the rocks of the true Faith,
‘which ‘foamed out their own shame,’ as a Regius Professor so
‘‘beautifully puts it (for I am here using his thoughts),—yet they
“testify to the practice of Synods of Bishops, to the regular custom
‘that then obtained. All the then misbelievers seem to have been
‘such misbelievers through failing to perceive, as some do now (for
‘¢ Arianism under another appellative is still moribund), that ‘ there
“is no middle point between the entire Oneness of the Nature of
‘‘God the Son with the Father and His being a mere creature,’ since
‘what is not God of necessity is a creature of God,

XxX. INTRODUCTION.

‘Taken together, the first four general Synods rank above all
‘‘others in importance and value to the Catholic Church. They
‘chiefly concerned themselves about ‘the whole state of our Lord
‘‘ Jesus Christ ;’ to make which ‘complete,’ Hooker (Book V.) says,
‘«« There are but four things that concur: His Deity, His manhood,
‘the conjunction of both, and the distinction of the one from the
‘other being joined in one. Four principai heresies there are
‘‘ which have in those things withstood the truth: Arians by bending
‘themselves against the Deity of Christ, Apollinarians by maiming
‘‘and misinterpreting that which belongeth to His human nature»
‘“‘Nestorians by rending Christ asunder and dividing Him into two
‘‘ persons, the followers of Eutyches by confounding in His person
‘‘those natures which they should distinguish. Against these there
‘‘ have been four most famous ancient General Councils: the Council
‘‘of Nice to define against Arians, against Apollinarians the Council
‘of Constantinople, the Council of Ephesus against Nestorians,
‘against Eutychians the Chalcedon Council. In four words,
* GAnbas, TeAEwWs, adiatpeTs, aovyxi Tos, truly, perfectly, indiwisibly,
‘distinctly ; the first applied to His being God, and the second to
‘* His being Man, the third to His being of both One, and the fourth
‘to His still continuing in that one Both: we may fully, by way
“of abridgment comprise whatsoever antiquity hath at large
‘ handled, either in declaration of Christian belief, cr in refutation
‘‘of the aforesaid heresies. Within the compass of which four
‘heads, I may truly affirm, that all heresies which touch but the
‘‘person of Jesus Christ, whether they have arisen in these latter
‘days, or in any age heretofore, may be with great facility brought
‘to confine themselves.’

‘* Now if there be one period in the whole history of the Church
‘‘militant here on earth, which does or will demand of the readers
‘“‘of that history thoughts and reflections such as those so pithily
‘and nervously indited in the Oxford translation of M. L’ Abbé
‘Fleury, it is that which comprises ihe period of heresy and the
‘councils so succinctly reviewed and concisely summarized by
“Hooker. Our allusion is to the following: ‘Most men who have

INTRODUCTION. XX1,

‘‘considered the course which Church-history takes, have in some
“‘stage of their progress felt pain, if not misgiving, at the rapidity
‘with which cne heresy seems to follow upon another. To minds
‘‘in this state we may suggest, first, that as wars occupy a wide
‘“space on the page of civil history, though often affording scarcely
‘any criterion of the aggregated happiness of a nation, so ecclesi-
‘‘astical history is often compelled to dwell on the life of a single
‘‘heretic, while thousands and tens of thousands are passing to
‘their heavenly inheritance unnoticed and unknown. Secondly,
‘‘that from the disproportionate time spent in examining heresies
‘“‘we are apt to think too slightly of the periods ef rest, those
‘« “intervals of sunshine between storm and storm”’ in which it ‘‘is
‘‘God’s will to gather in His elect little by little.” Lastly, that
‘heresy is overruled to several of the best ends—to promote
‘‘humility—to try our faith (I. Cor. ii. 19)—to rouse the careless
‘to an attentive study, and the religious to a more earnest realiza-
‘‘tion of the Christian verities, and to subserve the evolution of
‘‘those verities in a dogmatic form.’

