87

they closed the doors to the church and, having gathered by themselves, voted for these things. Acacius, however, denounced what had thus been done, but privately showed to Leonas and Lauracius the document he was promoting. 4.22.11 And on the third day again, the others came together, both Macedonius and Basil who had previously been absent, but Acacius and his party did not think it right to participate in the assembly unless those who had been deposed and accused by them first withdrew; and this was done. 4.22.12 For those of the other party conceded, supposing that Acacius was seeking this pretext to dissolve the synod, so as to escape both the present investigation into the heresy of Aetius 4.22.13 and, for themselves, the accountability for what they were accused of. When all were present, Leonas said he had a book which had been given to him by the party of Acacius; it was a written creed with a certain preface, and the others were unaware of this; for Leonas, supporting the views of Acacius, had intentionally concealed this. And when it was read, 4.22.14 the assembly was filled with uproar. For it declared that, as the emperor had commanded that nothing be added to the faith beyond the holy Scriptures, some men, by bringing in those who had been deposed from various nations and those who had been unlawfully appointed bishops, had disturbed the synod, and had insulted some of them, 4.22.15 and had not allowed others to speak. And that they themselves did not reject the creed set forth in Antioch, even if those who assembled there had introduced this document in response to the inquiry that had arisen at that time; but since "homoousios" and "homoiousios" still trouble many, and lately some are attempting to innovate with "anomoios" of the Son in relation to the Father, for this reason it is necessary to reject "homoousios" and "homoiousios" as being foreign to the Scriptures, and to repudiate "anomoios," and to clearly confess the "homoios" of the Son in relation to the Father; for he is, as Paul the apostle says somewhere, 4.22.16 the image of the invisible God. Having set this forth as a preface, they next appended a written creed that was in accord neither with the decrees of Nicaea nor with those of Antioch, but was composed in such a simple manner that even those who held the views of Arius and Aetius would seem to be in no error if they believed thus. 4.22.17 For having passed over the terms by which those who assembled at Nicaea reject the doctrine of Arius, 4.22.17 and keeping silent about the Son being the unchangeable one of the Godhead, the unvarying image of the Father in substance and will and power and glory, as was stated by the synod at Antioch, they confessed to believe in the Father, and to believe also in the Son and in the Holy Spirit. 