CONCERNING ST. FLAVIAN, BISHOP OF CONSTANTINOPLE, MARTYR
A.D. 449.
HISTORICAL COMMENTARY.
Flavian, Bishop of Constantinople, Martyr (St.)
By G. H.
Section I. The episcopate conferred upon St. Flavian. The hatred of the Emperor and of the eunuch Chrysaphius toward him.
[1] "Our Holy Father Flavian, first a Priest of the holy Church of God at Constantinople, through a life of continence adorned with all virtues, by the counsel of God, the suffrage of the Emperor and Senate, St. Flavian, from being a Priest, and the judgment of the sacred Synod, was created and consecrated Patriarch of the same Church." This eulogy of his is found in the Greek Menaea and in Maximus Cytheraeus. and Keeper of the Treasury of the church, becomes Bishop of Constantinople, Nicephorus Callistus, Book 14, Chapter 47 of the Ecclesiastical History, writes: "Proclus was succeeded by Flavian, keeper of the sacred treasures of the Great Church, a Priest in rank, but distinguished by his heavenly life." By Cedrenus, in the thirty-ninth year of Theodosius, he is called Skeuophylax, keeper of the vessels of the Great Church of Constantinople; and as is added in the History of Theophanes, "a most sacred and virtuous man."
[2] At that time there lived in the court of Theodosius the eunuch Chrysaphius, who, as Theophanes and Nicephorus attest, Chrysaphius demanding a gift, wielded great authority with the Emperor. He, being displeased with the ordination of Flavian, suggested to the Emperor that the Patriarch be informed that, as a token of gratitude for his election or consecration, he should send him some gift as a blessing. But the holy Flavian sent him pure bread. Chrysaphius, on the contrary, insisted that a golden gift of blessing should be sent. he sends bread: To this the Patriarch replied that he had no abundance of such things, unless perhaps he should use the sacred treasures of the temple for this purpose. But Chrysaphius himself knew very well that the sacred vessels of the Church were consecrated to God and to the poor. Chrysaphius was offended by these words. So much from those two authors. But Evagrius, who lived only one century after St. Flavian, or even church vessels? in Book 2 of the Ecclesiastical History, Chapter 2, reports that Flavian sent Chrysaphius, who demanded gold for his ordination to the episcopate, the sacred vessels of the Church, in order to put him to shame. What Chrysaphius then did out of his hostile disposition toward St. Flavian, Nicephorus narrates as follows, and largely from Theophanes.
[3] "Pulcheria Augusta was entirely unaware of all these things. Meanwhile Chrysaphius, driven by envy, left no stone unturned to overthrow the Patriarch from his See. But when he saw that this could not be done In order to remove St. Pulcheria from government, while Pulcheria was administering the supreme authority, he solicited the Empress Eudocia, and gradually stirring her up against Pulcheria, who had been like a mother to her, he began to persuade her to take away the Steward from Pulcheria and claim him for herself. For the Steward obeyed Pulcheria, since she administered the supreme authority. Eudocia tried not a little to sway the Emperor's mind to take the Steward away from Pulcheria. But he did not allow himself to be persuaded, rejecting Eudocia's request on the ground that his sister Pulcheria had been born and raised in the Imperial court and administered the state most excellently. After this plan did not succeed for Chrysaphius, he tried another and was again troublesome to Eudocia, urging her to incite the Emperor he is ordered by the Emperor to ordain her as Deaconess, to secretly suggest to the Patriarch that he ordain Pulcheria as a Deaconess. When Eudocia pursued this, she finally bent the most gentle spirit of the Emperor by frequent suggestion. For a drop of water, falling more frequently, can hollow out even a stone. Theodosius revealed this secret to the Patriarch, whom he had summoned. And the Patriarch, cast into grief, seemed willing to do what was pleasing to the Emperor; he secretly warns her, but he informed Pulcheria by more secret letters not to come into his presence at all, lest he be compelled to do what would be disagreeable both to himself and to her. Pulcheria, immediately understanding what was happening, ordered the Steward to go over to Eudocia, and she herself, leaving the city, led a tranquil private life at the Septimum. and thereby incurs the hatred of the Emperor: But the Emperor and Eudocia were thereafter most greatly angered at Flavian, because he had divulged that secret plan. With Pulcheria thus expelled, the state was administered through the hands of Eudocia." So Nicephorus. Eudocia was the wife of the Emperor Theodosius, instructed in the Christian faith by St. Pulcheria and promoted to that marriage, since she was the daughter of the philosopher Leontius, as was said at length on January 8, Section 8 of the Life of St. Atticus, Bishop of Constantinople, who baptized her.
Section II. The provincial Synod held at Constantinople by St. Flavian. The Eutychian heresy detected and condemned.
[4] While these things were thus being done (so Nicephorus continues), Flavian convened a provincial Synod at Constantinople, he convenes a Synod at Constantinople: to which forty Bishops came. The acts of this Synod, comprising various sessions, still exist, and are inserted into the first session of the Fourth Ecumenical Council held at Chalcedon; where, however, only thirty-two Bishops and twenty-four Archimandrites are listed as having subscribed to the seventh session. But among them is not recorded Florentius, Metropolitan of Sardis, in whose favor the Synod seems initially to have been assembled. It begins thus: "In the consulship of Flavius Zeno and Posthumian, most illustrious men," that is, A.D. 448, "on the sixth day before the Ides of November, in the most Christian and royal city of Constantinople, New Rome, the holy and great Synod being assembled, found in the aforesaid most magnificent city, in the secretarium of the Bishopric, with the most holy and blessed Archbishop Flavian presiding, he judges the case of Bishops: there was read the report sent by the most blessed Florentius, Bishop of the metropolis of Sardis in the province of Lydia, and by the most reverend Bishops John and Cossinius established under him, with the Clerics also present who had brought the same reports, and the form of what had been read was publicly promulgated." Among the Bishops subscribing to the seventh session of this Synod are Cossinius, Bishop of the city of Hierocaesarea of Lydia, and John, Bishop of the city of the Hyrcanians in the same Lydia, to which Eratosthenes (followed by Stephanus on Cities) and Strabo in Book 13 of the Geography ascribe Hyrkanion Pedion, the Hyrcanian Plain, so called from colonists brought there from Hyrcania. Florentius, Bishop of Sardis, the metropolis of Lydia, subscribed to the Council of Chalcedon, at which he also served as interpreter for Julian the Bishop, who was acting as the representative of St. Leo, the Roman Pontiff.