‘“ And if there be one page of ecclesiastical history which more
‘‘than another deserves and claims attention to the strikingly
‘‘ beautiful and thoughtfu! remark tersely embodying the sentiments
‘expressed above, and placed by Dr. Burton in the forefront of his
‘‘historical work, it is that which recounts the doings, especially
‘ when viewed by the additional light furnished by this ancient
‘Syriac Document, of that Patriarch of the ancient and once
‘glorious Church of Alexandiia, who marred the splendour of the
‘Throne of SS. Athanasius and Cyril, reduced one of the grandest
‘institutions of Christ, designed for the benefit of His Church, to
‘‘<the Latrocinium of Ephesus,’ and so brought a withering curse
‘upon the whole of ‘the Evangelical See’ of S. Mark, it may be
‘for ever.

‘‘ Tt is hoped that, in this individual effort to do some houour to
“and to commemorate, the Synod of Bishops of Christ’s} Holy
‘Catholic Church, holden at Lambeth in Septemder 1867, may be
‘‘ considered, as included, a humble desire as well to promote the

XXil. INTRODUCTION.

‘study of the oldest Church language and literature generally, as
“to draw their attention to, if not actually to bring to bear on
‘those many fellow Churchmen of our common ‘Civitas Dei’ in
“India, the Colonies, and other parts of the world, the rich literary
‘Church treasures, and the accompanying advantages within easy
‘reach, which we of the home Church possess in such great but
‘‘not selfish abundance; and last, but not least, to add a little link
‘‘in that chain of fraternal love that is uniting together in closer
‘‘ brotherhood the members of the ‘One Body’ living in the East
‘Cand in the West, in the New World and in the Old.
os. G FoPEERY:

“'TOTTINGTON PARSONAGE,
‘“r~ THE Diocesm oF MANCHESTER AND PROVINCE OF YORK,
September, 1867.”

Thus have I transposed, in their entirety, my
“Prefatory Remarks” of Part I., by which to enable
my readers to judge of them for themselves. One
more paragraph at Page 19 I might adduce as
unfavourable to myself perhaps, but, as the matter
therein stated is purely historical, I forbear to do so.
The fellow copy of that presented to Archbishop
Longley was shewn among other articles of literary
curiosity at the Missionary Exhibition at Manchester,
undertaken a few years since by the enterprise of
the senior Member for that city—viz., Hugh Birley,
Esq. <A notification of Part I. is made by Dr. W.
Wright in the three-volumed catalogue of the Syriac
MSS. in the British Museum. Subsequently, on
finding the costliness of printing the whole Codex in
the “sumputous” type would be very considerable,

INTRODUCTION. XX.

I followed the example of a Syriac scholar whose
work had cost Oxford University £1,000, and made
application, but in vain, to the Delegacy for assist-
ance, and, although the Right Honorable W. E.
Gladstone, during his first Premiership, offered me
a sum of money from the Treasury, I ultimately
resolved to adopt a smaller type, and to prosecute
my object at my leisure and independent of all
pecuniary assistance. Accordingly, when I had
completed the transcript of the whole of it with my
own hand, I dedicated my first printed edition of the
Codex to the memory of S.W.P. and of M.E.P., in

the personal “tribulation” connected with which I
have never yet been able to be “joyful,” and in the
midst of the joy in the ‘bitterness of the heart no
stranger could possibly intermeddle. At the sug-
gestion of a foreign scholar, who, though of an alien
communion, sympathised with me both in my
labours and my sorrows, I appended several appro-
priate extracts from various Syriac documents in the
British Museum, and at the late Quarternian
Centenary Commemoration of the University of
Tabingen—QUINTUM SACULUM SUPER
IORIBUS CLARIUS SURGIT (See Vol. ui. p.
-305)—where thirty universities had representatives,
and where such distinguished courtesy and kindness

were manifested towards me as can never be effaced

XXIV. INTRODUCTION.

from my memory. I was able to have the pleasure
of presenting to the University and Royalty there
my Tubingen Edition, including an English Version
of the Codex, together with the first part of my
Tetraglott Psalter, and the Rector Magnificus, at
my request, proposed formally to those in Statu
Pupellan a Prize Essay for the encouragement of
Syriac Ltterature—a fact duly recorded in the
beautiful Documents drawn up for the Commemora-
tion. In a new Kdition of a Theological Encyclo-
peedia Professor Semischt afterwards called attention
to the Syriac Volumes, and especially to the extracts
that more or less refer to the Codex. It will greatly
add to my pleasure to offer these now completed
Volumes, i. and ii., with some accompaniments, for
the acceptance of Modern Victoria University, by .
which opportunity to the rising generation for
encouragement to study may be afforded. A
Language and a Literature that are hallowed by
associations affecting greatly our Blessed Lord and
His Mission on Earth, and call to the whole
Christian World in the unedited Paschetto for
devout attention, and that appeal to this Nation
especially in the unravelled MSS. of unrivalled
Syriac Treasures in the British Museum.

