Difference between revisions of "Second Council of Ephesus" - New World Encyclopedia

From New World Encyclopedia
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
{{Ecumenical council|council_name=Second Council of Ephesus|council_date=449|accepted_by=[[Oriental Orthodoxy]]|rejected_by=[[Roman Catholicism]], [[Eastern Orthodoxy]], [[Protestantism]], [[Assyrian Church of the East|Assyrian Church of the East (Nestorians)]]|previous=[[First Council of Ephesus]]|next=[[Council of Chalcedon]] (not accepted by the Oriental Orthodox)|convoked_by=Emperor [[Theodosius II]]|presided_by=[[Pope Dioscorus I of Alexandria|Pope Dioscorus of Alexandria]]|attendance=130|topics=[[Nestorianism]], [[Monophysitism]], [[Christology]], [[Chalcedonian]]ism|documents=Condemnations & declared anathemas of [[Archbishop Flavian of Constantinople|Patriarch Flavianus]], [[Pope Leo I|Patriarch Leo I]], [[Theodoret]], and [[Domnus II of Antioch|Domnus II]]}}
  
 +
The '''Second Council of Ephesus''' was a church synod in 449 C.E. It was convoked by Emperor [[Theodosius II]] as an [[ecumenical council]] to deal with unresolved issues that had arisen our the early First [[Council of Ephesus]] in 431. Because of its highly acrimonious and controversial proceedings it labeled by its opponents as a '''Robber Synod''' and later repudiated at the [[Council of Chalcedon]].
 +
 +
The coumcil was called after the archmonk [[Eutyches]] had been deposed Bishop [[Flavian of Constantinople]] on account of his [[christology|christological]], which was an early version of what later became known as [[Monophysitism]]. Eutyches appealed to [[Dioscurus]], the successor of Patriarch [[Cyril of Alexandria]], who restored him and moved the emperor to summon a council. The council of 130 bishops convened in August 449, was dominated by Dioscurus and his followers. Eutyches was acquitted of [[heresy]], and reinstated, while Flavian and other bishops were deposed. Opposition was met by intimidation and actual violence, and the death of Flavian, which soon followed, was attributed to injuries received in this synod.
 +
 +
The emperor confirmed the synod, but the Eastern Church was divided upon the question of accepting it. Pope Leo I, upon hearing the report of his delegate the deacon and future pope [[Pope Hilary|Hilary]] excommunicated Dioscurus and refused to recognize the successor of Flavian. The death of Theodosius II cleared the way for the Council of Chalcedon in 451, which deposed the Dioscurus and condemned Eutychianism.
 +
 +
==Background==
 +
[[Image:Cyril of Alexandria.jpg|thumb|125px|[[Cyril of Alexandria]]]]
 +
[[Image:Nestorius1.jpg|thumb|left|125px|[[Nestorius]]]]
 +
The Second Council of Ephesus grew out of the Nestorian controversy that had been dealt with at the First [[Council of Ephesus]], where Patriarch [[Cyril of Alexandria]] had succeeded in obtaining the condemnation of the patriarch of [[Constantinople]], [[Nestorius]], for his teaching on the two distinct natures of Christ, divine and human. Although [[Nestorianism]] had thus been condemned, the underlying issue issue had not been resolved: did Christ have one unified nature of divinity-humanity, or two natures, divine and human, which were harmoniously combined within a single person?
 +
 +
Following Cyril's teaching, the archmonk Eutyches, who had been an outspoken opponent of Nestorius, had insisted on one nature. Now around 70 years of age, Eutyches had been for 30 years the leader of a monastery outside the walls of Constantinople, where he ruled over 300 monks. However, his insistence on "one nature" in Christ brought him into conflict with his bishop, Patriarch Flavian of Constantinople, and also with views expressed by Pope Leo X in a letter to Flavian. In 488, Flavian presided over a council which deposed Eutyches and excommunicated both him and his monks.
 +
 +
Seeing this as as an injustice that opened the two to a revival of Nestorianism, Patriarch [[Dioscuros of Alexandria]] supported Eutyches and influenced Emperor Theodosius II to call a new [[ecumenical council]] to deal with the matter. [[Leo I]], whose predecessors had traditionally sided Alexandria on theological matters, sent legates to the council, notable the deacon Hilary, who would later become pope himself. In this case, however, Rome would break with Alexandria and side with Constantinople.
 +
 +