4.22.18 And for each, using certain common descriptive names which were in conflict neither with them nor with those who held opposite views, they voted that those who believed otherwise were <alien> to the catholic church. Such things the book brought forward by Leonas contained, and it was signed by Acacius himself 4.22.1 and by those who followed him. After the reading of this, Sophronius the Paphlagonian cried out and said, "If setting forth one's own will each day," he said, "is an exposition of the faith, the precision of the 4.22. truth will fail us." And when Acacius asserted that nothing prevented another document from being dictated, since the Nicene creed was altered once and many times after that, Eleusius retorted, "But the synod," he said, "has been convened now not to learn what it has not learned, nor to receive another faith besides the one already approved by those who assembled in Antioch," 4.22.21 and that they would hold to this one until life and death. As the discussion was proceeding in this way, they moved on to another inquiry. And they began to ask the party of Acacius in what respect they confessed the Son to be like the Father; and when they said "in will only, but not in substance," all the others asserted that he was like him in substance also. And they refuted Acacius on account of the treatise which he had composed 4.22.22 and published, showing that he had formerly held the same views as they did. But as he was saying that one ought not to bring charges from written works and as the discussion was proceeding more and more contentiously, at last

87

εἰς τὴν ἐκκλησίαν τὰς θύρας ἀπέκλεισαν καὶ καθ' ἑαυτοὺς γενόμενοι ἐπεψηφίσαντο τούτοις. ᾿Ακάκιος δὲ τὰ μὲν οὕτω γενόμενα διέβαλλεν, ἰδίᾳ δὲ Λεωνᾷ καὶ Λαυρακίῳ τὴν σπουδαζομένην αὐτῷ γραφὴν 4.22.11 ἐπέδειξε. τρίτῃ δὲ πάλιν ἡμέρᾳ οἱ μὲν ἄλλοι συνῆλθον Μακεδόνιός τε καὶ Βασίλειος οἱ πρὶν ἀπολειφθέντες, ᾿Ακάκιος δὲ καὶ οἱ ἀμφ' αὐτὸν οὐκ ἠξίουν τοῦ συλλόγου κοινωνεῖν, εἰ μὴ πρότερον ὑπεξέλθωσιν οἱ πρὸς αὐτῶν 4.22.12 καθῃρημένοι καὶ κατηγορηθέντες· καὶ τοῦτο ἐγένετο. συνεχώρουν γὰρ οἱ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἑτέρου μέρους ὑπολαβόντες ᾿Ακάκιον ταύτην πρόφασιν θηρᾶσθαι διαλῦσαι τὴν σύνοδον, ὡς καὶ τὴν ᾿Αετίου αἵρεσιν τὴν παροῦσαν ἐξέτασιν 4.22.13 διαφυγεῖν καὶ σφᾶς αὐτοὺς τὰς εὐθύνας τῶν κατηγορουμένων. ἐπεὶ δὲ πάντες παρῆσαν, βιβλίον ἔφη Λεωνᾶς ἔχειν ἐπιδοθὲν παρὰ τῶν ἀμφὶ ᾿Ακάκιον· τὸ δὲ πίστεως ἦν γραφὴ σὺν προοιμίῳ τινί, καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους ἐλάνθανεν· ἑκὼν γὰρ τοῦτο καὶ Λεωνᾶς ἀπεκρύψατο τὰ ᾿Ακακίου φρονῶν. ὡς δὲ ἀνε4.22.14 γνώσθη, θορύβου πλήρης ὁ σύλλογος γέγονεν. ἐδήλου γάρ, ὡς βασιλέως προστάξαντος μηδὲν ἐπεισάγειν