CONTENTS OF THE BOOK,

ANALYSIS OF THE CODEX

The Great Syriac Codex, numbered 14,530 among
the Additional MSS. inthe British Museum, is by

us designated A, which contains :—

i, Lerrers [mperiat,

[a] Addressed to Dioscorus and convoking the Synod (1—7).

| 8| Addressed to Dioscorus and relating to Theodoret (8—10).

[y] Addressed to the Holy Synod and relating to Ibas (10—13).

[d] Document, giving the Date of the Synod or Council, and a
list of the Bishops and Presbyters present, but omitting
the names of the representatives of Leo of Rome, and the
names of Domnus of Antioch, and of Flavian of Constanti-
nople, and of Timothy of Alexandria.

Resumption of the Council’s deliberation, on
August 22nd, 449, a.p.

Preliminary discussion, relative to the absence from the
Synod of the Envoys of Leo and the absence of Domnus,
between the Proto-Notary and the Bishops Juvenal of
Jerusalem, and Thalassius of Cesarea, and including the
Report of the Deputies despatched by the Synod to visit
them (21—27).

ii. THe Cause or Inas, BisHop or Epussa

[Introductory note, including historical matter from the
“Chronicle of Edessa,” view of the position ecclesiastically
considered chiefly from Abbe Martin’s ‘‘ Etude,” dates and
facts worth remembering, and the ‘‘Crimina’’ or charges
against Ibas, from Assernanni (28—37). |

XXV1.

CONTENTS.

Action taken against Ibas at Edessa.

Imperial letters to the Council urging it, since all classes
witness against his Impiety, to appoint another Bishop in
the stead of Ibas. [This is the Document (7) not (6) (38).
Monks enter the Council, bearing Imperial Letters addressed
to James and eleven other Archimandrites of Edessa,
which letters are read, (39—41). At the instance of
Dioscorus, the Commissioners, Photius, Eustatius, and
Uranius, declare what took place before them on matters of
The Faith as to Ibas, andas regards Daniel, he tendered his
resignation (41—43).

[A.] Records of Transactions at Edessa in April last
past before the Praeses, Cheereas, including the vociferations
of the Citizens on his entry on the borders and into the
Church of Zacheeus (44—54).

[B. First Formal Enquiry.] The Second Report.
Document addressed to Roman Authorities by Cherceas re-
specting the excited condition of the City (55—57). Copy
of Records drawn up at Edessa in the Consulate of Zeno and
Posthumian. Micallus brings a Petition of the Inhabitants
of the City, which he and other EKcclesiastics had signed,
and it is received and read (57—59). The Petition (59—66).
‘‘Every person subscribed to these Transactions and to the
Presentation of the Petition’? Then the Acclamations of
the whole popwation (67—73). The Count notes the
instancy on the Authorities, and Micallus offers the apology
(73 and 74). Micallus assures the Count that it is with the
good will of all present that the Petition and the Oath
are proffered (75). Fifty attest to this (75—82).

[C. Second Formal Enquiry]. The Third Report.
Document, despatched to Martialius by Chereas, relative to
the recurrence of ‘the commotion excited in the City by the
discovery of the false faith of its Bishop (84—87). <A civie
Dignitary, Theodosius, speaks of his efforts on a Sunday to
repress disturbance, and, in the name of the community at
large, presents a Petition for allaying it. He urges Ibas’s
accusers present to say what charges are preferred against
him, in what counts convicted, and appeals to those present
as to whether his statements are correct (87—90). Twenty-
six witnesses attest to this (91—94). Samuel, Maras, and
Cyrus took part in the presentment and indictment at
Berytus (95). Samuel’s account of his full Deposition
made there, and of Ibas’s Heresy—‘‘I do not envy Christ’s
becoming God, &c.,” (95—100). The testimony of six
witnesses to this Heresy (100—103). That of sixteen
others as to kindred Heresy (103—108). Theodosius urges

ill.

lv.

