CHAPTER XXX

DIVISIONS IN THE CHURCH

THIS Anastasius, being of a peaceful disposition, was altogether averse to the introduction of changes, especially in the state of the church, but endeavoured by every means, that the most holy churches should continue undisturbed, and the whole body of his subjects enjoy profound tranquillity, by the removal of all strife and contention from matters both ecclesiastical and civil. During these times, accordingly, the synod of Chalcedon was neither openly proclaimed in the most holy churches, nor yet was repudiated by all: but the bishops acted each according to his individual opinion. Thus, some very resolutely maintained what had been put forth by that synod, and would not yield to the extent of one word of its determinations, nor admit even the change of a single letter, but firmly declined all contact and communion with those who refused to admit the matters there set forth. Others, again, not only did not submit to the synod of Chalcedon and its determinations, but even anathematised both it and the tome of Leo. Others, however, firmly adhered to the Henoticon of Zeno, and that too although mutually at variance on the point of the single and double nature; some being caught by the artful composition of that document; and others influenced by an inclination for peace. Thus the churches in general were divided into distinct, factions, and their presidents did not even admit each other to communion.

Numerous divisions, hence arising, existed in the East, in the West, and in Africa; while the eastern bishops had no friendly intercourse with those of the West and Africa, nor the latter with those of the East. The evil too became still more monstrous, for neither did the presidents of the eastern churches allow communion among themselves, nor yet those who held the sees of Europe and Africa, much less with those of remote parts.

In consideration of these circumstances, the Emperor Anastasius removed those bishops who were promoters of change, wherever he detected any one either proclaiming or anathematising the synod of Chalcedon in opposition to the practice of the neighbourhood. Accordingly, he rejected from the see of the imperial city, first, Euphemius, as has been already mentioned, and afterwards Macedonius, who was succeeded by Timotheus; and Flavian from the see of Antioch.