Abstract
Abstract After the Reunion of 433 Alexandria and Antioch were in communion again but the fragile balance of power collapsed in the 440s. Cyrillians and dyophysites regarded each other as heretics and attempted to win over as many episcopal sees as possible. It is notable—and against previous scholarly assumptions—that until 448 Dioscorus remained on the side-lines, in contrast to Emperor Theodosius (408–450) whose mistrust towards Theodoret of Cyrrhus and other dyophysite near eastern bishops increased during the 440s. The bishop of Cyrrhus actively engaged in the controversy not the least through his literary oeuvre: by declaring the Council of Constantinople in 381 to have been ecumenical, he caused such a turmoil so that Emperor Theodosius summoned the Second Council of Ephesus in August 449. Presided by Dioscorus, the council deposed with Flavian of Constantinople, Eusebius of Dorylaeum, Theodoret, and Domnus of Antioch all leading dyophysite bishops in the Eastern Roman Empire. Theodosius wished to regard it as the third ecumenical council (after Nicaea in 325 and the First Council of Ephesus in 431) that should have ended questions of doctrine but Pope Leo denounced it as ‘robber-council’ and insisted to annul it. The chapter discusses particularly questions of the councils’ canonicity and Dioscorus’ role in it.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
