II. THE CANONS OF THE SECOND SYNOD have a style quite different from those of the first, are not so simple,
37. The metropolitans are annually to hold provincial Synods, that discipline and love may be maintained
38. All bishops are required to obey these canons. f461
SEC. 254. SYNODS AT ANTIOCH AND GAZA, A.D. 542.
We met with the last controversy about Origen before this time, at the beginning of the fifth century, in the history of S. Chrysostom, and in the account of the Synods held on his account (see vol. 3, sec. 115). From this time onwards, for nearly a century and a half, this controversy rested; but there was growing up an ever stronger conviction of the heretical character of many of the doctrines of the great Alexandrian. Thus, for example, Pope Leo the Great assumed (Ep. 35, t. 1, page 881, ed. Ballerini) that Origen had been justly anathematized on account of his doctrine of the pre- existence of souls, and the Roman Synod of A.D. 496 blamed Eusebius because with Pamphilus he had written a defense of Origen (see above, sec.
217). Yet, it adds, “many of his books are to be read.”
About the year 520, however, a new controversy broke out about Origen, in Palestine. Four monks of the new Laura, Nonnus at their head, were zealous Origenists, and were therefore expelled by their Abbot Agapetus.
His successor Mennas restored them. On the other hand, S. Sabas, the superior of the monks of Palestine, personally made a journey (A.D. 530) to Constantinople, and demanded of the Emperor Justinian the expulsion of the Origenisis. Before, however, the Emperor took any steps, Sabas died in 531, and Origenism extended still more widely among the monks of
Palestine, particularly through two learned monks, Domitian and Theodore Ascidas. Both immediately gained the favor of the Emperor to such an extent, that he advanced them to episcopal chairs about the year 537.
Domitian became bishop of Ancyra in Galatia, and Theodore Ascidas, archbishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia (as successor of the well-known Sotericus); and both of them stayed a good deal at the imperial court. f462 Supported by these two men, the Origenists obtained the upper hand in the Lauras, and drove out their opponents, the so-called Sabaites. Six of these, particularly Stephen and Timothy, appealed to the Patriarch Ephraim of Antioch, and he summoned, about the year 542, f463 a Synod to deal with this question at Antioch, as is shown by the principal authority for the history of the new Origenistic controversy, the priest Cyril of Scythopolis, in the biography of his teacher S. Sabas, in the words: “Ephraim
promulgated a synodal decree in which he anathematized the doctrinal propositions of Origen. f464 The Libellus Synodicus also refers to the same Antiochene Synod with the brief remark, that Ephraim of Antioch, the archbishop of Syria, had, at a holy Synod, anathematized f465 the defenders
of Origenist doctrines who had lately arisen in Palestine. All further particulars respecting the Synod are unknown, as its Acts are lost, and we only know through Cyril that the Origenisis in Palestine, in order to take revenge on Ephraim, compelled the Patriarch Peter of Jerusalem to strike the name of his colleague of Antioch from the diptychs.
About the same time the Synod at Gaza in Palestine took place (541 or 542), f466 occasioned by a matter quite different and unconnected with Origenism. The Patriarch Paul of Alexandria had fallen under suspicion, as though, at his request, the imperial commander at Alexandria, Augustalis Rhodo, had privately murdered Psoius the deacon and steward of the Alexandrian Church. On receiving intelligence of this the Emperor Justinian sent Liberius as his representative to Egypt, to examine the matter; and Rhodo declared at the examination that the Emperor had ordered him to do everything that the bishop required, and that he had murdered that deacon at the command of the bishop. Bishop Paul denied that he had given such a command to Rhodo, and it was proved that it was not the bishop, but a certain Arsenius, a distinguished resident of Alexandria, who, in connection with Rhodo, had brought about that murder. Arsenius was therefore
immediately executed, but Rhodo was sent to the Emperor with the documents of the examination, and was by him condemned to death. As, however, Bishop Paul of Alexandria did not seem entirely without blame, the Emperor Justinian sent the Roman deacon Pelagius, who still remained at Constantinople as legate (Nuntius), to Antioch, in order that, in
communion with Ephraim, the patriarch of that place, and other bishops of distinction, they might complete the deposition of the Alexandrian.
