Page:Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire vol 5 (1897).djvu/159

 OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE 137 maintain the uniformity of faith and worship, his wife Theodora, whose vices were not incompatible with devotion, had listened to the Monophysite teachers ; and the open or clandestine enemies of the church revived and multiplied at the smile of their gracious patroness. The capital, the palace, the nuptial bed, were torn by spiritual discord ; yet so doubtful was the sincerity of the royal consoi'ts that their seeming disagreement was imputed by many to a secret and mischievous confederacy against the religion and happiness of their people. ^^ The The three famous dispute of the three chapters,'"' which has filled more A.rf Isl-'es volumes than it deserves lines, is deeply marked with this subtle and disingenuous spirit. It was now three hundred years since the body of Origen ^" had been eaten by the worms : his soul, of which he held the pre-existence, was in the hands of its Creator, but his writings were eagerly perused by the monks of Palestine. In these writings the piercing eye of Justinian descried more than ten metaphysical errors ; and the primitive doctor, in the company of Pythagoras and Plato, was devoted by the clergy to the etendly of hell-fire, which he had presumed to deny. Under the cover of this precedent, a treacherous blow was aimed at the council of Chalcedon. The fathers had listened without impatience to the praise of Theo- dore of Mopsuestia ; -^^ and their justice or indulgence had of Belisarius in Italy. The ingeniously imagined condemnation of the Three Chapters did not win over the Monophysites, and was regarded in Italy and Africa as an attack on Pope Leo I. and Chalcedon. Gelzer does not go too far when he describes the ecclesiastical measures of Justinian as " a series of mistakes ".] ''^ Procopius, Anecdot. c. 13. Evagrius, 1. iv. c. 10. If the ecclesiastical never read the secret historian, their common suspicion proves at least the general hatred. '*^ On the subject of the three chapters, the original acts of the vth general council of Constantinople supply much useless, though authentic, knowledge (Concil. torn. vi. p. 1-419). The Greek Evagrius is less copious and correct (1. iv. c. 38) than the three zealous Africans, Facundus (in his twelve books, de tribus capitulis, which are most correctly published by Sirmond), Libcratus (in his Breviarium, c. 22, 23, 24), and Victor Tununensis in his Chronicle (in torn. i. Antiq. Lect. Canisii, p. 330-334). The Liber Pontificalis, or Anastasius (in Vigilio, Pelagio, &c. ), is original, Italian evidence. The modern reader will derive some information from Dupin (Bibliot. Eccles. tom. v. p. 189-207) and Basnage (Hist, de I'Eglise, tom. i. p. 519-541), yet the latter is too firmly resolved to de- preciate the authority and character of the popes. '*'' Origen had indeed too great a propensity to imitate the ■^.vi and Svo-o-f/Sfia of the old philosophers (Justinian, ad ilenam in Concil. tom. vi. p. 356). His moderate opinions were too repugnant to the zeal of the church, and he was found guilty of the heresy of treason. •'« Basnage (Priiffat. p. 11-14, ad. tom. i. Antiq. Lect. Canis. ) has fairly weighed the guilt and innocence of Theodore of Mopsuestia. If he composed 10,000 volumes, as many errors would be a charitable allowance. In all the subsequent catalogues of heresiarchs, he alone, without his two brethren, is included ; and it is the duty of Asseman (Bibliot. Orient, tom. iv. p. 203-207) to justify the sentence.