[5] Present with St. Flavian at this Synod of Constantinople was Eusebius, Bishop of Dorylaeum in Phrygia Salutaris, he accuses Eutyches of heresy established as one of those sitting in judgment, who however is not found among the Bishops subscribing to the seventh session. This Bishop, as Nicephorus relates, because he was an associate of Eutyches, having once conversed with him about the faith, noticed that he did not hold correct opinions, and on this matter presented a petition to the Patriarch Flavian, who presided over the Synod. Flavian ordered it to be read for the purpose of hearing the case of Eutyches, and when it had been read, he said: "What has been read indeed astonishes us, he first wishes to admonish him privately, because such a charge is brought against the most reverend Priest and Archimandrite Eutyches. Yet let your reverence deign to meet with him and dispute with him about the right faith, and if it is truly found that he does not hold correct opinions, then he shall be summoned before the holy Council to defend his case." But when Bishop Eusebius refused to meet with Eutyches, St. Flavian insisted again: "Let your reverence bear with us," he said, "and again endure the trouble of going to the monastery and speaking to him what is fitting, and what pertains to peace, so that no further disturbance and confusion may arise for the holy Churches of Christ." But when Eusebius still insisted that Eutyches be summoned in person, then to summon him through various messengers in person, the Priest John and the Deacon Andrew were sent; and then on November 15, by the Fathers assembled in the third session, the Priests Mamas and Theophilus were delegated to him; and when these returned, Memnon the keeper of the sacred vessels, and Epiphanius, and Germanus the Deacon were sent. Finally on the following day, November 16, Abraham the Archimandrite came to the Synod, assembled for the fourth session, and reported that Eutyches was unable to come because of a worsening illness. To this, among other things, St. Flavian gave this reply: "How, I ask you, is it possible for one person to answer on behalf of another who is accused? Let him come here; he will come to Fathers and brothers, not to those who do not know him, and through another filling his place, paternally admonishes: but rather to those who have remained in friendship until now. If he went forth for the truth when Nestorius opposed the truth, how much more ought he now to go forth for the truth and for himself? We are human beings; many great men have been scandalized and have been deceived through imprudence and ignorance, thinking that they held right opinions. Repentance does not bring shame, but to persist in sin is a disgrace. Let him come, and to him confessing his fault and anathematizing it, we will give pardon for past offenses, and for the future let him safeguard both us and the holy Synod; namely, that he hold opinions in accordance with the expositions of the holy Fathers, and beyond these that he neither teach anyone hereafter nor dispute in anyone's presence. Do I want your dispersal? Far be it! Do I not rather want you to be gathered together? It is the part of enemies to scatter, but of fathers to gather."
[6] Eutyches had written books about his heresy and sent them to various monasteries for the purpose of having them approved by the subscription of Archimandrites and monks. he orders inquiry into Eutyches's books offered to various monasteries: When St. Flavian learned from the testimony of Abraham, a Priest at the Septimum, that this was true, he dispatched various persons from the Synod to various monasteries to search for the book sent by Eutyches and bring it to the Synod. These, having made their inquiry, reported on November 17, as is found in the fifth session, that various Archimandrites had received the volume of faith sent by Eutyches but had refused to subscribe to it. When Bishop Eusebius therefore insisted that Eutyches should be condemned from his own writings, St. Flavian replied: "All things that have been deposed against Eutyches are indeed sufficient to show that he holds opinions alien to the right faith and has hastened to disturb the Church, so that he should now be subject to canonical punishment and be stripped both of the priestly dignity which he holds and of the governance of his monastery. But for the sake of a fuller examination and the delays he has requested, he defers condemnation: we grant them; for if he appears, he will be confounded to his face. But if, according to his own promise, Eutyches does not appear on the next Monday, that is, the twenty-second day of this present month of November, he will be completely stripped of the dignity of the priesthood and removed from the governance of his monastery."
[7] Meanwhile Eutyches, in the manner of heretics, took refuge with the Emperor Theodosius, and, as Liberatus the Deacon observes in his Summary of the Nestorian and Eutychian Affair, Eutyches appearing amid soldiers, through the eunuch Chrysaphius, whom Eutyches had received from the sacred font, he obtained from the Emperor that he should enter Flavian's Council together with Florentius the Patrician and the Grand Silentiary. This was done on the appointed day of November 22, when Eutyches came surrounded by a military guard, and after long evasions and verbal tricks, which are described in the seventh session, and denying the two natures of Christ, being compelled to reveal what he thought, he finally uttered the blasphemous heresy, saying: "I confess that our Lord was of two natures before the union; but after the union, I confess one nature." And when, after various investigation, his mind was found to be hardened, St. Flavian pronounced this sentence upon him in the name of the Synod: "In all things Eutyches, formerly a Priest and Archimandrite, has been found, both from what was previously done and now from his own confessions, to be sick with the perversity of Valentinus and Apollinaris, and to follow their blasphemies unchangeably; who, not respecting our persuasion and teaching, weeping, he condemns him in the Synod: refused to consent to right doctrines. Wherefore, weeping and groaning over his utter perdition, we have decreed through our Lord Jesus Christ, whom he has blasphemed, that he be a stranger from all priestly office and from our communion and the governance of his monastery; all who hereafter converse with him and associate with him knowing that they themselves will also be subject to the penalty of excommunication, as those who have not shunned his conversations. Flavian, Bishop of Constantinople, New Rome, judging, subscribed." In like manner the other Bishops and Archimandrites subscribed. And let these few things suffice concerning that Synod, from which the virtues of St. Flavian especially shine forth, the rest being omitted lest they cause weariness to the reader.
[8] St. Flavian soon informed St. Leo, the Roman Pontiff, by letter of the matters transacted in the Synod, desiring to have ratified by him he informs Pope St. Leo of everything, what he himself, together with the other Bishops, had decreed against Eutyches. That letter exists with others in the first part of the Council of Chalcedon, beginning thus: "Nothing restrains the poisons of the devil, nor contains his deadly arrows." Eutyches also wrote crafty letters full of lies to St. Leo, which he took care to have delivered to Rome more quickly through imperial ministers, the letters of St. Flavian being maliciously detained. Upon receiving these, St. Leo sent an epistle, which is numbered 8, admonishing St. Flavian to signify by a most complete report what novelty had arisen against the ancient faith, which had been deemed worthy of correction by a more severe sentence. St. Flavian soon wrote another letter, whose beginning is: "Nothing is more honorable for Priests than piety and the right preaching of the word of truth." In this letter Flavian makes public what Eutyches had rashly attempted after his condemnation, and refutes the lies written by him; after which he concludes thus, showing how great a force he knows to reside in Apostolic letters: "Being moved therefore, most holy Father, by all these things which have been presumed by him, and because of those things which have been and are being done against us and the most holy Church, act boldly according to your accustomed confidence, as befits the priestly office; and making the common cause your own and the discipline of the holy Churches, deign to decree together the condemnation lawfully made against him, also through your own writings; and strengthen the faith of our most pious Emperor, most devoted to Christ. and he trusts in his Apostolic letters: For the cause needs only your support and defense, by which you ought, with your own consent, to bring all things to tranquility and peace. For thus the heresy which has arisen and the tumults which have been caused on his account will be most easily destroyed, with God cooperating, through your most sacred letters. The Council too, which is rumored to be forthcoming, will be averted, so that the most holy Churches may nowhere be disturbed."
[9] So Flavian. But St. Leo, having read these letters and the synodal Acts, the various letters St. Leo sent, and having learned all that had been done against Eutyches by St. Flavian and the Synod, recognized the imposture of the wicked heresiarch, and wrote a famous letter on the Catholic faith and the Incarnation of the Word against this heresy to St. Flavian, whose beginning is: "Having read the letters of your charity, at whose tardiness we wonder, and having reviewed the order of the Episcopal acts, we have at last learned what scandal has occurred among you and what has arisen against the integrity of the faith." That letter exists, as a Catholic document to be communicated to all Bishops of all Churches, inserted into the second session of the Council of Chalcedon, which the Fathers and various Councils have followed with the highest praises and acclamations. It was given on the Ides of June, under the Consuls Asterius and Protogenes, most illustrious men, in the year 449.
Section III. The pseudo-synod of Ephesus against St. Flavian. His unjust condemnation at the instigation of Dioscorus.
