A. D. 546.

of Judea. For when the monks of the great Laura went to Jerusalem to ask the appointment of a new Abbot, the suffragans of Peter, imitating the cunning of Theodorus, drove them away; and immediately all the monastic communities in that region, yielding to the strong, popular current, were carried over, by flattery or by fear, to the side of Origenism. Even the great Laura itself submitted, soon afterwards, to an Abbot appointed by the dominant party; and the few orthodox leaders in the place forsook their long venerated cells, and sought other retreats. But the very day on which the triumphant Origenists saw the feeble remnant of their opposers retire, called them also to mourn the sudden and unexpected death of Nonnus at Nova Laura. This loss was the more severely felt, as Leontius, the other chief of the party, had died, a year or two before, at Constantinople. What was the real character of these two individuals, and what their abilities, we have no satisfactory means to ascertain. That they had considerable influence among the monks, is fully evident; and that they were feared and hated by their opposers, is certain. Should we judge of them, however, by their cotemporaries, we could boast neither of their intelligence, nor of their peaceable and christian temper. Nonnus had the satisfaction of leaving their cause, though proscribed by the government, in a very prosperous condition throughout Palestine. At the great Laura of Sabas, however, the orthodox regained an ascendancy, seven months after his death, and appointed a new Abbot; who was succeeded, in less than a year, by Conon, another of

their most enterprizing leaders. The loss of this important place seemed, soon afterwards, more than made up to the Origenists, by a fortunate acquisition on their

part: Peter, who had always opposed them, A. D. 547. died about this time; and by their influence, their friend, Macarius, was chosen his successor in the bishopric of Jerusalem. But their affairs remained, for five or six years, unstable and fluctuating in the country. A sedition followed the election of the new prelate; and Justinian commanded him to be expelled from his See. What was still more injurious to their interests, the Origenists themselves had abused their success and suffered prosperity to cherish a factious spirit, which divided them, on some trivial question, into hostile parties P.

to 553.

VIII. Meanwhile, an artful plot was conA. D. 546, trived and put in execution, at Constantinople; the particulars of which it is necessary to relate, although they have no other bearing on the doctrine of Universal Salvation, than as they led eventually, to the assembling of the Fifth General Council. Theodorus of Cappadocia had not forgotten the malicious interference of Pelagius, in procuring the late imperial Edict against Origen and his doctrines; and he resolved to retaliate upon his enemy, by taking advantage of some unsettled affairs in the old Nestorian controversy. He happened to belong to a party that hated the memory of the General Council of Chalcedon, held in the middle of the last century;

P Vit. Sabæ cap. 86-90. Fleury's Eccl. Hist. Book xxxiii. ch. 20. 40.

while the Roman Legate, on the contrary, zealously supported its authority and cherished its reputation. To impair its credit, and to vex its advocates, Theodorus contrived to procure the condemnation of some of the fathers whom it had approved. Among those of this class, he found the name of Theodorus of Mopsuestia ; and ignorant, probably, that he had been, in his day, a Universalist, and knowing only that he was celebrated as an opposer of Origen, he thought that by anathematizing him, he should accomplish, at once, two important objects: that of avenging, in some degree, the late indignities inflicted on the memory of his own master; and that also of bringing disgrace on the obnoxious council.

Accordingly, he cautiously suggested to his patron, the emperor, that he might easily effect a work in which he was laboriously engaged, the reconciliation of a certain party in the church, merely by condemning Theodorus of Mopsuestia, Theodoret of Cyrus, and Ibas of Edessa, together with the writings they had left in favor of Nestorianism. Justinian had not sufficient penetration to discover the subtlety of his adviser; and with his characteristic officiousness assumed the authority of pronouncing, for the whole church, upon one of the most hazardous topics he could have selected. But it was foreseen that when he had once promulgated his decision, his theological vanity would be security against all retraction, and his pride of power a guarantee of his perseverance and final victory. Accordingly, Theodorus felt already assured of success, when he received a command to draw up an Edict in the Emperor's name,

condemning the fathers in question, together with their obnoxious writings; which have since been known by the title of the Three Chapters. This Edict was published A. D. 546, in the form of a Letter addressed to the whole catholic church; and all bishops were required to subscribe its anathemas. Most of them, apparently against their conscience, complied, after some hesitation, and were liberally rewarded; but such as maintained their integrity and refused, were of course banished. A violent and general contention followed, for several years. Books were written on both sides. The Roman Pontiff himself continually shuffled between fear of the sovereign's vengeance, and regard for the consistency of the church. The passions of men grew inflamed, till all christendom was so agitated that the usual expedient became necessary in order to allay, or rather to give vent to the fermentation o.

IX. On the fourth of May, A. D. 553, A. D. 553. the Fifth General Council was therefore opened at Constantinople, under the eye of Justinian, by one hundred and fifty one bishops from the Greek and African churches; and it was continued, with the accession of fourteen other bishops, till the second day of the following month. Every thing appears to have been managed, as was expected, according to the emperor's pleasure. The Three Chapters were condemned with extravagant expressions of zeal; and the person of Theodorus of Mopsuestia was anathematized, not for his Universalism, but for his alleged Nestorian

a Fleury's Eccl. Hist. Book xxxiii. ch. 21—43.

ism. Thus far, the artful bishop of Cappadocia saw his plan go into complete effect. But he could not stop the ponderous machinery which he had put in motion; and he was destined to feel, before the close of its operations, that his cunning had overreached itself. While he was, in reality, the prime but covert manager, steadily controling the results, by first suggesting to Justinian the course to be pursued, and then dictating, in his name, to the council, the subject of Origenism, entirely foreign from the business of the session, was suddenly brought before the obsequious conclave', in spite of all his efforts to the contrary. The emperor's attention had lately been directed to it by some incidents in Palestine; certain deputies from Jerusalem, with Conon, the Abbot of St. Sabas, at their head, urged its immediate consideration; and Justinian was by no means backward to show his zeal and faithfulness in the affair. He despatched a message to the assembled bishops, exhorting them to examine the doctrine of "the "impious Origen," and to condemn him and his followers, together with their tenets. As a form which they

r Here I follow Huet (Origenian. Lib. ii. cap. 4. Sect. iii. § 14-16,) Fleury (Eccl. Hist. Book xxxiii. ch. 40. 51,) and the testimony of antiquity, in preference to the authority of Du Pin (Biblioth. Pat. Vol. v. Art. Hist. of Fifth Gen. Council,) who contends, with some others, that the affair of Origen, Didymus and Evagrius, was not examined in this Council, but only in that which was called together, at Constantinople, by Mennas, on receiving Justinian's Edict, in A. D. 540. Without incurring the charge of pretending to decide this question, I may say that the general voice of history is against Du Pin; and that whether he was correct or not, this is certain, that the condemnation of Origen, Didymus and Evagrius, having been almost invariably attributed to the Fifth General Council, has been received in the catholic church with the deference which is paid to the decisions of such a body.