The history of the church from our Lords incarnation, to the twelth year of the Emperour Maricius Tiberius, or the Year of Christ 594 / as it was written in Greek, by Eusebius Pamphilius ..., Socrates Scholasticus, and Evagrius Scholasticus ... ; made English from that edition of these historians, which Valesius published at Paris in the years 1659, 1668, and 1673 ; also, The life of Constantine in four books, written by Eusibius Pamphilus, with Constantine's Oration to the convention of the saints, and Eusebius's Speech in praise of Constantine, spoken at his tricennalia ; Valesius's annotations on these authors, are done into English, and set at their proper places in the margin, as likewise a translation of his account of their lives and writings ; with two index's, the one, of the principal matters that occur in the text, the other, of those contained in the notes.

CHAP. XXXIV. Concerning the former Synod at Ephesus convened against Nestorius.

FOr within a small intervall of time, the Bi∣shops in all places were by the Emperour's Edict ordered to meet together at Ephesus. Im∣mediately after the Feast of Easter therefore, Nestorius went to Ephesus, accompanied with a great and promiscuous multitude, where he finds many Bishops met together. But Cyrillus [Bi∣shop] of Alexandria made some delaies, and came not till about Pentecost. On the fifth day after Pentecost, Juvenalis Bishop of Jerusalem arrived. Whilest Johannes [Bishop] of An∣tioch was slow in coming, the [Prelates] that were present began to debate the Question. And Cyrillus of Alexandria made some onse••s [of dispute,] being desirous to disturb and terrifie Nestorius; for he had conceived an hatred a∣gainst him. Moreover, when many asserted the Deity of Christ, Nestorius exprest himself thus, I cannot term him God, who was two months and three months old. And therefore I am clear from your bloud; nor will I in future come to you any more. Having said this, he afterwards held conventions with the other Bishops, who were followers of his opinion. So that the persons present were divided into two factions. Those of Cyrillus's party * 1.1 staid in the Councill, and cited in Ne∣storius. But he refused to come in, and deferred his appearance till the arrivall of Johannes [Bi∣shop] of Antioch. Whereupon those of Cy∣rillus's party, (after they had severall times read over Nestorius's Discourses about this Question, which he had made to the people; and from the reading thereof had given in their judgment, that he had constantly spoken blasphemy against the Son of God) deposed him. When this was done, a 1.2 Nestorius's party made up another Synod apart by themselves, and depose Cyrillus, and to∣gether with him Memnon Bishop of Ephesus. Not long after these transactions, Johannes Bi∣shop of Antioch arrived. And being informed of what had been done, was highly displeased with Cyrillus, as being the occasioner of the di∣sturbance which had hapned, in regard he had with so much rashness and precipitancy procee∣ded to the deposition of Nestorius. But Cyrillus, and together with him Juvenalis, to revenge themselves upon Johannes, depose him also. These affairs being after this manner confused and disturbed, Nestorius perceiving this contention had arrived to such an height as to ruine com∣munion, retracted, and termed Mary Theotocos, saying, Let Mary be styled Theotocos, and let all animosities cease. But though he made this retractation, yet no body admitted of it. For at this present he continues deposed, and lives in exile at Oäsis. And this was the conclusion of the Synod held at that time. These things were done in the Consulate of Bassus and An∣tiochus, on the twenty eighth of June. But Jo∣hannes after his return to Antioch, assembled ma∣ny Bishops, and deposed Cyrillus, who was then gone home to Alexandria. However, they laid aside their enmity soon after, came to a reconci∣liation, and restored one another to their Epis∣copall Chairs. But after Nestorius's deposition, a most violent disturbance seized the Churches of Constantinople. For the people were divided by reason of his frigid and empty babling, as I have said already. But all the Clergy by a generall consent Anathematized him. (For so we Christians do usually term the sentence a∣gainst a blasphemer, when we propose it to pub∣lick view on a Pillar as it were, and render it visi∣ble to all persons.)

Notes

• * 1.1

  Or, Made up the Synod.
• a 1.2

  Socrates mistakes at this place, in attribu∣ting that to Nestorius which was done by John Bi∣shop of Antioch. Therefore Evagrius and (who has fol∣lowed him) Nicephorus do deser∣vedly re∣prehend our Socra∣tes. Now, the busi∣ness, as we are in∣formed from the Acts of the Ephesine Synod, was transacted in this manner. When Ne∣storius had been con∣demned and depo∣sed by the holy Sy∣nod, and the Letters of Deposi∣tion had been sent to him, he sent forth∣with a rela∣tion to the Emperour Theodosius, wherein he complained of his Ad∣versaries violence, and that they would not expect the coming of the Eastern Bishops, who, 'twas said, would quickly be there. This re∣lation was subscribed by ten Bishops of Nestorius's party. On the fifth day after, comes John Bishop of Antioch, with the Eastern Bishops. Who having understood what had been done▪ assembled together the Bishops (as well the Eastern Prelates whom he had brought with him, as those ten, which (as we have said) had subscribed Nestorius's Relation,) and deposed the Bishops Cyrillus and Memnon. At this Little Councill of Johannes's, Nestorius himself was not persent, be∣cause having been condemned by an Episcopall sentence, he had not been restored by the determination of a Synod. But the Bishops of his party, whom the sentence of the Synod had in no wise touched, were present. Wherefore Socrates may be excused, if we say that these words [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] do not denote Nestorius himself, but the Bishops who were of his party, and had subscribed his Relation. But in the other particulars Socrates is not to be excused. Vales.