[10] Meanwhile the eunuch Chrysaphius, offended by St. Flavian, left no stone unturned on behalf of Eutyches At the resumed Synod of Constantinople, to render the Acts of the Synod of Constantinople null and void, and to turn the penalty of condemnation upon Flavian himself. The Synod of Constantinople was therefore resumed in the Baptistery of the Great Church on the fifth day before the Ides of April, A.D. 449, at which thirty Bishops were present, and Florentius the Patrician was sent by the Emperor to attend; Thalassius, Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, was ordered to preside over the Synod. Three monks who would defend Eutyches were thrust in over the protests of the Bishops and contrary to the custom of Synods. The Acts were read again, the testimonies re-examined, and each point carefully investigated. But all adverse suspicion fell back upon the author: the acts of St. Flavian are approved, for the more carefully everything was explored, the more clearly the uncorrupted faith of St. Flavian shone forth, and the most wicked fraud and deceit of Eutyches was detected. All these things were accurately written down and woven into the first session of the Council of Chalcedon. After these proceedings in favor of St. Flavian, Eutyches devised other calumnies, crying out that St. Flavian held the same opinions as Nestorius. Therefore the Emperor, as Liberatus relates in the said Chapter 11, demanded from him a confession of faith written and subscribed by his own hand. Which Flavian presented to him of such a kind he gives the Emperor a confession of faith: that he pronounced anathema upon Nestorius and his followers. The very text of Flavian's confession of faith has been published in Part 1 of the Council of Chalcedon, and in Liberatus the Deacon.
[11] Furthermore, as Nicephorus relates in the mentioned Chapter 47 of Book 14, when the Bishops had approved the acts and decrees as legitimate by their authority, the eunuch Chrysaphius, who held the same opinions as Eutyches, exposed to the hatred of Chrysaphius, being unable to bear the insult, intensified his anger against Flavian in a wondrous manner, and indicated to the impious Dioscorus of Alexandria that he would gratify him in all matters that pleased him, if he would defend Eutyches in his danger, and oppose Flavian and Eusebius, Bishop of Dorylaeum. of the Empress Eudocia, In the same manner he also stirred up the Empress Eudocia, saying many things, but especially those which had befallen her bitterly from Pulcheria, on the grounds that Flavian had not kept concealed and silent the matter secretly entrusted to him. of the Emperor, These two persuaded Theodosius to order a second Synod at Ephesus to be held, which would adjudicate the case of Eutyches and Flavian, and to commit the judgment of sentences to the impious Dioscorus, and to place him at the head of the Synod, and also to send sufficient military forces to carry out the judgment. So Nicephorus. What followed, Liberatus the Deacon relates in Chapter 12: "Therefore Dioscorus wrote to the Emperor Theodosius that another general Synod ought to be held; and Eutyches persuaded that it should be done. The Emperor assented and, directing a sacred letter (so they used to call the letters of Emperors) to Dioscorus in Alexandria, and of Dioscorus of Alexandria, he commanded that with ten Metropolitan Bishops, whom he might choose as he wished, he should come to Ephesus; and that having assembled a universal Council, he should examine the case of Eutyches, ordering the Archimandrite Barsumas to be present at the Council and to act on behalf of the monks who were accusing the Eastern Bishops. A general Council was held at Ephesus, to which both Flavian and Eutyches came, with Eutyches he is summoned to the Pseudo-Synod of Ephesus: but as those to be judged: Juvenal and Thalassius and all those Metropolitan Bishops with their Councils, and the Judges of the Council of Constantinople who had condemned Eutyches. But Dioscorus had with him the strongest soldiers of the state together with the monks of Barsumas. And when those Bishops were seated in the basilica of the Mother of God Mary, the Deacons of the Roman Church, acting as representatives of Pope Leo, were not permitted to sit, because precedence had not been given to their holy See; and moreover because the letter of Leo to Flavian, directed through the above-mentioned Legates to that very Synod, had not been read." So Liberatus concerning the announced and assembled Synod; which is more fully reported, together with various letters both of the Emperor to the Synod, to Dioscorus, to Barsumas, and others, and of Pope St. Leo and others, published with the Council of Chalcedon, and thence transferred by Baronius into the Ecclesiastical Annals.
[12] This Synod of Ephesus had been appointed for the Kalends of August, but began on the fourth day before the Ides of the same month; it was called by the Greeks, as Nicephorus attests, leistrike, "predatory" or "robber synod." To this synod, at the suggestion of Count Elpidius, Eutyches was admitted, and with the approval of the Bishops was ordered to plead his case and set forth what he believed concerning the faith. he does not obtain the opportunity of defense, When a document of faith had been presented by him and read before all in the Synod, St. Flavian asked that a place be given to the accuser and that Bishop Eusebius of Dorylaeum be ordered to enter; but he was rebuffed, and Eusebius was forbidden admission to the assembly of the Bishops. So he afterwards complained before the Fathers assembled at the Council of Chalcedon, where the entire blame was cast upon Count Elpidius, and by him upon the Emperor now deceased, as though he had decreed that Flavian, who was formerly the Judge, should not make any petition, but in this Synod should stand as the accused to be judged; and conversely, Eutyches, who had already previously fulfilled the role of accusation, should now be the accuser. And so both Eusebius and Flavian had been summoned by the Emperor not to prosecute the case against Eutyches, but to be judged in the Synod.
[13] When Dioscorus then, with the agreement of some, wished to have read the proceedings against Eutyches at Constantinople, Julian, the Legate of the Apostolic See, objected, the Legates of St. Leo being rejected, saying he would not allow the Acts to be read unless the letter of Pope St. Leo was first read. St. Hilary also testified that the same should be done -- he who was then a Deacon and Legate of the same Apostolic See, but after the death of St. Leo became the Roman Pontiff. The shameless Eutyches objected that these Legates had been rendered suspect to him because they had dined with St. Flavian. The petition of the Legates being therefore rejected, the Acts were publicly read, and the Eutychian heresy was confirmed. and the Eutychian heresy defended by force, Those who were on the side of Dioscorus exclaimed: "After the union, two natures in Christ are not to be spoken of, but one." And anathema was pronounced against those who would admit two natures. But the remaining Bishops testified at the Council of Chalcedon that violence had been done to them, where at the first session they uttered these mournful words: "Condemnation was threatened against us; threats of exile were held over us; soldiers with clubs and swords pressed upon us. We feared the swords and clubs. Where there are swords and clubs, what kind of Synod is it?" And then: "All the Egyptians rose up, and the monks who followed Barsumas, and the whole crowd, and they began to say: 'He who says two natures, cut him in two! He who says two natures is a Nestorian!'" Struck by this violence, the principal Bishops were driven headlong into ruin: Domnus of Antioch, Juvenal of Jerusalem, Stephen of Ephesus, he protests in vain: Thalassius of Caesarea in Cappadocia and others; and while St. Flavian protested in vain and testified that he had not been heard, they ratified the acquittal of Eutyches by their subscription.
[14] After these events the way was opened to greater crimes, namely that St. Flavian, with Eutyches thus absolved, should be condemned for heresy. The Acts of the earlier Synod of Ephesus against Nestorius were therefore re-read and approved by this Synod. To these Dioscorus appended this sentence of condemnation: he is condemned, with heresy imputed to him by Dioscorus, "Since the holy and great Synod which was long ago assembled at Nicaea by the will of God set forth our right and undefiled faith, which the holy Synod recently assembled here also confirmed, and decreed that this alone should be held as the rule and transmitted in the Church, ordaining also that it should not be lawful for anyone to set forth or inquire into or introduce any other faith besides this, or in any way to disturb our venerable religion; and that those who attempt, contrary to these things, either to think or to seek or to compose, or in any way to re-examine what has been ordained, should be subject to certain condemnations -- so that if they are Bishops, they should be deprived of the episcopate, and Clerics of the clergy; and if they are laymen, they should be deprived of communion -- for we have learned these things from the records read above. But it is apparent (as all your holiness and the universal Synod foresees) that Flavian, formerly Bishop of the Church of Constantinople, and Eusebius of Dorylaeum, renewing and changing nearly everything, have become the occasion of scandal and disturbance to the most holy Churches and to Catholic peoples everywhere. It is certain that these men are, of themselves, subject to the condemnations long ago defined by the holy Fathers in their synodal decrees. Wherefore we too, confirming those things, judge the aforementioned, that is, Flavian and Eusebius, to be deprived of all priestly and episcopal dignity. Let each of the most religious Bishops confess his own will and make it manifest under the guarantee of the records. Let all things that have been done today be made known to the most pious, Christ-loving Emperors."