τῇ πίστει παρὰ τὰς ἱερὰς γραφὰς ἐπαγόμενοί τινες τοὺς καθῃρημένους ἐκ διαφόρων ἐθνῶν καὶ τοὺς παρανόμως ἐπισκόπους καταστάντας ἐτάραξαν τὴν σύνοδον καὶ τοὺς μὲν αὐτῶν ὕβρισαν, 4.22.15 τοὺς δὲ λαλεῖν οὐ συνεχώρησαν. σφᾶς δὲ τὴν ἐκτεθεῖσαν πίστιν ἐν ᾿Αντιοχείᾳ μὴ ἀποφυγεῖν, εἰ καὶ πρὸς τὴν τότε συμβᾶσαν ζήτησιν οἱ συνελθόντες ἐκεῖσε ταύτην τὴν γραφὴν εἰσηγήσαντο· ἐπεὶ δὲ τὸ ὁμοούσιον καὶ τὸ ὁμοιούσιον εἰσέτι νῦν πολλοὺς θορυβεῖ, ἀρτίως δὲ καινοτομεῖν τινες ἐπιχειροῦσι τὸ ἀνόμοιον υἱοῦ πρὸς πατέρα, διὰ τοῦτο τὸ μὲν ὁμοούσιον καὶ τὸ ὁμοιούσιον ἐκβάλλειν χρεὼν ὡς ἀλλότριον γραφῶν, ἀποκηρύττειν δὲ τὸ ἀνόμοιον, τὸ δὲ ὅμοιον υἱοῦ πρὸς πατέρα σαφῶς ὁμολογεῖν· ἔστι γάρ, ὥς πού 4.22.16 φησι Παῦλος ὁ ἀπόστολος, εἰκὼν τοῦ ἀοράτου θεοῦ. ταῦτα προοιμιασάμενοι ἑξῆς πίστεως ἐπισυνῆψαν γραφὴν μήτε τοῖς ἐν Νικαίᾳ μήτε τοῖς ἐν ᾿Αντιοχείᾳ δόξασι συνᾴδουσαν, ἀλλ' ἁπλῶς οὕτως συγκειμένην, ὡς καὶ τοὺς τὰ ᾿Αρείου καὶ τὰ ᾿Αετίου φρονοῦντας μηδὲν δοκεῖν ἁμαρτάνειν, εἰ καὶ 4.22.17 ὧδε πιστεύουσι. παραδραμόντες γὰρ τὰ ὀνόματα, δι' ὧν τὴν ᾿Αρείου 4.22.17 δόξαν ἐκβάλλουσιν οἱ ἐν Νικαίᾳ συνελθόντες, σιωπήσαντες δὲ καὶ ὡς ἀναλλοίωτός ἐστι τῆς θεότητος ὁ υἱός, οὐσίας τε καὶ βουλῆς καὶ δυνάμεως καὶ δόξης ἀπαράλλακτος εἰκὼν τοῦ πατρός, οἷα τῇ ἐν ᾿Αντιοχείᾳ συνόδῳ εἴρηται, ὡμολόγησαν πιστεύειν εἰς πατέρα, πιστεύειν δὲ καὶ εἰς τὸν υἱὸν καὶ εἰς τὸ ἅγιον 4.22.18 πνεῦμα. ἐφ' ἑκάστῳ δὲ ἐπιθέτοις ὀνόμασι κοινοῖς τισι χρησάμενοι, ἃ μήτε αὐτοῖς μήτε τοῖς ἐναντίως δοξάζουσιν ἐμάχετο, τοὺς ἄλλως πιστεύοντας <ἀλλοτρίους> τῆς καθόλου ἐκκλησίας ἐψηφίσαντο. Τοιάδε μὲν τὸ παρὰ Λεωνᾶ προκομισθὲν βιβλίον περιεῖχεν, ὑπ' αὐτοῦ δὲ 4.22.1 ᾿Ακακίου καὶ τῶν αὐτῷ πειθομένων ὑπογεγραμμένον. μετὰ δὲ τὴν τούτου ἀνάγνωσιν ἀναβοήσας Σωφρόνιος ὁ Παφλαγών «εἰ τὸ ἑκάστης ἡμέρας», ἔφη, «ἰδίαν ἐκτίθεσθαι βούλησιν πίστεώς ἐστιν ἔκθεσις, ἐπιλείψει ἡμᾶς ἡ τῆς 4.22. ἀληθείας ἀκρίβεια.» ἰσχυριζομένου δὲ ᾿Ακακίου μηδὲν κωλύειν ἑτέραν ὑπαγορευθῆναι γραφήν, εἴ γε ἅπαξ καὶ ἡ ἐν Νικαίᾳ πίστις μετεποιήθη καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα πολλάκις, ὑπολαβὼν ᾿Ελεύσιος «ἀλλ' ἡ σύνοδος», ἔφη, «συνεκροτήθη νῦν, οὐχ ἵνα μάθῃ ἃ μὴ μεμάθηκεν, οὐδ' ἵνα πίστιν ἑτέραν παραλάβῃ παρὰ τὴν ἤδη δοκιμασθεῖσαν παρὰ τῶν ἐν ᾿Αντιοχείᾳ συνελθόντων», 4.22.21 καὶ μέχρι ζωῆς καὶ θανάτου ταύτης ἔχεσθαι σφᾶς. ὧδε προϊούσης τῆς διαλέξεως ἐπὶ ἑτέραν μετέβησαν ζήτησιν. καὶ ἐπυνθάνοντο τῶν ἀμφὶ ᾿Ακάκιον, κατὰ τί ὅμοιον τῷ πατρὶ τὸν υἱὸν ὡμολόγησαν· τῶν δὲ κατὰ βούλησιν μόνον, οὐ μὴν κατ' οὐσίαν εἰπόντων οἱ μὲν ἄλλοι πάντες καὶ κατ' οὐσίαν ὅμοιον αὐτὸν ἰσχυρίζοντο. καὶ τὸν ᾿Ακάκιον ἤλεγχον διὰ τὸν λόγον, ὃν συνε4.22.22 γράψατο καὶ ἐκδέδωκεν, ὡς ὁμοίως αὐτοῖς ἐδόξαζε πρότερον. τοῦ δὲ μὴ δεῖν ἀπὸ συγγραμμάτων τὰς εὐθύνας ἐπάγειν λέγοντος καὶ τῆς διαλέξεως ἐπὶ μᾶλλον ἐριστικῶς προϊούσης τὸ τελευταῖον