sons on guard to appear. It was then decided that Dioscorus should be sought in front of the place of meeting; and, on his not being found, Anatolius, bishop of Constantinople, ruled that he ought to be summoned, and be present before the synod. This course having been adopted, the delegates, on their return, said that he had replied: "I am under restraint. Let these say whether they leave me free to proceed thither;" and to their intimation that they were deputed to himself, and not to the civil powers, his answer was stated to be: "I am ready to proceed to the holy and universal synod, but I am prevented." To this statement Himerius added, that the Assistant of the Master of the Sacred Offices had met them on their return, in company with whom the bishops had again visited Dioscorus, and that he had taken some notes1 of what then passed. These were then read, and set forth the precise words of Dioscorus, as follows: "Upon calm reflection, and due consideration of my interest, I thus reply. Whereas, at the former meeting of the synod, the most illustrious magistrates ruled upon many several points, and I am now summoned to a second having for its object a modification of the preceding matters; I pray that the most illustrious magistrates who attended on the former occasion, and the sacred senate, should do so on the present also, in order that the same points may be again debated." The Acts show that Acacius then replied in the following words: "The great and holy synod, in requiring the presence of your Holiness, has not in view a modification of what was transacted in the presence of the most illustrious magistrates and the sacred senate; but it has deputed us merely that you should have a place in the meeting, and that your Holiness should not be wanting to it." Dioscorus replied, according to the Acts, "You have just told me that Eusebius had presented libels. I pray that the matters touching myself may be again sifted in the presence of the magistrates and the senate."

Then follow other similar matters. Afterwards, persons were again sent with a commission to urge Dioscorus to

1 Himerius was a notary and a reader, sent by the council to Dioscorus, that he might take down in writing what was said on both sides. The bishops, as often as they went to a synod, were wont to carry their notaries along with them, so that, after the end of the synod, each bishop might carry a copy of the Acts into his own country.

appear; who, on their return, said that they had taken notes of his words. From these it appears that he said: “I have already signified to your piety, both that I am suffering from sickness, and that I demand that the most illustrious magistrates and the sacred senate should also on the present occasion attend the investigation of the matters at issue. Since, however, my sickness has increased, on this ground I am withholding my attendance." Cecropius then, as appears from the Acts, intimated to Dioscorus, that but a short time before he had made no mention of sickness, and accordingly, he ought to satisfy the requisitions of the canons. To whom Dioscorus rejoined: "I have said once for all, that the magistrates ought to be present." Then Rufinus, bishop of Samosata, told him that the matters mooted were under canonical regulation, and that on his appearance he would be at liberty to make whatever statements he chose. To the inquiry of Dioscorus, whether Juvenalis, Thalassius, and Eustathius were present, he replied that this was nothing to the purpose. The Acts show that Dioscorus said in answer, that he prayed the Christ-loving emperor to the effect that the magistrates should be present, and also those who had acted as judges in conjunction with himself. To this the deputies rejoined, that Eusebius accused him only, and there was accordingly no occasion that all should be present. Dioscorus replied, that the others who had acted with him ought to be present, for the suit of Eusebius did not affect himself individually, but rested in fact upon a judgment in which they had all united. When the deputies still insisted upon this point, Dioscorus summarily replied: "What I have said, I have said once for all; and I have now nothing further to say."

Upon this report, Eusebius stated that his charge was against Dioscorus only, and against no other person: and he required that he should be summoned a third time. Aetius then, in continuance, informed them that certain persons from Alexandria, professing to be clerks, together with several laymen, had lately presented libels against Dioscorus, and standing outside, were now invoking the synod. When accordingly, in the first place, Theodorus, a deacon of the holy church at Alexandria, had presented libels, and afterwards Ischyrion, a deacon, Athanasius, a presbyter, and nephew of Cyril, and also Sophronius, in which they charged Dioscorus with blasphemies,

offences against the person, and violent seizures of money; a third summons was issued urging him to attend. Those who were accordingly selected for this service, on their return, reported Dioscorus to have said: "I have already sufficiently informed your piety on this point, and cannot add anything further." Since Dioscorus had persisted in the same reply, while the delegates continued to press him, the bishop Paschasinus said: "At length, after being summoned a third time, Dioscorus has not appeared:" and he then asked what treatment he deserved. To this, when the bishops had replied that he had rendered himself obnoxious to the canons, and Proterius, bishop of Smyrna, had observed, that when Flavian had been murdered, no suitable measures had been taken with respect to him; the representatives of Leo, bishop of the elder Rome, made a declaration as follows:- "The aggressions committed by Dioscorus, lately bishop of the great city Alexandria, in violation of canonical order and the constitution of the church, have been clearly proved by the investigations at the former meeting, and the proceedings of to-day. For, not to mention the mass of his offences, he did, on his own authority, uncanonically admit to communion his partisan Eutyches, after having been canonically deprived by his own bishop, namely, our sainted father and archbishop Flavian; and this before he sat in council with the other bishops at Ephesus. To them, indeed, the holy see granted pardon for the transactions of which they were not the deliberate authors, and they have hitherto continued obedient to the most holy archbishop Leo, and the body of the holy and and universal synod; on which account he also admitted them into communion with him, as being his fellows in faith. Whereas Dioscorus has continued to maintain a haughty carriage, on account of those very circumstances over which he ought to have bewailed, and humbled himself to the earth. Moreover, he did not even allow the epistle to be read which the blessed pope Leo had addressed to Flavian, of holy memory; and that too, notwithstanding he was repeatedly exhorted thereto by the bearers, and had promised with an oath to that effect. The result of the epistle not being read, has been to fill the most holy churches throughout the world with scandals and mischief. Notwithstanding, however, such presumption, it was our purpose to deal mercifully with him as regards his past impiety,