[15] So far the impious sentence of Dioscorus. What followed was related by the Bishops assembled at Chalcedon, where the following is added in the first session: "Then Flavian said: and consent extorted by force from the other Bishops: 'I appeal against you.' Hilary, Deacon of the Roman Church, said: 'There is an objection.' Then Onesiphorus, Bishop of Iconium, taking other Bishops with him, rose and took hold of the knees of Dioscorus himself, saying: 'Do not, by the steps of your reverence! Flavian has done nothing worthy of condemnation; but if he is worthy of rebuke, let him be rebuked.' Dioscorus, rising from his throne and standing upon his footstool, said: 'Even if my tongue were cut off, I will not utter another word.' And when the Bishops persisted, holding his knees and beseeching him, Dioscorus uttered this word: 'Where are the Counts?' Then the Counts entered and brought in the Proconsul with a great multitude and chains. On account of which each of us subscribed." Their names, up to ninety-six, are found repeated with great ignominy at the Council of Chalcedon, when Bishop Acacius testified thus: "We subscribed to blank sheets, compelled and by violence, and having suffered many evils, unwillingly; but also oppressed by power we signed. For they kept us shut up in the church until evening, and though we were sick they did not permit us to rest or allow us to take any refreshment, but set soldiers with clubs and swords over us, and thus they made us sign." So reads that passage.
[16] Pope St. Leo, informed by St. Hilary the Deacon, who had escaped by flight, wrote the following to St. Pulcheria: "And those Legates indeed Pope St. Leo detests that Synod. who were sent by us (of whom one, escaping the violence of the Bishop of Alexandria who claimed everything for himself, faithfully reported to us the order of events) protested in the Synod, as was proper, against not so much the judgment as the fury of one man, testifying that the things done by violence and fear were contrary to the sacraments of the Church and
could not prejudice the very Creed instituted by the Apostles, nor were they to be separated from that faith, which they had brought most fully expounded and set forth from the See of Blessed Peter the Apostle to the holy Synod." So St. Leo to St. Pulcheria, and he writes the same to Theodosius; and Hilary himself also writes to the same Pulcheria. These letters exist in Part 1 of the Council of Chalcedon, together with several others of the same Leo to St. Flavian, one of which we append here.
"Leo the Bishop to his dearest brother Flavian.
How much and how greatly your charity suffers for the defense of the Catholic faith, we have learned through the Deacon who secretly escaped from Ephesus. and sends consolatory letters to St. Flavian: And although we glorify God who strengthens you with the power of his grace, it is nevertheless necessary to grieve at the ruin of those through whom the truth is attacked and the very foundations of the whole Church are shaken. But since the providence of God always provides his people with the necessary help, your brotherhood should know that we are neglecting nothing that must be done for the common cause, so that we may first deserve to arrive at those things which will benefit the whole body of the faithful. In the meantime, let your charity bravely endure what it does not doubt will be profitable for eternal glory. The bearer of this brief letter will be able to narrate faithfully in his own words whatever it is to which, with the Lord's help, we are directing our zeal for faith and charity. Given on the third day before the Kalends of October, under the Consuls Asterius and Protogenes, most illustrious men." At which time, unknown to St. Leo, St. Flavian had already attained the palm of martyrdom.
Section IV. The impious deposition of St. Flavian, his beatings, imprisonment, exile, and martyrdom.
[17] Evagrius, Book 1 of the Ecclesiastical History, Chapter 10, describes the insane conventicle at Ephesus, "the irrational assembly at Ephesus," and enumerates the various Bishops deprived of their dignity and episcopal See. St. Flavian is cast down from his episcopal See, with others; These were chiefly St. Flavian, of whom we are treating here, and his companion in condemnation Eusebius of Dorylaeum; then Ibas of Edessa, Daniel of Carrhae, Irenaeus of Tyre, Aquilinus of Byblus, Theodoret of Cyrrhus, as well as Domnus, Bishop of the Church of Antioch, whose fall (for he had previously favored Eutyches) St. Euthymius had long before predicted, as is read in his Life on January 20, Chapter 9, number 56. How highly Theodoret esteemed St. Flavian is indicated by the following letter addressed to the same Flavian, which exists as number 11 among his letters in Volume 3 of his works, he is adorned with an illustrious encomium by Theodoret, and is as follows: "The Creator and Ruler of all things has displayed you as a most brilliant light of the world, and has converted the dark night into pure noonday. And just as a fire placed upon a watchtower near a harbor shows those navigating by night the entrance to the port, so the radiance of your holiness has shone as the greatest consolation upon those afflicted for the cause of piety, and has laid open the harbor of the Apostolic faith; it has filled those who know with joy and freed the ignorant from the rocks. But I above all praise the Giver of good things, having found a vigorous defender who by divine fear shakes off human terror, who fights eagerly for the doctrines of the Gospel, and willingly undertakes Apostolic struggles. And so now every tongue is roused to the praises of your holiness. For not only the followers of piety proclaim your sincere faith, but even the enemies of truth greatly commend your fortitude. For falsehood yields to the splendors of truth. I write these things now, knowing that the most reverend and devout Hypatius the Reader both obeys the bidding of your holiness with a ready spirit and makes perpetual mention of your outstanding deeds, my Lord. Embracing your holy and God-beloved head, we pray that you may support us with your prayers, so that we may spend what remains of life according to the divine laws." So Theodoret.
[18] Meanwhile, as Liberatus the Deacon attests in Chapter 12, Flavian and Eusebius were committed to custody. from prison he appeals to the Apostolic See: Flavian, however, against the sentence pronounced against him, appealed to the Apostolic See through its Legates by a petition. "Moreover, those holding the place of Pope Leo had contradicted all that had been done." So that passage reads. St. Leo also mentions this petition presented by St. Flavian, in his letter to the Emperor Theodosius, number 20, published before the Council of Chalcedon, which he begins thus: "For a long time and from the beginning, in the Councils that have been held, we have received from the most blessed Peter, the Prince of the Apostles, such confidence that we have the authority to defend the truth for our peace, so that no one may be permitted to disturb it, thus fortified, in any way, since the injury is immediately removed. Therefore, since the Council of Bishops which you ordered to be held in the city of Ephesus on account of Flavian is proved to be harmful to the Faith itself and to wound all the Churches... all the Churches of our regions, all the Priests, with groans and tears supplicate your Clemency that, since our representatives faithfully protested and Flavian the Bishop gave them a petition of appeal, you would order a general Synod to be held within Italy, which may either repel or mitigate all offenses, so that there may be nothing further that is doubtful in faith or divided in charity. Given on the third day before the Ides of October, under the Consuls Asterius and Protogenes, most illustrious men." The same Pope St. Leo wrote to the Clergy and people of Constantinople a letter full of consolation and exhortation, in which he says: "But now, by St. Leo he is judged the true Bishop of Constantinople, since we have learned that your Church has been dispersed in this manner, we have believed that you should be consoled and exhorted by our letters, so that you may resist the wickedness of the faithless in defense of the Catholic faith. For we do not wish your charity to be struck by this sorrow, since a greater glory is about to follow your constancy, if no threats, no fear, has torn you away from your worthy Priest. For whoever, while your Bishop Flavian is safe and alive, dares to invade his priesthood, shall never be held in our communion, nor shall he be counted among the Bishops. Given on the Ides of October." As also the following letter to the same Clergy and people of Constantinople. They exist as numbers 22 and 23 before the Council of Chalcedon.
