CAP. XXXI.
Howe the monks of Palaestina wrote vnto Alcison of Xenaias the monke and others.
THe monks of Palaestina wrote vnto Alcison toutching Macedonius and Flanianus in such sort* 1.1 as followeth. VVhen Peter had departed this life, Alexandria, Aegypt and Libya were at variance among them selues, & other c••ūtreis of the East contended within them selues: for the west Churches would in no wise cōmunicate with them saue vnder this condition, that they would accurse Nestorius, Eutyches, Dioscorus, Peter syrnamed Moggus and Acacius. VVher∣fore seeing the churches throughout the worlde, were at this pointe, the fauourers of Dioscorus and Eutyches were brought to a narrow rowme. And now being as it were euerie one rooted & weeded from of the face of the earth, one Xenaias after the Etymologie of his name far estraun∣ged from God, we knowe not what wicked fiende had bewitched his minde, or what malice he owed vnto Flauianus, vnder cloke of religion (as report goeth) he made an insurrection a∣gaynst him and charged him with the here••ie of Nestorius. VVhen he had accursed Nestorius with his hereticall opinion, he lefte him and turned to Dioscorus, and Theodorus and Theodo∣ritus, and Ibas, and Cyrus, and Eutherius, and Iohn, and to others, we wot not who, neyther out of what countreye: of whiche number some in very deede were Nestorians, some others to auoyde the suspition of that heresie, accursed Nestorius, and returned vnto the Churche. Vnlesse thou accurse, (••••yd Xenaias) all these whiche sauour of Nestorius fylthye sinke of hereticall doctrine, thou thy selfe shalt seeme to be of Nestorius opinion, although thou accurse both him and his doctrine, yea a thousande ty••••es. The same Xenaias moreouer dealte by letters both wyth the complices of Dioscorus and the fauourers of Eutyches, perswadinge them to holde wyth him againste Flauianus, not that they shoulde accurse the Councell, but onelye the persons aboue named. After Flauianus the Byshope had wythstoode them a longe whyle, and sawe that o∣thers h••ld with Xenaias against him, namely Ele••sinus Byshop of some city or other, within Cap¦padocia the less, Nicias byshop of Laodicea in Syria with others of other countreis (whose ac∣cusations proceeding of abiect mindes we will passe ouer with silence, and geue others leaue to report them) at length remembring him selfe, they would be pacified, if the aforesaide persons were accursed, yelded vnto them. And after he had condemned those men with his owne hand he wrote vnto the Emperour, for these men had set him vp against Flauianus, as if he had beene patrone of Nestorius heresie. Neyther was Xenaias satisfied with this, but agayne required Flauianus to condemne both the Councell and suche as affyrmed there were two natures in Christe, the one humane, the other diuine, who for refusinge to doe this, is charged a freshe wyth Nestorius opinion. Last of all after much adoe, when the patriarch had published a forme of faith where he had vnfainedly geuen to vnderstand that the councell as toutching the depri∣uation of Nestorius and Eutyches was to be approued, but not for their decree of the faith & do∣ctrine: they threaten to take him in hand againe, as one that secretly sauored of Nestorius, vnlesse he woulde accurse both the Councell it selfe, and them that affirmed there were two natures