to eat them.1 On one occasion of this kind, there was included among them the son of a glass-worker, a Jew by faith; who, in reply to the inquiries of his parents respecting the cause of his delay, told them what had taken place, and what he had eaten in company with the other boys. The father, in his indignation and fury, places the boy in the furnace where he used to mould the glass. The mother, unable to find her child, wandered over the city with lamentations and wailings; and on the third day, standing by the door of her husband's workshop, was calling upon the boy by name, tearing herself in her sorrow. He, recognising his mother's voice, answered her from within the furnace, and she, bursting open the doors, saw, on her entrance, the boy standing in the midst of the coals, and untouched by the fire. On being asked how he had continued unhurt, he said that a woman in a purple robe had frequently visited him; that she had offered him water, and with it had quenched that part of the coals which was nearest to him; and that she had supplied him with food as often as he was hungry.

Justinian, on the report of this occurrence, placed the boy and his mother in the orders of the church,2 after they had been enlightened by the laver of regeneration. But the father, on his refusal to be numbered among the Christians, he ordered to be impaled in the suburb of Sycæ,3 as being the murderer of his child.

Such was the course of these occurrences.

1 Nicephorus (b. xvii. ch. 25) bears witness that this custom, viz. that the particles of the holy eucharist which remained after the conclusion of the service, were at Constantinople distributed amongst the boys and eaten, continued even in his age; and he writes, that he himself, whilst he was a boy, and was frequently in the churches, partook of those particles. Vales.

2 We must understand that the emperor ordered the boy to be reckoned amongst the readers of the church, and commanded his mother to be ordained a deaconness. Vales.

3 In this suburb of the city of Constantinople, punishments were heretofore usually inflicted on criminals. Saint Jerome, in his commentaries on Matt. xxvi., writes thus: Extra urbem enim et foras portam loca sunt in quibus truncantur capita damnatorum, et Calvariæ, id est, Decollatorum sumpsere nomen. Vales.

CHAP. XXXVII. SUCCESSION OF BISHOPS.

AFTER Menas, Eutychius is elevated to the see.

At Jerusalem, Sallustius succeeds Martyrius, who is himself succeeded by Helias. The next in succession was Peter; and after him came Macarius, without the emperor's confirmation. He was ejected from his see, on the charge of maintaining the opinions of Origen, and was succeeded by Eustochius. After the removal of Theodosius, as has been already mentioned, Zoilus is appointed bishop of Alexandria, and when he had been gathered to his predecessors, Apollinaris obtains the chair. After Ephraemius, Domninus is intrusted with the see of Antioch.

CHAP. XXXVIII.-THE FIFTH GENERAL COUNCIL.

DURING the time that Vigilius was bishop of the Elder Rome, and first Menas, then Eutychius of New Rome, Apollinaris of Alexandria, Domninus of Antioch, and Eustochius of Jerusalem, Justinian summons the fifth synod, for the following reason:-On account of the increasing influence of those who held the opinions of Origen, especially in what is called the New Laura, Eustochius used every effort for their removal, and, visiting the place itself, he ejected the whole party, driving them to a distance, as general pests. These persons, in their dispersion, associated with themselves many others. They found a champion in Theodore, surnamed Ascidas, bishop of Cæsarea, the metropolis of Cappadocia, who was constantly about the person of Justinian, as being trusty and highly serviceable to him. Whereas he was creating much confusion in the imperial court, and declared the proceeding of Eustochius to be utterly impious and lawless, the latter despatches to Constantinople Rufus, superior of the monastery of Theodosius, and Conon, of that of Saba, persons of the first distinction among the solitaries, both on account of their personal worth and the religious houses of which they were the heads; and with them were associated others scarcely their inferiors in dignity. These, in the first instance, mooted the questions relating to Origen, Evagrius, and Didymus. But Theodore of Cappadocia, with a view to divert them from this point, introduces the subject of Theo

dore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret, and Ibas; the good God providentially disposing the whole proceeding, in order that the profanities of both parties should be ejected.

On the first question being started, namely, whether it were proper to anathematize the dead, Eutychius, a man of consummate skill in the divine Scriptures, being as yet an undistinguished person-for Menas was still living, and he was himself at that time apocrisiarius to the bishop of Amasea-casting a look on the assembly, not merely of commanding intelligence but of contempt, plainly declared that the question needed no debate, since King Josiah in former time not only slew the living priests of the demons, but also broke up the sepulchres of those who had long been dead. This was considered by all to have been spoken to the purpose. Justinian also, having been made acquainted with the circumstance, elevated him to the see of the imperial city on the death of Menas, which happened immediately after. Vigilius gave his assent in writing to the assembling of the synod, but declined attendance.