[19] But before that time, as we noted above, St. Flavian had died. "After all these things had been perpetrated by Dioscorus," he becomes a Martyr, overwhelmed by injuries and beatings, says Liberatus the Deacon, "Flavian, beaten and subjected to many injuries, departed to the Lord from the pain of his wounds." At which passage Baronius exclaims at this year 449, number 105: "It was entirely fitting, it was fitting that so great a Bishop should earn the crown of martyrdom for so worthy and noble a cause. It was likewise fitting that the title of the rights of the Apostolic See and the primacy of the Roman See -- namely, the right of appeal from an ecumenical Synod to the Roman Pontiff -- should be sealed and consecrated by the blood of so great a Martyr." But who is considered to have perpetrated so great a crime, the authors vary. Evagrius, Book 2, Chapter 2, from the account of Eusebius, Bishop of Dorylaeum, his companion in captivity, by Dioscorus committing violence, writes that Flavian was killed in a wondrous manner by Dioscorus, violently thrust out of the church by him and kicked. And therefore perhaps Sabas, Bishop of Paltus, at the third session of the Council of Chalcedon, calls the same Dioscorus a new Cain. But Nicephorus, in the said Chapter 47 of Book 14, attributes his death to the ministers of Dioscorus and Chrysaphius in these words: and by the ministers of Chrysaphius, "Moreover Flavian, a most holy man, after that illegitimate deposition, driven from the Synod by violent pushings and kicks by the faction of Dioscorus and Chrysaphius, on the third day after, blessedly exchanged his life." Certainly the Fathers who were then present testified that the chief minister of this most criminal faction was the Archimandrite Barsumas, when the matter of those monks was discussed at the fourth session of the Council of Chalcedon, and especially the Archimandrite Barsumas where the following is read: "Diogenes, the most reverend Bishop of Cyzicus, said: 'Barsumas, who entered among them, killed Blessed Flavian. He himself pressed on and said: Kill him! And he is not named in the petitions -- why did he enter?' All the most reverend Bishops cried out: 'Barsumas has overthrown all Syria! He led a thousand monks against us! And when the monks were admitted, the most reverend Bishops cried out: Send Barsumas the murderer outside! The murderer to the arena, that is, with the gladiators! Anathema to Barsumas! Barsumas to exile!'"
[20] The exile which the Fathers decreed for this Barsumas seems to have been previously decreed by him and his accomplices in crime for St. Flavian. Thus in Indiction II, under the Consuls Protogenes and Asterius, Marcellinus writes in his Chronicle: previously condemned to exile, "Flavian the Bishop, in the second Synod at Ephesus, by the violence of Dioscorus, Bishop of Alexandria, and of the eunuch Saturninus, to Epipa, was exiled to Epipa." Baronius confirms this in his Notes to February 18, from a manuscript codex which is held in the Vatican library, number 1855, in which after several letters of the Roman Pontiffs there is read a booklet of an unknown author, who however is reported to have written about the affairs of his own century; and he cites this beginning: "In our own century indeed, but at an interval of time, Nestorius and Eutyches," etc. From it he cites this about Flavian: or whether he was sent to Hypaepa in Lydia: "Flavian is led into exile, and at Epypa, which is a city of Lydia, whether by death overtaking him or death inflicted, he died." Ptolemy, Book 5 of the Geography, Chapter 2, places among the cities of Lydia and Maeonia the city of Hypaepa, which we judge is here called Epipa or Epypa. So much for the place of exile decreed; but whether he departed from Ephesus is very uncertain, as is the day on which he underwent martyrdom. Theophanes describes the death as follows: "He too, even before the decree of deposition, thrust out by the pushings and kickings of Dioscorus's agents, on the third day exchanged his life for death." Hence we suppose he died in the month of August, whose death Pope St. Leo had not yet heard of he dies in the month of August. when he wrote his letters about St. Flavian on the third day before the Ides of October, and then on the Ides of October, to the Emperor Theodosius, St. Pulcheria, the Clergy of Constantinople, and others. Theophanes observes that from the beginning the mind of Dioscorus had been averse to Flavian, on account of certain assistance given to the relatives of St. Cyril. This insane fury of Dioscorus did not cease even with the death of St. Flavian, but, as Nicephorus attests, he himself even leaped upon the belly of the deceased champion of truth with his heels; and then, having returned to Alexandria, he convoked a Council and excommunicated Pope St. Leo.
Section V. The relics of St. Flavian brought to Constantinople. His sanctity and innocence declared at the Council of Chalcedon, defended by the Emperors.
[21] The Emperor Theodosius, whose excessively pliant mind the eunuch Chrysaphius, whose surname was Taiumas, turned wherever he wished, as Theophanes relates, in the last year of his life, with Chrysaphius banished, as the same asserts, weighing his own affairs more carefully and recognizing that he had been circumvented by the deceits of Chrysaphius, conceived the greatest grief of soul over the impious crimes perpetrated against Flavian and the injuries inflicted upon the other Bishops. Breaking forth therefore into anger, he first banished Chrysaphius to a certain island; and Eudocia having departed for Jerusalem, then he attacked more harshly Eudocia, who had been severely rebuked, calling her the author of all the evils, since she had driven Pulcheria from the court... She, in her desperate circumstances, asked to be sent to Jerusalem, and having received the Priest Severus and the Deacon John as companions for the journey, she made for Jerusalem. But the Emperor, hearing that those two had frequently visited her previously in the City, and were now found with her at Jerusalem, and that moreover they were being enriched with many gifts by her, sent letters and ordered them to be punished with death. Then finally, having earnestly solicited Blessed Pulcheria with many entreaties, he brought her back to the court; Pulcheria returns to the court: and she immediately sent men to Ephesus to carry away the body of St. Flavian and to bear it with a great escort of pomp through the middle of the City and inter it for burial in the church of the Holy Apostles. she arranges for the body of St. Flavian to be brought: So Theophanes. But Nicephorus, Book 14, Chapter 49, describes that translation thus: "Pulcheria, recalled, returned as soon as possible with great preparation and a large retinue to the Imperial court; sending certain men to Ephesus, she translated the sacred body of Flavian from there to the imperial City, and having borne it through the middle of the city with reverence and a celebrated procession, she deposited it splendidly and devoutly within the sanctuary of the temple of the holy Disciples of Christ." So that passage reads; and these events, as is clear from the letter of St. Pulcheria, were accomplished after the death of her brother Theodosius, by the command of her husband, the reigning Marcian. For Theodosius, as the same Theophanes says, "died on the twentieth of June, [after the death of Theodosius on June 20, A.D. 450, she succeeds with her husband Marcian:] in the third Indiction," A.D. 450. Marcian, taken by St. Pulcheria as her husband, soon succeeded. "Blessed Pulcheria," says Theophanes, "handed over the eunuch Chrysaphius, hated by all, to Jordan, the son of John (whom Chrysaphius had killed), and Jordan punished him with an equal penalty of death." The same is read in Cedrenus. And thus Chrysaphius, as Marcellinus attests in his Chronicle, "was killed at the bidding of Pulcheria along with his greed" -- that most hostile enemy of St. Flavian and the greatest supporter of Eutyches and Dioscorus.