The acts of the first session of this synod were read at the [[Council of Chalcedon]] in 451, and have thus been preserved. Another fuller version of the council's acts is known through a [[Syriac]] translation by a pro-Eutychian monk written in the year 535 C.E.
 +
 +
==The first session==
 +
The question before the council by order of the emperor was whether Patriarch Flavian, in a synod held by him at [[Constantinople]] beginning November 8, 448, had justly deposed and [[excommunicated]] [[Eutyches|Archimandrite Eutyches]] for refusing to admit [[Christology|two natures in Christ]]. Consequently Flavian and six other bishops who had been present at his synod, were not allowed to sit as judges at Ephesus.
 +
 +
[[Image:Greatleoone.jpg|thumb|left|[[Pope Leo I]]]]
 +
 +
[[Image:PopeDioscorosI.jpg|thumb|Patriarch [[Dioscorus of Alexandria]]]]
 +
 +
The emperor designated [[Pope Dioscorus I of Alexandria|Dioscorus of Alexandria]] to act as president of the council. The papal legate Julius is mentioned next in order of precedence, but he seems to have been expelled at some point. Next named was Patriarch [[Juvenal of Jerusalem]], listed above both the [[Domnus II of Antioch|Patriarch Domnus II of Antioch]], and [[Flavian of Constantinople]], although he was not allowed a vote. The number of bishops present was 198. Also attending was the deacon [[Hilarius]] with his notary.
 +
 +
After a message from Theodosius II was read, the Roman legates apologized for the bishop of Rome's absence by explaining that it would have been contrary to custom for the pope to attend in person. A letter from the pope, [[Leo I]] indicated that he intended his dogmatic letter to Flavian to be read at the council and accepted as a rule of faith. However, Dioscorus refused to have it read. Dioscorus did, however, present a letter from the emperor, ordering the presence at the council of the anti-[[Nestorian]] monk [[Barsumas]].[[Pope Dioscorus I of Alexandria|Pope Dioscorus]] declared that determining matters of dogma was not a matter for inquiry, since these had already been resolved at the earlier Council of Ephesus, which had soundly defeated Nestorianism. The issue had hand was whether Flavian had acted properly in deposing and excommunicating Eutyches.
 +
 +
Eutyches then was introduced. He declared that he held to the [[Nicene Creed]], to which nothing could be added, and from which nothing could be taken away. He claimed to have been  condemned by Flavian for a mere slip of the tongue and asked the council to exonerate and reinstate him. Bishop [[Eusebius of Dorylaeum]], who was to act as the accuser of Eutyches, was not allowed to be heard. However, the bishops agreed that the acts of the condemnation of Eutyches at the synod of  [[Constantinople]] in 448 should be read. At this point, the delegates of Rome asked that Leo I's letter might be heard first. Eutyches argued that the papal legates could not be trusted, for they had dined with Flavian who had treated them with great courtesy. [[Pope Dioscorus I of Alexandria|Dioscorus]] decided that only the acts of the trial were germane, not the pope's doctrinal letter.
 +
 +
The acts of Eutyches' condemnation were then read in full, and also and account of later inquiries made at Eutyches' behest alleging that these acts had been incorrectly taken down and that Flavian had drawn up the sentence against him beforehand. During these proceedings, acrimonious shouts were to be heard against "Nestorianism," and Flavian rose to complain that no opportunity was given him of defending himself.
 +
 +
The bishops proceeded to cast 114 votes absolving Eutyches, with each bishop making a short speech in the process. A petition was read from the [[monastery]] of Eutyches, which had been excommunicated by Flavian. The synod absolved them also and reinstated the monastery to communion.
 +
 +
Dioscorus the led the bishops in deposing Flavian from his post, and  135 bishops joined in signing the canon removing him.
 +
 +
==Subsequent sessions==
 +
The Syriac acts take up the history where the Chalcedonian Acts break off. In the next session, 113 were present, with several bishops apparently having left and nine new names being listed. The Roman delegates did not appear, having left the city after the council's disregard of the pope's letter.
 +
 +