CONTENTS. XXVIL.

the conveyance of these Instruments to the Authorities, and
asks for a copy of Ibas’s Letter to Maris be read before the
Synod (108—109). The Judge replies (110). THE
LETTER ITSELF (111—119). Discussion as to the
copy of the Letter (120—12%3). Count Chereas prom-
ises that all shall be notified to the Authorities (123). Then
ensue EXCLAMATIONS from the Synod (124—125).
What Eulogius repeats as known, the Synod cries out should
be put into writing (126). More Exclamations of the Synod
(127). The President calls for silence (128). A highly
important Deposition made by Eulogius (128—183). Sen-
tence of Deposition pronounced upon the Bishop of Edessa
judicially and severally by twenty chief Bishops of the
Synod and unanimously by the Synod itself (184—145),
[A note on their judgment (145—147). ]

Deposition or Danie, tHe Bisuop or CHARRE
(Haran).

[Introductory Note, containing part of the tenth ‘‘Actio”’ of
the Chalcedon Synod referring to the ‘“ Urimina” with
which Daniel was charged, and the relationship between
Kdessa and Charrae, and their Bishops (151—164). |

Eulogius opens the case with charges made against Daniel,
and requests the Commissioners to speak on the subject into
which investigation had been made in their presence (155).
One of them says he had forgotten the case (156). Eusta-
thius states Danicl was convicted to his face in open Court,
but, during a delay, sent in letters of his Resignation to his
Metropolitan. In the end, the case was remitted for the
settlement of the affair to this GJcumenical Synod (156—
158). Bishop Euranius speaks by an interpreter (159).
Relying on the excellent name of the Commissioners, twelve
Bishops or more pronounce sentence upon Daniel’s Depo-
sition from the Throne of the Priesthood (159—165).

Deposition oF IRmNaUS THE Bisuop or Tyre.

[Introductory Note, shewing tiat Irenaeus was a Count of
the Empire. but subsequently consecrated to the Episcopate
by Archbishop Domnus and not by Theadoret (168—170). ]
The Proto-Notary, after speaking of the Nestorian Doctrine
which Daniel upheld, and of his having two wives, «c.,
urges the justice of a Synodical and Legal sentence (170—
178). The chief Bishops state that he ought to be deprived
of the episcopal Digni:y which he should not have had in
the first instance, and, some add, of Communion in the Pure
Mysteries. The Synod asseated (173—177),.

XXVI1. CONTENTS.

Vl.

Vil.

Vill.

Deposition or Aquitinus (ACILINUsS), THE BisHop

or Bysuuvs.

[Introductory Note (180—181).] Photius makes out Aqui-

linus to have so acted that Domnus gave him permission to

consecrate another in his place (182); and Dioscorus urges

the expulsion of him, as a Heretic, by his Metropolitan

(188) He is pronounced to be deprived (184—186).

Action RELATIVE TO SoPHRONIUS, THE BIsHoP OF
TELLA.

[Introductory Note (188).] Certain Libels of Indictment
from the Clerks of Tella (189), in a Document, descriptive
of Sunday doings of Sophronius and signed by certain repre-
sentativés of Confraternities, presented to the Synod (189—
198). The case is to be decided upon by the new Bishop of
Edessa, as Metropolitan (198).

Deposition or ‘THEODORET, THE BISHOP oF
Cyrus.

[Introductory Note, containing some prominent features in
Theodoret’s character and his references to his own hard-
ships; some notice of, and extracts trom, his lost and other
works; and the urgency made upon him at Chalcedon
to anathematise Nestorius. Much has yet to be added to
his written life. Long note due chiefly to Dr. Nestle (202—
206).] The Formal Document, to the Synod, of Pelagius,
affording matter about the Genera’ Synods, about himself
as a Monk, about Theodorct’s and Domnus’s persecution
of himself, their punishment due from the Synod, &e.
(207—218). ‘Lheodoret’s other Volume, produced, against
the first Synod of Ephesus, and another written against
Cyril after intercommunion; the Notary reads the
Volume (218—240); also fifteen extracts from the
other Volume (241—250). The President gives his
judgment; Notaries are sent to make known the day’s pro-
ceedings to Domnus (251—-253). Ten Bishops pronounce
their sentences on Theodoret, and the Synod (253—258).
Reflections and Notes (258—263). [Theodoret’s original
Letter from Hoffman’s text (263—271). |

THE SENTENCE oF Domnws.

