the Council was closed.[1] An exceptionally respectful letter was sent to the Pope, asking for his confirmation.[2] He confirmed the dogmatic decree, but explicitly rejected the 28th Canon.[3] On February 7, 452, Marcian, together with his Western colleague Valentinian III,[4] published a decree deposing and banishing all who resisted the Council. Eutyches died in exile just at this time; Dioscor died, also exiled, at Ganges in Paphlagonia, 454.[5]
4. Later Monophysite Troubles
It would seem now as if Monophysism were dead. A general Council had rejected it; the Pope had confirmed its rejection. East and West alike condemned it. Unhappily, there was to be as tragic a sequel to this heresy as there had been to Arianism after Nicæa. It was still to cause enormous trouble in the Eastern Empire before it finally settled down in the heretical sects of Copts, Abyssinians, Jacobites and Armenians. Before we come to the special history of these sects it will be well to trace the general disturbance this heresy caused in the empire. This will lead us beyond the foundation of the separated Churches; but it is more or less one story, which we may as well clear up before we leave the great Church of the empire and discuss their local history.
After Chalcedon there was still a great number of people, chiefly in Egypt and Syria, who refused to accept its decrees, who sympathized with Dioscor and saw in his deposition an attack on St. Cyril and on the Council of Ephesus in 431, who thought Chalcedon had given way to Nestorianism. These are the Monophysites, whom various Emperors will vainly try to conciliate. Out of these attempts to conciliate the Monophysites arise a crowd of minor heresies, compromises and evasive formulas which satisfy no one, which lead to fresh schisms and further confusions.
- ↑ For all the story of the Council of Chalcedon see Hefele-Leclercq: op. cit. ii. (2), 649–834.
- ↑ P.G. liv. 958.
- ↑ Ep. 105 (P.L. liv. 997–1002), 114 (ib. 1027–1032).
- ↑ Emperor in the West, 423–455.
- ↑ For the Papal acceptance and sequel of Chalcedon see Hefele-Leclercq, ii. (2), 835–857. Note that the East, too, abandoned Canon 28 till it was revived by Photius (ib. 855–857). It has never been included in any collection of canon law made by Catholics. As Orthodox canon law it dates, not from Chalcedon, but from their schism.