Pelagius, Ephraim, Peter, patriarch of Jerusalem, Hypatius of Ephesus, and a good many other bishops assembled, as Liberatus relates (Breviar. c. 23, in Galland. t. 12, page 158), at Gaza, deprived Paul of the pallium, deposed him, and ordained Zoilus in his stead.
SEC. 255. THE EDICT OF JUSTINIAN AGAINST ORIGEN.
On the return from Gaza and Constantinople the Roman representative Pelagius fell in with monks from Jerusalem who had with them extracts from the writings of Origen, and wanted to obtain from the Emperor a sentence of condemnation against him. f467 Pelagius and the Patriarch Mennas of Constantinople upheld them in this matter, and Justinian
promulgated the edict against Origen, which afterwards became so famous.
f468 This copious theological document was first published by Baronius in
Latin (ad ann. 538, n. 34 sqq.). Later on Lupus made the Greek text known, and it was embodied in the Acts of the fifth Oecumenical Synod.
f469 That copy of the edict which has come to us was addressed to the Patriarch Mennas of Constantinople, and the Emperor declares in it, at the very beginning, that it was his highest care to preserve the faith pure and the Church in peace. But, alas! he had been forced to learn that some ventured to defend the errors of Origen, which were similar to the heathen, Arian, and Manichaean doctrines. One who followed such a man as Origen could scarcely be still called a Christian, for he, blaspheming the Holy Trinity, had maintained that “the Father is greater than the Son, and the Son greater than the Holy Ghost: That the Son could not behold the Father, nor the Spirit the Son: That the Son and the Spirit are creatures, and that the Son is related to the Father as we to the Son.”
The Emperor further adduces the other leading errors of Origen (pre- existence, apokatastasis, plurality of worlds, etc.), and opposes to them a very thorough refutation with the insertion of many patristic passages from Gregory of Nazianzus, and of Nyssa, Chrysostom, Peter of Alexandria, Athanasius, Basil, Cyril of Alexandria, etc., who had all spoken decidedly in the rejection of Origen’s teaching. As, the Emperor proceeded, he was now desirous of removing all offense from the Church, he, following the Holy Scriptures, and the Fathers who had repudiated Origen, had addressed this letter to His Holiness (Mennas), advising him to hold a Synod of the bishops present in Constantinople and the presidents of convents (su>nodov ejndhmou~sa), and procure in writing an anathema on Origen and his errors, and particularly on those propositions of his
appended to the imperial decree.
Mennas was requested straightway to send copies of the Acts of this Synod to all other bishops and heads of monasteries, so that they too might
subscribe the anathema on Origen and his errors. In the future, too, no one was to be ordained bishop or head of a monastery unless to the customary anathema on the heretics Sabellius, Arius, Apollinaris, Nestorius, Eutyches, Dioscurus, Timothy Aelurus, Peter Mongus, Anthimus of Trapezont (also of Constantinople), Theodosius of Alexandria, Peter of Antioch, Peter of Apamea, and Severus of Antioch, he should add also an anathema on Origen.
The Emperor stated that he had written the same to the Patriarch Vigilius, the Pope of Old Rome, as well as to the other holy patriarchs — namely, of
Alexandria, Theophilus (of Antioch), and of Jerusalem, that they might also take precautions in this matter. So that at last all might see that the writings of Origen were heretical, he had appended only a few of his blasphemies in the appendix. These are twenty-four propositions from his book peri<
ajrcw~n, particularly from the first and fourth. This being so, the Emperor concludes, it was reasonable that Origen should be anathematized, and in the following ten propositions: f470 —
1. Whoever says or thinks that human souls pre-existed, i.e. that they had previously been spirits and holy powers, but that, satiated with the vision of God, they had turned to evil, and in this way the divine love in them had grown cold (ajpoyugei>sav), and they had therefore become souls (yuca>v), and had been condemned to punishment in bodies, shall be anathema.
2. If anyone says or thinks that the soul of the Lord pre-existed and