Page:The Greek and Eastern churches.djvu/108

82 have been heard of this by-product of Arianism—since the battle was raging round the doctrine of Christ—if it had not succeeded in obtaining a champion in high quarters. the patriarch of Constantinople maintained the same position, and consequently the party who agreed with him was known as Macedonian. Since this consisted largely of Semi-Arians, unlikely as we might have supposed it, the orthodox were quick to seize the new weapon, and call all the Semi-Arians Macedonians. But that was not just.

With this babel of voices from Eunomians, Acacians, Semi-Arians, Macedonians, Apollinarians, followers of Marcellus and Photinus, rending the air, all more or less opposed to the party of the three Cappadocians in their support of the Niceue position, there seemed to be an urgent need for another general council of the Church to settle the various disputes involved. Accordingly, Theodosius summoned a synod of the Eastern bishops at Constantinople. This synod is reckoned to be the second Œcumenical Council, none of the councils—at Tyre, Constantinople, Antioch, Sardica, Sirmium, Rimini—which had met in the interval since Nicæa, being regarded as of that character. And yet even this council at Constantinople only represented the Eastern half of the Church. Not a bishop from the West was present. Theodosius only ruled over the Eastern branch of the empire, and he was only able to command the bishops within the area of his jurisdiction. The sole justification for regarding the council as œcumenical is the fact that its decisions were accepted by the bishop of Rome and the Church of the West. This council first assembled in the year 381; then it broke up for a time. It reassembled the next year. There were 150 bishops present. The first president was Meletius of Antioch; but he died during the discussions and was succeeded by Gregory Nazianzen, who, as we have seen, retired because he felt out of his element among the wrangling, quarrelsome theologians, and his place was then