[22] Concerning the orthodox religion vigorously championed by the Emperor Marcian and his wife Pulcheria, there exists a letter of the same St. Pulcheria to Pope St. Leo, published as number 35 before the Council of Chalcedon, in which she also informs him that the body of St. Flavian has been translated to Constantinople, that the faith of his successor Anatolius has been examined, and that the other exiled Bishops have been restored to their Sees. We append the letter itself as an irrefutable testimony to the sincere faith and sanctity of Flavian and of the related events then transacted, and it is as follows:
"To Leo, the most reverend Bishop of the glorious Church of the City of Rome, Pulcheria Augusta. We have received the letters of your blessedness with all the veneration befitting every Bishop, through which we have recognized your faith to be pure and such as ought to be offered with holiness to the sacred temple. I indeed, and likewise my Lord, the most tranquil Emperor, my husband, have always remained and remain in the same faith, both defend the orthodox faith, declining all depravity and pollution and wickedness. The most holy Bishop of glorious Constantinople, Anatolius, has therefore remained in the same faith and religion, with Anatolius, Bishop of Constantinople, and embraces the Apostolic confession of your letters, that error being removed which has now arisen from certain persons, as your Holiness will be able to recognize more clearly also from his letters; and he has likewise subscribed without any delay to the letter of the Catholic faith which your blessedness directed to the Bishop Flavian of holy memory. And therefore let your reverence deign to indicate in whatever manner it shall see fit, so that all the Bishops of the entire East, Thrace, and Illyricum, as it has also pleased our Lord, the most pious Emperor my husband, prepared to convene an Ecumenical Council, may be able to assemble quickly from the eastern regions into one city; and there, a Council being held, they may decree, under your authority, both concerning the Catholic confession and concerning those Bishops who were previously separated, as faith and Christian piety require. Beyond these things, let your Holiness know that, by the command of our Lord and most tranquil Prince, my husband, they translate the body of St. Flavian to Constantinople: the body of the Bishop Flavian of holy memory has been brought to the glorious city of Constantinople and has been fittingly placed in the basilica of the Apostles, where the preceding Bishops have been accustomed to be buried. And likewise he has commanded by the force of his pragmatic decree that those Bishops who, for the same reason -- because they had concurred with the most holy Flavian in the harmony of the Catholic faith -- were deported into exile, should return, so that by the approval of the Synod and the sentence of all the convening Bishops, they may be decreed to receive their episcopates and their own Churches."
[23] So St. Pulcheria. Upon receiving her letter, or having been informed of the matters contained in it, Pope St. Leo wrote to the Emperor Marcian, congratulating him among other things on the defense of the faith. This is Epistle 44, in which he says: for which Pope St. Leo praises them: "For so that the integrity of my brother Anatolius might be more quickly manifested, and the revived champion of the error long ago condemned might have no place in the Church of Christ; so that the Catholic Bishops, whom the recent persecution of the heretics was unable to corrupt, might be recalled from their unjust exiles; and so that, the relics of Flavian of blessed memory having been received with worthy honor, his condemner might recognize his own impiety -- this is the mark of your virtue, this is the fruit of your piety..." Given on the fifth day, or according to others the seventh, before the Ides of June, under the Consul Adelphius, a most illustrious man, that is A.D. 451. "Furthermore," and he requests a general Council. says Theophanes, "Blessed Leo, the Roman Pope, requested by his letters that the things which had been attempted at Ephesus against St. Flavian by the reckless audacity of Dioscorus and Eutyches be re-examined and discussed in a general Council. The Emperor indeed commanded that all the Bishops be assembled."
[24] The Fourth Ecumenical Synod was then celebrated in the city of Chalcedon, beginning on the eighth day before the Ides of October and concluded in thirteen sessions on the Kalends of November, A.D. 451. At the Synod of Chalcedon The Emperor Marcian and the Empress Pulcheria attended, together with Magistrates and Senators. In it the "Robber Synod" previously held at Ephesus was annulled, Eutyches and Dioscorus were condemned, and the faith of St. Flavian was praised. There, at the third session, Zenodotus, Bishop of the city of Termessus in Pamphylia Secunda, said: "Dioscorus ought not to be indignant at submitting to a just judgment, St. Flavian is judged to have been unjustly condemned, who unjustly condemned the former Bishop Flavian of holy memory, who was in no way shown worthy of condemnation, as the records read before this holy Council have shown; and who, being summoned in the present by the holy Synod through the most holy Fathers once, twice, and a third time according to the order of the divine canons, refused in the least to appear and answer his accusers. Justly therefore let him be removed from the episcopal See and from all ecclesiastical status." And at the eleventh session, when the case of Bassian, Bishop of Ephesus and Primate of all Asia, deposed by Pope St. Leo and St. Flavian, was being examined, his adversary Bishop Stephen said: "The most holy Archbishop of Rome, Leo, condemned him because he was made contrary to the rules." Cecropius, the most reverend Bishop of Sebastopolis, said: "Lord Stephen, how much can Flavian of blessed memory do even after death!" The most reverend Bishops and Clergy of Constantinople cried out: "The truth is so. We all say the same: and he is invoked as a Martyr: eternal memory to Flavian! Eternal memory to the Orthodox! Behold the vindication, behold the truth! Flavian lives after death! The Martyr will pray for us! Flavian after death has set forth the faith! Flavian is here! The Orthodox is here! Many years to the Emperor! Flavian judges with us!" So the Fathers spoke, and the one whom the holy Flavian of blessed memory had expelled four years before, they excluded from episcopal governance.
[25] After the Ecumenical Synod was concluded, the Fathers in their report to Pope St. Leo concerning all the general proceedings call Flavian "that blessed one among the Saints, the Pastor of Constantinople, who set forth the Apostolic faith." He is held by St. Leo as a defender of Catholic truth: And St. Leo, in a letter to his successor Anatolius, praises his predecessor "Flavian of blessed memory, cast out for his defense of Catholic truth." But above all others, the edict of the Emperors is illustrious, by which those things which had been unjustly brought against St. Flavian are nullified, and those things which had been established concerning him at the holy Synod of Chalcedon are confirmed; this we give here from the third part of the Council of Chalcedon, and it is as follows:
"The Emperors Valentinian and Marcian Augusti, to Palladius, Prefect of the Praetorium of the East; to Valentinian, Prefect of Illyricum; by a decree of the Emperors Valentinian and Marcian, to Tatian, Prefect of the City; to Vincomalus, Master of the Divine Offices and Consul designate."
