At the same time the arguments of the orthodox at home, and the intercessions of the empress Pulcheria, produced a change in his views, which resulted in the ratification of the decrees of the general council. Nestorius himself was restricted at first to his ancient monastery of St. Euprepius, at Antioch; but, on the further spread of his sentiments, he became the victim of an unrelenting persecution, by which, deprived of his property, he was banished to the oasis on the confines of Libya, where, after many painful vicissitudes, he died in great bodily misery in the year 436.

V. PROGRESS OF THE SCHISM.

IN tracing the developement of Nestorianism among the Eastern churches, we must first call to mind the influence exercised over their divines by the writings of Theodore already referred to. He was the favourite doctor of the age; and the bias he had given to the opinions of Nestorius was communicated as well to those of his Eastern contemporaries who were conversant with the Greek language. Hence the partiality for Nestorius displayed by them, even before the council of Ephesus. Thus, on the publication of the twelve chapters or anathemas of Cyril, John of Antioch, ostensibly shocked at the strong language in which that writer had expressed himself, and apprehensive of a tendency in some of them to the error of Apollinarius, directed two of the bishops of his province to draw up formal replies to them. One of these was done by Andrew of Samosata, whose production received the approval of his episcopal brethren in a provincial synod, thereby already committing themselves to the side of Nestorius. The other was by Theodoret of Cyrus, a small diocese in the Euphratensian Syria; a divine no less celebrated for his piety and beneficence, his various erudition and powerful talents, than

for his indefatigable labours and extensive usefulness. To each of these treatises, Cyril published methodical and ample answers: first, stating his own thesis; then, the strictures of his antagonists; finally, his refutation of them. This work was translated into Latin, for the use of the Western church, by Marius Mercator.

Then, subsequently to their return from the general council, the dissentient bishops met in synod at Antioch, and wrote to the emperor, declaring their abhorrence of the twelve articles of Cyril, and praying him not to suffer them to be taught in the churches.* They also separated from their communion Rabbula, bishop of Edessa, who, though at first disposed to coincide in their opposition to Cyril, had latterly given in his adhesion to the doctrine of that father. About the same time, also, Theodoret (who, however, in after-days, became reconciled to the orthodox party) wrote his five books on the Incarnation, in defence of the views of Theodore and Nestorius, and a Letter of Consolation to the numerous people of Constantinople, who retained their attachment to the deposed patriarch.

At length a compulsory reconciliation was effected, in obedience to the imperative commands of Theodosius, between Cyril and John. But whatever concession was requisite to the accomplishment of such an occurrence, was made by the bishop of Antioch. As for Cyril, while he gave explanations of some topics in his writings on the controversy, disavowed the false constructions which had been put on them by his adversaries, and professed his forgiveness of the contumelies he had endured from them, he remained unalterable as to any principle involved in his twelve articles. John of Antioch, on the other hand,-whether as a man who had not decidedly adopted the opinions of Nestorius, but had kept till then his

* BALUZ. Synod. cap. 39. FLEURY, xvi 150.

judgment in suspense, and was at last satisfied by the explanations of Cyril; or as one willing to sacrifice points of doctrine for the peace of the church; is still problematical,—met the wish of the emperor and the demands of his adversary, by acknowledging the orthodoxy of Cyril's doctrine, the justice of the deposition of Nestorius, and the validity of his successor's ordination, and by anathematizing the Nestorian dogma. In this measure several of the bishops of his province concurred; while, to others, the conduct of John was a subject of surprise and indignation. Some of the latter held a council at Anazarba, where they confirmed the pretended deposition of Cyril at Ephesus, and pronounced excommunication upon all who should hold communion with him till they had condemned his twelve obnoxious articles, which they affirmed it to be their own determination to resist to the death.*

One of the vigorous measures of the emperor to accomplish an universal harmony of doctrine, was the expulsion of recusant bishops from their sees. In consequence of this measure, we find, in the year 436, nine of the Asiatic prelates deprived of their charges and driven into exile. Two of these were metropolitans; Alexander of Hierapolis, who was sent to the mines of Tamothis, in Egypt; and Eutherius of Tyana, who, banished to Scythopolis, and driven afterwards from thence, died at Tyre. The steadfastness of these confessors gave a still greater prominence to the cause for which they suffered.