as we had done with the other bishops, although they had not held an equal judicial authority with him. But inasmuch as he has, by his subsequent conduct, overshot his former iniquity, and has presumed to pronounce excommunication against Leo, the most holy and religious archbishop of great Rome; since, moreover, on the presentation of a paper full of grievous charges against him to the holy and great synod, he refused to appear, though once, twice, and thrice canonically summoned by the bishops, pricked no doubt by his own conscience; and since he has unlawfully given reception to those who had been duly deposed by different synods; he has thus, by variously trampling upon the laws of the church, given his own verdict against himself. Wherefore Leo, the most blessed and holy archbishop of the great and elder Rome, has, by the agency of ourselves and the present synod, in conjunction with the thrice-blessed and all honoured Peter, who is the rock and basis of the Catholic church, and the foundation of the orthodox faith,' deprived him of the episcopal dignity, and severed him from every priestly function. Accordingly, this holy and great synod decrees the provisions of the canons on the aforesaid Dioscorus."

After the ratification of this proceeding by Anatolius and Maximus, and by the other bishops, with the exception of those who had been deposed together with Dioscorus by the senate, a relation of the matter was addressed to Marcian by the synod, and the instrument of deposition was transmitted to Dioscorus, to the following effect: "On account of contempt of the sacred canons and thy contumacy regarding this holy

66

The legates of the Roman see allude to the expression used by our Saviour to Peter, recorded Matt. xvi. 18. As a comment on this text, see St. Cyprian, in his book de Unitate Ecclesiæ, p. 113, edit. Basil, 1558. Loquitur Dominus ad Petrum, Ego tibi dico, inquit, quia tu es Petrus, et super istam Petram ædificabo ecclesiam meam,' &c. The Lord speaketh to Peter, "I say unto thee," says he, "that thou art Peter, and upon this Rock I will build my church," &c.--And after his resurrection he says to the same person, "Feed my sheep." And although he gives an equal power to all the apostles after his resurrection, and says, "As the Father hath sent me, so also I send you," &c.-yet, that he might manifest the Unity, by his own authority he hath disposed the original of the same Unity as beginning from One. For the rest of the apostles were the same also that Peter was, endowed with an equal fellowship, both of honour and power; but the original proceeds from unity, that the Church may be shown to be one.

and universal synod, inasmuch as, in addition to the other offences of which thou hast been convicted, thou didst not appear, even when summoned the third time by this great and holy synod, according to the sacred canons, in order to reply to the charges made against thee; know then that thou hast been deposed from thy bishopric, on the thirteenth day of this present month, October, by the holy and universal synod, and deprived of all ecclesiastical rank.”1 After a letter had been written to the bishops of the most holy church at Alexandria on this subject, and an edict had been framed against Dioscorus, the proceedings of this meeting were closed.

After the business of the preceding meeting had terminated in this manner, the members of the synod, again assembling, replied to the inquiry of the magistrates, who desired to be informed respecting the orthodox doctrine, that there was no need that any further formulary should be framed, now that the matter relating to Eutyches had been brought to a close, and had received a conclusive determination at the hands of the Roman bishop, with the further accordance of all parties. After the bishops had with one voice exclaimed, that they all held the same language, and the magistrates had ruled that each patriarch, selecting one or two persons of his own diocese, should come forward into the midst of the council in order to a declaration of their several opinions; Florentius, bishop of Sardis, prayed a respite, so that they might approach the truth with due deliberation; and Cecropius, bishop of Sebastopolis, spoke as follows. "The faith has been well set forth by the three hundred and eighteen holy fathers, and has been confirmed by the holy fathers, Athanasius, Cyril, Celestine, Hilary, Basil, Gregory, and again, on the present occasion, by the most holy Leo. We accordingly require that the words both of the three hundred and eighteen holy fathers and of the most holy Leo be now read." At the conclusion of the reading the whole synod exclaimed, "This is the faith of the orthodox; thus

In the sentence of condemnation pronounced against the same Dioscorus by the legates of the Roman see, the word evέpysia, "office," is made use of. These words are therefore added by the synod, to show that Dioscorus was reduced to lay-communion. For he is not only said to be divested of the episcopal dignity, but is also removed from every ecclesiastical office.