The council now dealt with the case of Ibas, Bishop of Edessa, who was aquited of charges of [[Nestorianism]] in February, 449. However, after a new inquiry in April the emperor ordered that a new bishop should be chosen. The council convicted Ibas and sentenced him to deposition and [[excommunication]]. Ibas' teaching would later become one of the central issues in the [[Three-Chapter Controversy|Three Chapters]] controversy. The council also ratified the deposition a certain Bishop Irenaeus of Tyre as a bigamist and a blasphemer. [[Aquilinus of Byblus|Aquilinus, Bishop of Byblus]], who had been consecrated by Irenaeus, was also deposed. [[Theodoret]], who had been an opponent of [[Pope Dioscorus I of Alexandria|Dioscorus]] and a personal supporter of Nestorius, was also deposed and excommunicated, despite having earlier reached accord with Cyril of Alexandria.
 +
 +
Bishop [[Domnus of Antioch]] was said to have agreed in the first session to the acquittal of Eutyches but did not appear at the latter sessions of the council, pleading illness. He was now accused of friendship with Theodoret and Flavian, of Nestorianism, of altering the form of the [[sacrament]] of [[baptism]], and of being an enemy of holy Dioscorus. The council's final act was to depose him.
 +
 +
==Reception and legacy==
 +
Flavian was deported into exile, and died a few days later in [[Lydia]], with the council's opponents alleging that he in fact died of wounds received at this "Robber Synod."
 +
 +
The council reported its act to the emperor, who confirmed its legitimacy with his own letter. Dioscorus sent an [[encyclical]] to the bishops of the East, with a form which they were to sign and return, indicating their agreement with its acts. He then went to Constantinople and appointed his secretary, [[Patriarch Anatolius of Constantinople|Anatolius]], as bishop of that [[see]]. On his way back to Egypt, Dioscorus halted at Nicaea, and, in a council with with ten other bishops excommunicated the Pope I.
 +
 +
Meanwhile Leo I had received the appeals of Theodoret and Flavian, of whose death he was unaware. He wrote to them and to the emperor and empress, declaring that the acts of the council were null and void. He eventually excommunicated all who had taken part in it and absolved all whom it had condemned, with the exception of Domnus of Antioch.
 +
 +
The evidence given at the [[Council of Chalcedon]] reported that secretaries of the bishops had been violently prevented from taking notes. It was declared that Dioscorus and others struck Flavian and that many bishops threw themselves on their knees to beg Dioscorus for mercy toward his enemy. Police and soldier had to be called in during the ensuing scene of violence. Some of the bishops allegedly endorsed the synod's acts under intimidation, and others allegedly did not sign at all, their names being added afterward.
 +
 +
The [[papal legate|Roman legate]] [[Pope Hilarius|Hilarius]] was said to have uttered a single word in Latin, ''Contradicitur'', purportedly annulling the sentence in Leo I's name. He then escaped with difficulty and secretly made his way back to Rome, leading to Leo's officially nullifying the council's acts.
 +
 +
At the Council of Chalcedon, Euthyches would be condemned as a heretic for teaching Monohpysitism. Dioscorus joined in [[anathema]]tizing Eutyches shortly after Chalcedon concluded. Although considered a Monophysite himself by many, he is honored as a saint in the modern  [[Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria|Coptic]], [[Syriac Orthodox Church|Syriac]], and other [[Oriental Orthodox church]]es.
 +
 +
==References==
 +
* [[Edward Walford]], translator, ''The Ecclesiastical History of Evagrius: A History of the Church from AD 431 to AD 594'', 1846. Reprinted 2008. Evolution Publishing, ISBN 978-1-889758-88-6. [http://www.evolpub.com/CRE/CREseries.html#CRE5]
 +
 +
==External links==
 +
*[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05495a.htm Catholic Encyclopedia, "Robber Council of Ephesus" at New Advent]
 +
*[http://mb-soft.com/believe/txs/councils.htm Roman Catholic Listings of Ecumenical Councils]
 +
*[http://encyclopedia.jrank.org/RHY_RON/ROBBER_SYNOD.html Robber Synod] in the 1911 [[Encyclopædia Britannica]]
 +
 +
{{Ecumenical councils}}
 +
{{Catholic}}
 +
{{coord|37|56|42|N|27|20|21|E|type:landmark|display=title}}
 +
 +
[[Category:philosophy and religion]]
 +
[[Category:religion]]
 +
[[Category:Christianity]]
 +
{{credit|263378787}}