Justinian addressed an inquiry to the synod on its assembling, as to what was their opinion concerning Theodore, and the expressions of Theodoret against Cyril and his twelve chapters, as well as the epistle of Ibas, as it is termed, addressed to Maris, the Persian. After the reading of many passages of Theodore and Theodoret, and proof given that Theodore had been long ago condemned and erased from the sacred diptychs, as also that it was fitting that heretics should be condemned after their death, they unanimously anathematize Theodore, and what had been advanced by Theodoret against the twelve chapters of Cyril and the right faith; as also the epistle of Ibas to Maris, the Persian; in the following words :

"Our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ, according to the parable in the Gospels," and so forth. "In addition to all other heretics, who have been condemned and anathematized by the before-mentioned four holy synods and by the holy catholic and apostolic church, we condemn and anathematize Theodore,

Patriarchs, as well as bishops of the greater churches, had their apocrisiarii, who managed ecclesiastical affairs in the emperor's palace. This had been in use from the times of Constantine the Great. Monasteries had likewise their apocrisiarii in the imperial city. Mention is made of these apocrisiarii in Justinian's Sixth Novel.

styled bishop of Mopsuestia, and his impious writings; also whatever has been impiously written by Theodoret against the right faith, against the twelve chapters of the sainted Cyril, and against the first holy synod at Ephesus, and all that he has written in defence of Theodore and Nestorius. We further anathematize the impious epistle, said to have been written by Ibas to Maris the Persian."

After some other matter, they proceed to set forth fourteen chapters concerning the right and unimpeachable faith. In this manner had the transactions proceeded: but on the presentation of libels against the doctrine of Origen, named also Adamantius, and the followers of his impious error, by the monks Eulogius, Conon, Cyriacus, and Pancratius, Justinian addresses a question to the synod concerning these points, appending to it a copy of the libel, as well as the epistle of Vigilius upon the subject: from the whole of which may be gathered the attempts of Origen to fill the simplicity of the apostolic doctrine with philosophic and Manichæan tares. Accordingly, a relation was addressed to Justinian by the synod, after they had uttered exclamations against Origen and the maintainers of similar errors. A portion of it is expressed in the following terms: "O most Christian emperor, gifted with heavenly generosity of soul," and so forth. "We have shunned, accordingly, we have shunned this error; for we knew not the voice of the alien; and having bound such a one, as a thief and a robber, in the cords of our anathema, we have ejected him from the sacred precincts." And presently they proceed: "By perusal you will learn the vigour of our acts." To this they appended a statement of the heads of the matters which the followers of Origen were taught to maintain, showing their agreements, as well as their disagreements, and their manifold errors. The fifth head contains the blasphemous expressions uttered by private individuals belonging to what is called the New Laura, as follows. Theodore, surnamed Ascidas, the Cappadocian,' said, "If the Apostles and Martyrs

As far as may be gathered from these words of Evagrius, this Theodorus the Cappadocian was one of the monks of the New Laura, near the city Jerusalem, who being afterwards made bishop of Cæsarea in Cappadocia, openly undertook the patronage of the Origenists, and acted the chief part in the fifth Constantinopolitan synod; hence Evagrius is led to suppose that these transactions took place in another Constantinopolitan synod, A. D. 538.

at the present time work miracles, and are already so highly honoured, unless they shall be equal with Christ in the restitution of things, in what respect is there a restitution for them?" They also reported many other blasphemies of Didymus, Evagrius, and Theodore; having with great diligence extracted whatever bore upon these points. At an interval of some time after the meeting of the synod, Eutychius is ejected, 1 and there is appointed in his place to the see of Constantinople John a native of Seremis, which is a village of the district of Cynegica, belonging to Antioch.

CHAP. XXXIX.-DEPARTURE OF JUSTINIAN FROM ORTHODOXY. AT that time Justinian, abandoning the right road of doctrine, and following a path untrodden by the apostles and fathers, became entangled among thorns and briers: with which wishing to fill the Church also, he failed in his purpose, and thereby fulfilled the prediction of prophecy; the Lord having secured the royal road with an unfailing fence, that murderers might not leap, as it were, upon a tottering wall or a broken hedge. Thus, at the time when John, named also Catelinus, was bishop of the Elder Rome, after Vigilius;2 John from Seremis, of New Rome; Apollinaris, of Alexandria; Anastasius, of Theopolis, after Domninus; and Macarius, of Jerusalem, had been restored to his see; Justinian, after he had anathematized Origen, Didymus, and Evagrius, issued what the Latins call an Edict, after the deposition of Eustochius, in which he termed the body of the Lord incorruptible and incapable of the natural and blameless passions; affirming that the Lord ate before his passion in the same manner as after his resurrection, his holy body having undergone no conversion or change from the time of its actual formation in the womb, not even in respect of the voluntary and natural passions, nor yet after the resurrection. To this, he proceeded to compel the bishops in all quarters to give their

Evagrius has disguised the cause of the deposition of Eutychius, lest he should offend the memory of the emperor Justinian. For a further account of Eutychius, see Nicephorus, b. xvii. ch. 29.

2

Evagrius is mistaken here. For John succeeded not Vigilius, but Pelagius was his successor. After his death John the younger undertook the episcopate of the church of Rome, A. D. 560. Vales.