"Glory is never destroyed by the death of glorious men, nor do virtues perish with the dying; on the contrary, the reputation of good men is even increased by their departure, because all envy against the dead fades away. Hence with such zeal and praises are the deeds of ancestors lauded; hence the memory of the best men is celebrated with the greatest veneration; hence the spirits of great men have sought glorious endings -- because it has been found that only those die forever about whose life and death silence is kept. That this is so, both the divine and the human judgment of the present time has shown. For when Flavian, of religious and venerable memory, had been expelled from the episcopate of this nourishing city by false envy and a wickedly fabricated calumny (although this was rather to retain the priesthood more fully, he is declared innocent, preserving the faith which he had received; for he alone deserves to be a Bishop), yet this royal city both sought and received his relics in such a way that he seemed more blessed than any living man; so that the end which was thought to be bitter he himself is recalled to Constantinople through his relics, should be believed to have been desirable, by which he obtained that immortal praise. And there followed what the Divinity granted to his merits: that a venerable Synod of nearly innumerable Priests should assemble at Chalcedon, which, while it diligently investigated the faith, by the authority of the most blessed Leo, Bishop of the eternal city of Rome, both confirmed the foundations of religion he is brilliantly honored at the Synod of Chalcedon. and awarded to Flavian the palm of his past life and the glory of his death. Therefore, since Flavian of venerable memory has been adorned with so great and such a testimony, that Eutyches, who had thought otherwise, was condemned by all with one voice together with his wicked teachings, let that decree be abolished which is known to have been issued against him by the fraud of the wicked after the death of Flavian of holy memory, and let those things entirely cease whose beginning was unjust. the decree of Theodosius against him is rescinded. And let the unjust sentence be no hindrance also to Eusebius and Theodoret, devout Bishops, who are included in the same law; since Priests cannot be condemned by a decree whom a Synodal decision adorns. Therefore, that decree being expelled, let him retain the perpetual praise of his life and glory which he deserves, being a future example of constancy toward the faith for others. Let therefore your most illustrious and magnificent authority cause this most salutary law to be brought to the notice of all by published edicts. Given at Constantinople on the day before the Nones of July, under the Consul Sporatius, a most illustrious man, and whoever shall have been announced." So reads that passage. That year was 452, under the Consuls Herculanus and Sporatius, and in the next following year 453 the Consuls were the above-mentioned Vincomalus and Opilio. This decree of the Emperors, which is found in the final part, has been incorporated into the Justinian Code, in the law "Since," concerning Bishops and Clergy.
[26] When the Emperor Marcian died in A.D. 457, Leo succeeded him, to whom letters written by various Bishops exist in Part 3 of the Council of Chalcedon. Among these, while Sebastian the Bishop urges him to embrace the said Council, he writes among other things: "Those who were condemned in it and decreed unworthy of the pontifical state, suffered this sentence of the great God as impious men. In a letter to the Emperor Leo he is called a second Abel. But those who were received, having endured an unjust and tyrannical circumvention for a short time, were suddenly and justly received by the decree of the Holy Spirit; among whom the second Abel of our times was Blessed Flavian."
Section VI. The sacred cult of St. Flavian; the time of his episcopate at Constantinople.
[27] After the death of Pope St. Leo on April 11, A.D. 461, St. Hilary was created pope, who as Leo's former Legate had been present at the Robber Synod at Ephesus and had bravely opposed himself with the other Legates in defense of St. Flavian against the impiety of Eutyches and Dioscorus. by Pope St. Hilary He, later created Supreme Pontiff, out of his affection for St. Flavian, as Cardinal Baronius is our witness at the year of Christ 449, number 108, in that wonderful and most noble oratory of the Holy Cross, his life and struggles expressed in mosaic in the Oratory of the Holy Cross, which he built at the right of the atrium of the Baptistery of Constantine and most magnificently adorned, left memorials of this struggle expressed in mosaic work -- namely, the crown of St. Flavian arising from the faith defended, the palm, worthy trophies, and triumph, when indeed, attacked with kicks by Dioscorus and the rest of his satellites, he obtained glorious martyrdom. These and other things were expressed in mosaic on the wall and vault of the oratory, which, having collapsed through the decay of time, afterwards restored in paintings, so that scarcely a few traces survived, were restored in paintings, and indeed of crude and rough craft, in keeping with that century when, on account of the wars continually pressing upon Italy, the noble arts too had collapsed along with the sciences. But to the sorrow of all the pious, and especially of those devoted to ecclesiastical affairs, so outstanding a monument -- the entire oratory -- we have seen leveled to the ground under Pope Sixtus. But may the memory of Flavian, which was cast down with the walls, live on, at least restored on paper, under the illustrious title of the Holy Cross, to endure forever. destroyed with the oratory. So Baronius. St. Hilary the Pope is venerated on September 10, on which day he died in A.D. 467.
[28] The Greeks celebrate the sacred memory of St. Flavian, Patriarch of Constantinople, in the Menaea on February 16, His memory in the Martyrologies where they say he was cast into exile by the heretic Dioscorus and his conciliable by God's permission, having held the See for one year and ten months. Moreover, that in exile he endured many afflictions for the orthodox faith, and finally departed from illness. The same is also reported in the Menologion of Maximus Cytheraeus for the same February 16. In the Menologion of the Greeks, however, from the library and interpretation of Cardinal Sirletus, edited by Henry Canisius, he is venerated on February 18 in these words: "Of our holy Father, Archbishop of Constantinople, Flavian, and on February 18. who, cast out by the impious Dioscorus and the heretics conspiring with him, and sent into exile, and harassed by various pressures and afflictions, departed this life." On the same day the Western Church celebrates his memory in the Calendar of the Roman Martyrology with this proclamation: "At Constantinople, of St. Flavian, Bishop, who, while he defended the Catholic faith at Ephesus, was beaten with blows and kicks by the faction of the impious Dioscorus, and driven into exile, and after three days ended his life." Below, in the Lessons of the proper Office recited at Giulianova, and in the Notes of Baronius, it is said that on this day the solemn translation of the body to Constantinople is celebrated, of which we treated above. In the manuscript Florarium of the Saints the following is read for December 12: "At Constantinople, of St. Fabianus, Bishop and Confessor." December 12, There was no Fabianus among the Bishops of Constantinople; yet by that name St. Flavian is also called in the universal manuscript Chronicle of Theodericus Pauli of Gorinchem, where he is wrongly placed before St. Proclus, and yet is reported to have presided over that Church in the time of the Emperor Marcian and November 24. and of Pope St. Leo. We shall say below that he is also venerated on November 24.
[29] The same duration of his See as in the Menaea is assigned by Nicephorus the Bishop in his Chronology: "The fortieth Bishop, Flavian, a Priest of Constantinople, one year and ten months." How long did he live as Bishop? After he was deposed by Dioscorus at that treacherous Synod at Ephesus, Anatolius, a Priest and secretary of Dioscorus, was installed. But he later condemned Dioscorus at the Council of Chalcedon. Cedrenus also confines his episcopate to that period, reporting that he succeeded Proclus in the thirty-ninth year of Theodosius, and that the infamous Synod assembled at Ephesus took place in the forty-first year of the same. But while Cedrenus asserts that both Cyril of Alexandria and Proclus of Constantinople died at the same time, it does not seem that his episcopate should be confined within the bounds of two or three years. We treated St. Cyril on January 28 and showed that he lived only until the year 445. Concerning St. Proclus, the following is certain: when the Bishop Maximian died, [Proclus, his predecessor, was made Bishop of Constantinople in the year 434, on April 12,] on the day before the Ides of April, a Thursday before Easter, under the Consuls Areobindus and Aspar, and before he was even buried, Proclus, previously Bishop of Cyzicus, was placed in the See of Constantinople by the Bishops, with the Emperor Theodosius consenting. So Socrates, who was then living, Book 7, Chapter 49. This corresponds to A.D. 434, Lunar cycle 17, Solar cycle 23, Dominical letter G, when Easter was celebrated on April 15. Furthermore, Theophanes in his Chronography and Nicephorus Callistus, Book 14, Chapter 37, relate that at the same time the admirable Cyril of Alexandria and the divine Proclus of Constantinople passed to immortal life, he held the See not just for 11 years, when the latter, says Nicephorus, had shone in that See for eleven years; in Greek: "having been distinguished for eleven years in addition to one." Therefore both would have died in A.D. 445: Cyril in the month of January, Proclus on October 24. And then St. Flavian, substituted for Proclus, would have held the See for three years and ten months. But Theophanes assigns twelve years to the See of St. Proclus; Nicephorus, Bishop of Constantinople, in his Chronology, but 12, and not 3 months, assigns the same twelve years and adds three months, which the Greeks in the Menaea and the Menologion of Maximus Cytheraeus and another manuscript of the Emperor Basil, cited by Vincentius Riccardus before the works of St. Proclus, also assign to him, though Riccardus argues that six months should be read among these, but 6, having died on October 24, A.D. 446. since the same authors say he was created Bishop on April 12 and died on October 24. Theophanes refers the death of the same Proclus and the beginning of the See of St. Flavian to the thirty-ninth year of the reign of Theodosius, A.D. 446, in which year Baronius also affirms that St. Flavian succeeded Proclus, and presided over the same Church for two years and ten months: namely from A.D. 446 and October 24 to A.D. 449 and the month of August, in which we said St. Flavian departed this life.