Revision as of 17:34, 3 February 2009

Second Council of Ephesus
Date 449
Accepted by Oriental Orthodoxy
Previous council First Council of Ephesus
Next council Council of Chalcedon (not accepted by the Oriental Orthodox)
Convoked by Emperor Theodosius II
Presided by Pope Dioscorus of Alexandria
Attendance 130
Topics of discussion Nestorianism, Monophysitism, Christology, Chalcedonianism
Documents and statements Condemnations & declared anathemas of Patriarch Flavianus, Patriarch Leo I, Theodoret, and Domnus II
Chronological list of Ecumenical councils

The Second Council of Ephesus was a church synod in 449 C.E. It was convoked by Emperor Theodosius II as an ecumenical council to deal with unresolved issues that had arisen our the early First Council of Ephesus in 431. Because of its highly acrimonious and controversial proceedings it labeled by its opponents as a Robber Synod and later repudiated at the Council of Chalcedon.

The coumcil was called after the archmonk Eutyches had been deposed Bishop Flavian of Constantinople on account of his christological, which was an early version of what later became known as Monophysitism. Eutyches appealed to Dioscurus, the successor of Patriarch Cyril of Alexandria, who restored him and moved the emperor to summon a council. The council of 130 bishops convened in August 449, was dominated by Dioscurus and his followers. Eutyches was acquitted of heresy, and reinstated, while Flavian and other bishops were deposed. Opposition was met by intimidation and actual violence, and the death of Flavian, which soon followed, was attributed to injuries received in this synod.

The emperor confirmed the synod, but the Eastern Church was divided upon the question of accepting it. Pope Leo I, upon hearing the report of his delegate the deacon and future pope Hilary excommunicated Dioscurus and refused to recognize the successor of Flavian. The death of Theodosius II cleared the way for the Council of Chalcedon in 451, which deposed the Dioscurus and condemned Eutychianism.

Background

The Second Council of Ephesus grew out of the Nestorian controversy that had been dealt with at the First Council of Ephesus, where Patriarch Cyril of Alexandria had succeeded in obtaining the condemnation of the patriarch of Constantinople, Nestorius, for his teaching on the two distinct natures of Christ, divine and human. Although Nestorianism had thus been condemned, the underlying issue issue had not been resolved: did Christ have one unified nature of divinity-humanity, or two natures, divine and human, which were harmoniously combined within a single person?

Following Cyril's teaching, the archmonk Eutyches, who had been an outspoken opponent of Nestorius, had insisted on one nature. Now around 70 years of age, Eutyches had been for 30 years the leader of a monastery outside the walls of Constantinople, where he ruled over 300 monks. However, his insistence on "one nature" in Christ brought him into conflict with his bishop, Patriarch Flavian of Constantinople, and also with views expressed by Pope Leo X in a letter to Flavian. In 488, Flavian presided over a council which deposed Eutyches and excommunicated both him and his monks.

Seeing this as as an injustice that opened the two to a revival of Nestorianism, Patriarch Dioscuros of Alexandria supported Eutyches and influenced Emperor Theodosius II to call a new ecumenical council to deal with the matter. Leo I, whose predecessors had traditionally sided Alexandria on theological matters, sent legates to the council, notable the deacon Hilary, who would later become pope himself. In this case, however, Rome would break with Alexandria and side with Constantinople.

The acts of the first session of this synod were read at the Council of Chalcedon in 451, and have thus been preserved. Another fuller version of the council's acts is known through a Syriac translation by a pro-Eutychian monk written in the year 535 C.E.

The first session

The question before the council by order of the emperor was whether Patriarch Flavian, in a synod held by him at Constantinople beginning November 8, 448, had justly deposed and excommunicated Archimandrite Eutyches for refusing to admit two natures in Christ. Consequently Flavian and six other bishops who had been present at his synod, were not allowed to sit as judges at Ephesus.

The emperor designated Dioscorus of Alexandria to act as president of the council. The papal legate Julius is mentioned next in order of precedence, but he seems to have been expelled at some point. Next named was Patriarch Juvenal of Jerusalem, listed above both the Patriarch Domnus II of Antioch, and Flavian of Constantinople, although he was not allowed a vote. The number of bishops present was 198. Also attending was the deacon Hilarius with his notary.

After a message from Theodosius II was read, the Roman legates apologized for the bishop of Rome's absence by explaining that it would have been contrary to custom for the pope to attend in person. A letter from the pope, Leo I indicated that he intended his dogmatic letter to Flavian to be read at the council and accepted as a rule of faith. However, Dioscorus refused to have it read. Dioscorus did, however, present a letter from the emperor, ordering the presence at the council of the anti-Nestorian monk Barsumas.Pope Dioscorus declared that determining matters of dogma was not a matter for inquiry, since these had already been resolved at the earlier Council of Ephesus, which had soundly defeated Nestorianism. The issue had hand was whether Flavian had acted properly in deposing and excommunicating Eutyches.

