Page:Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire vol 5 (1897).djvu/162

 140 THE DECLINE AND FALL restored in some degree the peace of the church, and the reigns of his four successors, Justin, Tiberius, Maurice, and Phocas, are distinguished by a rare, though fortunate, vacancy in the ecclesiastical history of the East.^*^- The faculties of sense and reason are least capable of acting on themselves ; the eye is most inaccessible to the sight, the soul to the thought ; yet we think, and even feel, that one will, a sole principle of action, is essential to a rational and conscious being. When Heraclius returned from the Persian war, the orthodox hero consulted his bishops, whether the Christ whom he adored, of one person but of two natures, was actuated by a single or a double will. They replied in the singular, and the emperor was encouraged to hope that the Jacobites of Egypt and Syria might be reconciled by the profession of a doctrine, most certainly harmless, and most probably true, since it was taught even by the Nestorians themselves.^*^^ The experiment was tried without effect, and the timid or vehement Catholics condemned even the semblance of a retreat in the presence of a subtle and audacious enemy. The orthodox (the prevailing) party devised new modes of speech, and argu- ment, and interpretation ; to either nature of Christ they speciously applied a proper and distinct energy ; but the difference was no longer visible when they allowed that the human and the divine will were invariably the same.^'^* The condemn the three chapters. Baronius almost pronounces the damnation of Jus- tinian (a.d. 565, No. 6). [The sources for the heresy of Justinian are : the Life of the Patriarch Eutychius (who was banished for his opposition to the aphtharto- docetic doctrine) by his contemporary Eustratius (Acta Sett. April 6, i. p. 5505^^.); Evagrius (iv. 39-41) : a notice in a ConstantinopoHtan chronicle (the Meyos xpoi'oypat^o? ?) preserved in the "EKAoyal otto ttj; i<K. l(TTopia<; published in Cramer's Aneai. Paris, 2, p. iii, and copied by Theophanes, sub. A.M. 6057 ; John of Nikiu, ed. Zotenberg. p. 518 ; Nicephorus, in his list of Patriarchs of Constantinople, in the Xpovoyp. o-vrro/iors p. 117, ed. de Boor. The great exponent of the doctrine of the incorruptibility of Christ's body was Julian, Bishop of Hali- carnassus. His doctrine is stated falsely in the passage of John of Nikiu— at least in the translation. As for Nicetius, cp. Appendix 8.] 1'^'^ After relating the last heresy of Justinian (1. iv. c. 39, 40, 41) and the edict of his successor (1. v. c. 3 [4]), the remainder of the history of Evagrius is filled w ith civil, instead of ecclesiastical, events. i"3 This extraordinary and perhaps inconsistent doctrine of the Nestorians had been obser-ed by La Croze (Christianisme des Indes, torn. i. p. 19, 20), and is more fully exposed by Abulpharagius (Bibliot. Orient, torn. ii. p. 292 ; Hist. Dynast, p. 91, vers. Latin. Pocock) and Asseman himself (tom. iv. p. 218). They seem igno- rant that they might allege the positive authority of theecthesis. 'o /xtapbs NeaTopios Kaiirep Si.aipi'n> ttji' Geiav toC' Ki'piou ifai-9pwnricni', Ka Svo elaayuii' vioC?, (the COmmon reproach of the Monophysites), Hvo fir ArJ/iara rovrwr elmh' ovk eToA/oiTjo-e, ToivavTiov Se TavToBov>^iav rCv ... Svo ^pocrwiraw i&6$aa-e {Conci). tom. vii. p. 205[ = Mansi, X. 996])- iw See the orthodox faith in Petavius (Dogmata Theolog. tom. v. 1. ix. c. 6-10, p. 433-447) : all the depths of this controversy are sounded in the Greek dialogue