The Ecclesiastical History of Evagrius Scholasticus - Coptic ...

140
EVAGRIUS
6 The same man says that Timothy, after setting out from the imperial
city, came to Ephesus and enthroned Paul as archbishop for the city of
the Ephesians. He had already been ordained in accordance with the
more ancient practice by the bishops of the diocese, but had been
expelled from his see. He also restored to the city of the Ephesians the
patriarchal right which the Synod at Chalcedon had removed from it, as
I have narrated. 24 Leaving there, he came to the city of the Alexandrians,
and continued in this manner to demand that those who came into his
presence should anathematize the Synod at Chalcedon. Accordingly, as
is narrated by the same Zachariah, many others from his party severed
themselves from him, including Theodotus, who was one of those
ordained at Joppa by Theodosius, who had been made bishop of Jerusalem
by certain people when Juvenal hurried o¡ to Byzantium. 25
7 He also states that Acacius, the prelate of the city of Constantine, being
deeply distressed at these events, 26 stirred up the monastic community
other unspeci¢ed individuals attached themselves to him on seeing his rejection of the
Eutychian doctrine; Evagrius has obscured the distinction.
24 A continuation of the same chapter in Zachariah (v.4). The ‘more ancient practice’ of
ordination by local bishops refers to the situation up to the end of the fourth century.
Ephesus was not a patriarchal see, but had possessed the patriarchal right to consecrate
the metropolitan bishops within its region; in 402, however, in a highly controversial
move, John Chrysostom had attempted to assert the disciplinary authority of Constantinople
over the neighbouring dioceses by deposing various heretical bishops and consecrating
replacements, including one at Ephesus. This created a point of tension between Ephesus
and Constantinople, which explains why Ephesus was a good place to hold anti-
Constantinopolitan Councils in 431 and 449.
Canon 28 of Chalcedon had con¢rmed the superior position of Constantinople, including
this right of consecration (the latter is not, in fact, mentioned by Evagrius in his accounts
of the Council in Book ii).
25 For Theodosius and his ordinations in Palestine, cf. ii.5, with nn. 79^81 above.
Evagrius has misrepresented the numbers and motives of Timothy’s opponents. There was
extravagant rejoicing in Alexandria at Timothy’s return, with his supporters chanting ‘You
have feasted on your enemies, father’ (Theodore Lector 409). Zachariah v.4 presents
Timothy as a mild and forgiving man, who was happy to welcome everyone back into communion
provided that they anathematized the Tome of Leo and the Council of Chalcedon,
but his tolerance angered some hard-liners, who wanted stricter controls on the penitents,
and these withdrew from communion; the majority welcomed Timothy’s kindness and
generosity.
26 Zachariah v.5 is more speci¢c: Acacius was troubled by the reinstatement of Paul at
Ephesus, Timothy at Alexandria and Peter at Antioch, and by the threat that a Council