The Archbishop of Antioch is made to say that he bestows
great praise on the Synod and pronounces the same decision
with it, and joins in the same command (272—274). Notes
on “the Apostolic Canons,” from Johnson and Sparrow.

CONTENTS. XXX.

ix. THe RELEASE OF CERTAIN CLERKS.

[Annotation, referring to the Discipline of the Church
(276).| The President aud the Synod loose from the
Inhibition Flavian had imposed on three Deacons and a
Reader of the Church (277). [The restoration of the lost
leaves of the MS 14,530 might enlighten us on sundry
matters of the Council (278). Theodoret refers, in his letters
(quoted in the original} to John of Germanicia, to the
transactions and doings of partisans, and, in his farnous one to
Leo, Bishop of Rome, gives an account of the proceedings of
the Synod (278—280). Theodoret’s opinion of Leo and his
See, and of his Letter to Flavian, especially (280). ]

x. Action aGAInst Domnws.

Introductory Note, containing information about Patriarchs
of the Church (from Bingham) and quotations from Lupas
(sent by Harris Cowper), and the arrangement of the pro-
cedure adopted against Domnus, &c. Martin’s view of the
chronicler and of the absence of historical knowledge of
Domnus (282—287). The procedure against the Bishop
of Antioch is chiefly documentary; the Notary reads the
formal address, to the Synod, of Cyriacus, and ‘‘ heads
from the Homiletical Expositions of Domnus”’ (288—306).
Anathemas of the Council. The Petitions and Complaints
of Marcellus (808—314), and Heliodorus (814—318) are
read, as well as the Confession of Faith of Pelagius (319—
322). The extraordinary Monk, Theodosius, is in posses-
sion of papers about Domnus and Theodoret, which are read
and deposited among the Archives (822—326). Letters of
Correspondence between Daoscorus and Domnus in which
occur two Lacuna (827—356). Anathemas and another
hiatus in the MS. Bishops pronounce sentence on Domnus
(859—863).

xi. Epict or THEODOSIUS CONCERNING THE SECOND
Synop oF EPHESUS.

This Document of the falling Roman Empire avoucbes the
authority of the Council, glances at the reasons for summon-
ing it, and expresses satisfaction at the result, and it also
directs the President to despatch letters to the Bishops
(364—870), in which is a hiaus. Correspondence between
Emperor Theodosius and Juvenal, Bishop of Jerusalem
(370), hiatus.

XXX.

Xi:

CONTENTS.

EncyciicAL Lerrer oF J)ioscorUs To THE
BisHops, (DEFICIENT).

The books of the Nestorians are to be burnt, being antago-
nistic to The Faith; the Treatises of the Former Fathers
are to be in use and of force. Dioscorus is to notify this to
the Metropolitans appending a form and subscription. The
Form is appended (878—875).

The Ascription of this Monophysite Codex or Document to
the Trinity (376), in large type, and its Scribes Post Script
(377—380).

The Letter of Domnus to Flavian (881—382), the Twelve

Chapters of Cyril, (883—884), and the Letter of Ibas to
Maris the Persiau (285—387), in the Original Greek.

APPENDICES.

EXTRACTS

Translated from Syriac MSS of different dates, in the British
Museum, relating directly or indirectly, sometimes quoting, the
Second Synod, or to the Great Nestorian Controversy.

An Extract from: one of the Additional MSS.
in the British Museum, numbered 12,156... 392

An Extract from one of the Additional MSS.
in the British Museum, numbered 14,663.
Bolelds . Teck... ic ae shy Rae 15)

An Extract from one of the Additional MSS.
in the British Museum, numbered 12,156... 401

CONTENTS.

An Extract from one of the Additional MSS.
in the British Museum, numbered 14,602.
Fols. 95 and 96 Lb : te