[30] Against this, however, others raise the following objections: that in Indiction 15, under the Consuls Ardaburius and Callepius, that is A.D. 447, The earthquake under St. Proclus did not occur in A.D. 447, an enormous earthquake at Constantinople is reported by Marcellinus Comes and the author of the Alexandrian Chronicle, by which the citizens were forced to live outside the city; in this earthquake a boy carried up to heaven heard the Trisagion hymn. Pope St. Felix remembers this event in his third letter to Peter Cnapheus, Bishop of Antioch, and records it as having occurred under Proclus. Petavius, Book 13 of the Doctrine of Times, fixes the death of St. Proclus on this account in the said year 447, and that Flavian then succeeded him; who by this reckoning would have sat at Constantinople for only one year and ten months, leaving thirteen years and six months for the episcopate of St. Proclus. But there is an error in the Alexandrian Chronicle, with events postponed by a full year: thus the Synod of Ephesus, in which St. Flavian was condemned and expelled, is not referred to the Consuls Protogenes and Asterius, under whom it is known with certainty to have been held, but to the following Consuls, Valentinian Augustus VII and Albinus, but in A.D. 446. or according to others, Avienus. In the same way that earthquake should be referred to the preceding Consuls both in the Alexandrian Chronicle and in Marcellinus, where that year, under the Consuls Ardeburius and Callepius, should begin with the war of Attila, to which is added: "In the same year the walls of the Imperial city, which had long since (therefore not in that year, and indeed when it was drawing to a close) collapsed in an earthquake, were rebuilt within three months."
[31] I add this one argument from the tenth session of the Council of Chalcedon, held on the fourth day before the Kalends of November, A.D. 451, where among other things the following is read concerning Bassian, Bishop of Ephesus: "He was expelled by the holy Fathers, [Bassian, Bishop of Ephesus, was expelled by St. Flavian the Bishop in the year 447.] and by the most holy Leo of the royal city of Rome, and by the most blessed Flavian of holy memory of the city of Constantinople, and by the Bishops of Alexandria and Antioch: for by these he was expelled." In Greek: "by these he was thrust out." And again: "Blessed Flavian of holy memory expelled him." In Greek: "he thrust him out." And concerning the time, this is interposed: "Today it is four years, and the Bishop of Rome deposed him, and the Bishop of Alexandria condemned him." In Greek, it is twice repeated: "he deposed him." By which word Theodoret also, Book 2 of the Ecclesiastical History, Chapter 8, indicates the abdication of Stephen the Arian Bishop. If therefore on October 29, A.D. 451, four years had already elapsed, then necessarily on October 29, A.D. 447, Bassian had already been deposed and expelled, the sentences of Pope Leo and Flavian, as well as of the Bishops of Antioch and Alexandria, having been previously communicated; which exchange of letters among persons so far apart shows that St. Flavian must necessarily have been a Bishop long before October 24, A.D. 447, and therefore that St. Proclus died in the immediately preceding year 446, which may be further examined at the date of his feast day.
Section VII. The relics of St. Flavian brought to Italy. An epitome of his life.
[32] The sacred bones of the most holy Bishop Flavian are preserved in Italy. But when they were brought there from Constantinople, we have not yet read. Recanati in Picenum In the March of Ancona (which the ancients called Picenum) Recanati is a rich and quite fine city, risen from the ruins of the ancient Recina, and close to Loreto, most famous throughout the entire world on account of the chapel of the Virgin Mother of God; and the piety of men toward the most blessed Virgin of Loreto has greatly profited and will profit it. In the Cathedral Church of this city of Recanati, among other sacred pledges, the arm of St. Flavian is venerated. there is the arm of St. Flavian: But the remaining bones of the body, along with the head, are honored with the most sacred worship in a town of Abruzzo, at Giulianova in Abruzzo, the head with other bones: called Giulianova after its founder Giulio Adriano, an outstanding military commander, whom Leander Albertus, in his Description of Italy, says was Lord of nearly the whole of this maritime district, who destroyed the town of San Floriano on account of the extreme harshness of its climate, and immediately founded a new one at his own expense three miles from the coast, giving it the name of Giulianova, where he transferred the colonists of San Floriano and also assigned them convenient fields. Among the neighboring villages, one is still called after St. Flavian, a village there named St. Flavian: which is a remarkable trace of a more ancient veneration. Of the Martyrology of Usuard at St. Germain in Paris, there are two manuscript copies: one very ancient, close to or equal in age to Usuard himself, the other more recent, yet written at least four hundred years ago or more, as our James Sirmond testifies in these words; through the efforts of both Sirmond and Jean Bartase we have a copy of both exemplars. In the more recent of these codices, the following words are read, written in the same ancient hand as the rest, for the eighth day before the Kalends of December: "In Abruzzo, of St. Flavian, Bishop and Confessor." venerated on November 24. On which day at both Recanati and Giulianova St. Flavian is indicated to be venerated, as the epitome of his Life, transmitted to us by our Antonio Beatillo from Naples, and transcribed from the Lessons approved by the Sacred Congregation of Rites and recited in the said Church of Giulianova, shows; it reads as follows:
[33] "Flavian, elected from Treasurer of the Church of Constantinople to the Patriarchate, was variously harassed by the eunuch Chrysaphius, the chamberlain of those Princes, Epitome of his Life, on account of the frustrated greed of the Emperor Theodosius and the ambition of Eudocia Augusta, his wife. He was the first to condemn Eutyches, who denied the two natures in Christ, in a Synod assembled at Constantinople, and banned him from the communion of the faithful. He also brought it about that he was condemned by St. Leo the First, the Roman Pontiff. Wherefore Chrysaphius, infected with the poison of Eutyches, unable to bear what he considered an injury, turned his hatred against Flavian and never ceased to contrive the final ruin of the most holy Patriarch. Therefore, having induced Theodosius through Eudocia, the minister of his cruelty, to convene a conventicle at Ephesus and to have Dioscorus, a supporter of Eutyches, preside over it, the proceedings against Eutyches were annulled at the conventicle of Ephesus; the heretic was restored to his former rank. But holy Flavian, stripped of all dignity, was moreover condemned to exile. But in an attack made by the Eutychians in the very sight of the conventicle, he was so badly beaten with blows, kicks, and clubs that after three days, laying down his victorious soul in the defense of the faith, he exchanged the place of exile for the heavenly fatherland. The triumph of St. Flavian is celebrated by the Greeks on the eighteenth of February, Translation of the relics. on which day his sacred body was honorably translated to Constantinople. By the Church of Recanati, where his arm is preserved, he is venerated with the highest devotion on the eighth day before the Kalends of December. The head and other relics of the body, translated from Constantinople to Giulia Vecchia, are venerated at Giulianova on the twenty-fourth of November and the eighteenth of February with great concourse of the people."