Meantime, in Cilicia, the scene of the more direct influence of the opinions of Diodorus† and Theodore, the

BALUZ. Synod. cap. 113.

+ Diodorus of Tarsus, metropolitan of the first Cilicia, and master of Theodore of Mopsuestia, wrote on the scriptures at large, on the Trinity, and the Incarnation. His works are stated by Ebed Jesu to have been sixty in number, but none of them remain.

new doctrine was gaining an established ascendancy. Here the leading men of the party were employed in multiplying and circulating copies of the works of those two bishops; who, although the primary authors of the heresy for which Nestorius suffered, had, nevertheless, died in communion with the church, and were, therefore, still possessed of the authority of catholic doctors. By this measure it was attempted to remove the odium of heterodoxy from the memory of Nestorius; and to show, that the sentiments for which he had been deposed were not peculiar to himself, but had been maintained before him by the greatest divines, whose names were still sacred among the faithful; and that, in effect, the exiled patriarch was a confessor for the ancient truth once delivered to the saints. Following up this enterprise, they translated, with consummate diligence, those works of Diodorus and Theodore which bore upon the subject, into Syriac, Persian, and Armenian, and spared no pains to insure them circulation among the Christians of those communions. This was a measure which gave no small vexation to the orthodox clergy in those parts. One of the latest acts of Rabbula of Edessa, then blind with extreme age, was to anathematize the works of Theodore in the public congregation, and to dictate a letter to St. Cyril, expressive of his grief and alarm that Nestorianism was striking its roots so deeply in the East.

Not a few also of the friends and disciples of Nestorius, who had been proscribed by the imperial severities, found refuge in Mesopotamia and Persia; where, under the Persian government, they obtained more than mere toleration. Patronized by the royal favour, their party soon acquired a predominance over the orthodox. They obtained possession of the churches, and employed this advantage in moulding to their opinions the sentiments of the multitude. Iba, the successor of Rabbula in the see

of Edessa, and Acacius, Paul, Maraba, Joseph, Ezekiel, and other archbishops of Seleucia, gave the influence of their high station to the cause; the eminent recluses of the monasteries of Beth-aven and Mount Izla employed the labours of the pen in its service; while Barsuma, Narses, Maanes, and other professors at the great theological schools, imbued with their favourite doctrine the fountains of religious instruction.

VI. NESTORIANISM TAKES A CHURCH-STATUS.

In the year 498 the archbishop or catholicos of Seleucia and Ctesiphon assumed the title of "patriarch of the East," or of the Orientals; and from henceforth the various bishoprics under his jurisdiction constituted a distinct anti-Byzantine communion, one of whose peculiar features was the maintenance of the Nestorian tenet.* This communion, though universally distinguished by the denominative "Nestorian," has, nevertheless, constantly disclaimed it. Their sentiment upon this point is thus expressed by Ebed-Jesu, one of their metropolitans: "They are unjustly and injuriously called Nesturoyee; whereas Nestorius was never their patriarch, nor did they even understand the language in which he wrote; but when they heard how he defended the orthodox truth of two natures and two persons in one Son of God and one Christ, they gave their confirmation to his testimony, because they themselves had entertained the same doctrine. So that it may rather be said, that Nestorius followed them, than that they were led by him."+

And

* Quum Antiochenum patriarcham dicant ab orthodoxa fide post Nestorii depositionem defecisse, ejus prerogativam volunt ad Seleuciensem episcopum, qui antea ei subjacebat, integrè et plenè translatam fuisse; eò scilicet quia, ut effutiunt, illibatam ille fidem quam Nestorianam esse dicunt conservavit.—ASSEMAN.

+EBED-JESU in Margarita, pars iii. cap. 2.