Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series 1, Vol. 7 (Augustine: Gospel and Epistle of John)

Ten deputies, who at the close of the Council of Seleucia had been appointed to report its proceedings to the Emperor, “met, on their arrival at the Court, the deputies of the Council of Ariminum, and likewise the partisans of Acacius.” After much controversy and many intrigues, a mutilated and ambiguous creed adopted at Ariminum—in which the ὁμοούσιος of Nicaea was replaced by “like to the Father that begat Him according to the Scriptures,” and the mention of either “essence” (οὐσία) or “subsistence” (ὑπόστασις) condemned—was brought forward and approved by the Emperor. “After having, on the last day of the year 359, discussed the matter with the Bishops till far into the night, he at length extorted their signatures.... It is in this connection that Jerome says: original: "Ingemuit totus orbis, et Arianum se esse miratus est" 'The whole world groaned and marveled to find itself Arian.'” Early in the following year, 360 A.D., through the influence of Acacius, a new synod was held at Constantinople, in which, among other Semi-Arian Bishops, Cyril also was deposed on the charge of having held communion with Eustathius of Sebaste, Basil of Ancyra, and George of Laodicea. Cyril, as we have seen, had become acquainted with these Bishops during his residence at Tarsus in 358, at which time they were all zealous opponents of Acacius and his party, but differed widely in other respects.

George of Laodicea was a profligate in morals, and an Arian at heart, whose opposition to Acacius and Eudoxius was prompted by self-interest rather than by sincere conviction. He had been deposed from the priesthood by Alexander, Bishop of Alexandria, both on the ground of false doctrine and of the open and habitual irregularities of his life. Athanasius styles him “the most wicked of all the Arians,” reprobated even by his own party for his grossly dissolute conduct.

Basil of Ancyra was a man of high moral character, great learning, and powerful intellect, a consistent opponent both of the Sabellianism of Marcellus and of every form of Arian and Anomœan heresy, a chief among those of whom Athanasius wrote, “We discuss the matter with them as brothers with brothers, who mean what we mean, and dispute only about the word (ὁμοούσιος).... Now such is Basil who wrote from Ancyra concerning the Faith.”

Eustathius is described as a man unstable in doctrine, vacillating from party to party, subscribing readily to creeds of various tendency, yet commanding the respect even of his enemies by a life of extraordinary holiness, in which active benevolence was combined with extreme austerity. “He was a man,” says Mr. Gwatkin, “too active to be ignored, too unstable to be trusted, too famous for ascetic piety to be lightly made an open enemy.”

S. Basil the Great, when traveling from place to place to observe the highest forms of ascetic life, had met with Eustathius at Tarsus and formed a lasting friendship with a man whom he describes as “exhibiting something above human excellence.”

Of any intimate friendship between Cyril and these Semi-Arian leaders, we have no evidence in the vague charges of Acacius: their common fault was that they condemned him in the Synod of Seleucia. The true reason of Cyril’s deposition, barely concealed by the frivolous charges laid against him, was the hatred of Acacius, incurred by the refusal to acknowledge the metropolitan jurisdiction of the See of Cæsarea. The deposition was confirmed by Constantius and followed by a sentence of banishment. His banishment did not last longer than two years. Constantius died on the 3rd of November, 361, and the accession of Julian was soon to follow.