Eutyches then was introduced. He declared that he held to the Nicene Creed, to which nothing could be added, and from which nothing could be taken away. He claimed to have been condemned by Flavian for a mere slip of the tongue and asked the council to exonerate and reinstate him. Bishop Eusebius of Dorylaeum, who was to act as the accuser of Eutyches, was not allowed to be heard. However, the bishops agreed that the acts of the condemnation of Eutyches at the synod of Constantinople in 448 should be read. At this point, the delegates of Rome asked that Leo I's letter might be heard first. Eutyches argued that the papal legates could not be trusted, for they had dined with Flavian who had treated them with great courtesy. Dioscorus decided that only the acts of the trial were germane, not the pope's doctrinal letter.

The acts of Eutyches' condemnation were then read in full, and also and account of later inquiries made at Eutyches' behest alleging that these acts had been incorrectly taken down and that Flavian had drawn up the sentence against him beforehand. During these proceedings, acrimonious shouts were to be heard against "Nestorianism," and Flavian rose to complain that no opportunity was given him of defending himself.

The bishops proceeded to cast 114 votes absolving Eutyches, with each bishop making a short speech in the process. A petition was read from the monastery of Eutyches, which had been excommunicated by Flavian. The synod absolved them also and reinstated the monastery to communion.

Dioscorus the led the bishops in deposing Flavian from his post, and 135 bishops joined in signing the canon removing him.

Subsequent sessions

The Syriac acts take up the history where the Chalcedonian Acts break off. In the next session, 113 were present, with several bishops apparently having left and nine new names being listed. The Roman delegates did not appear, having left the city after the council's disregard of the pope's letter.

The council now dealt with the case of Ibas, Bishop of Edessa, who was aquited of charges of Nestorianism in February, 449. However, after a new inquiry in April the emperor ordered that a new bishop should be chosen. The council convicted Ibas and sentenced him to deposition and excommunication. Ibas' teaching would later become one of the central issues in the Three Chapters controversy. The council also ratified the deposition a certain Bishop Irenaeus of Tyre as a bigamist and a blasphemer. Aquilinus, Bishop of Byblus, who had been consecrated by Irenaeus, was also deposed. Theodoret, who had been an opponent of Dioscorus and a personal supporter of Nestorius, was also deposed and excommunicated, despite having earlier reached accord with Cyril of Alexandria.

Bishop Domnus of Antioch was said to have agreed in the first session to the acquittal of Eutyches but did not appear at the latter sessions of the council, pleading illness. He was now accused of friendship with Theodoret and Flavian, of Nestorianism, of altering the form of the sacrament of baptism, and of being an enemy of holy Dioscorus. The council's final act was to depose him.

Reception and legacy

Flavian was deported into exile, and died a few days later in Lydia, with the council's opponents alleging that he in fact died of wounds received at this "Robber Synod."

The council reported its act to the emperor, who confirmed its legitimacy with his own letter. Dioscorus sent an encyclical to the bishops of the East, with a form which they were to sign and return, indicating their agreement with its acts. He then went to Constantinople and appointed his secretary, Anatolius, as bishop of that see. On his way back to Egypt, Dioscorus halted at Nicaea, and, in a council with with ten other bishops excommunicated the Pope I.

Meanwhile Leo I had received the appeals of Theodoret and Flavian, of whose death he was unaware. He wrote to them and to the emperor and empress, declaring that the acts of the council were null and void. He eventually excommunicated all who had taken part in it and absolved all whom it had condemned, with the exception of Domnus of Antioch.

The evidence given at the Council of Chalcedon reported that secretaries of the bishops had been violently prevented from taking notes. It was declared that Dioscorus and others struck Flavian and that many bishops threw themselves on their knees to beg Dioscorus for mercy toward his enemy. Police and soldier had to be called in during the ensuing scene of violence. Some of the bishops allegedly endorsed the synod's acts under intimidation, and others allegedly did not sign at all, their names being added afterward.

The Roman legate Hilarius was said to have uttered a single word in Latin, Contradicitur, purportedly annulling the sentence in Leo I's name. He then escaped with difficulty and secretly made his way back to Rome, leading to Leo's officially nullifying the council's acts.

At the Council of Chalcedon, Euthyches would be condemned as a heretic for teaching Monohpysitism. Dioscorus joined in anathematizing Eutyches shortly after Chalcedon concluded. Although considered a Monophysite himself by many, he is honored as a saint in the modern Coptic, Syriac, and other Oriental Orthodox churches.

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  • Edward Walford, translator, The Ecclesiastical History of Evagrius: A History of the Church from AD 431 to AD 594, 1846. Reprinted 2008. Evolution Publishing, ISBN 978-1-889758-88-6. [1]

External links

This article incorporates text from the public-domain Catholic Encyclopedia of 1913. Coordinates: 37°56′42″N 27°20′21″E / 37.945, 27.33917

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.