John Chilas, Metropolitan of Ephesus

the wretch accomplished nothing, but accomplished this alone, that he sold the land to the Latins for two hundred thousand pounds of gold. ^A Hence also there is much wailing, and the smoke, as has been said before, is intolerable, coming from the North. Time would fail anyone wishing to set these things forth in detail.

6. The present state of this place is no whit inferior to a sea tossed by an immense tempest and a violent storm; nay, it is worse than a savage sea. For the ferocity of that sea is succeeded by a calm; but here the surge increases every day, and its violent onrush has no end, unless perhaps it should hear: "Hitherto thou shalt come, and shalt go no further, but here shall thy waves be broken" [Job xxxviii, 11]. In the book of Leviticus [Levit. xxvi, et seqq.] those disasters which have befallen our land are clearly written: to wit, wars, defeats, sowings in vain, the consumption of our labors by adversaries; and our strength has come to nothing; and we have become few; and an alien people has multiplied in our land. ^B "If you walk contrary to me," says God, "I will also walk contrary to you in fury." And indeed so it is. For surely, if a sick man does not limp, the physician does not bring the incision with sharpness and cauterization. It is clear that we, too, if we had not greatly provoked our all-good physician and walked contrary to him, he would not have been minded to act contrary to us, filling us salutarily with bitterness.

ANNO DOMINI MCXCV.

JOANNES CHILAS

METROPOLITAN OF EPHESUS

NOTITIA AND FRAGMENTS

Among the Vatican codices which contain dogmatic controversies concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit also from the Son, or concerning the primacy of the Roman Church, or other questions arising through schism and the agitation of minds, I have said elsewhere that many Greek treatises occur, one or two of which I shall particularly commemorate, and from which I shall draw excerpts. And first of all, I saw a very learned little book by Joannes Clidas (or Chilas), metropolitan of Ephesus, written on account of the detestation of schism; and indeed in a double copy, one more extensive in codex Ottob. 225, the other, however, comprised in more concise language in codex Ottob. 213. Allatius makes ^C scarce mention of the man and his writing in *Contra Creyghtonum*, p. 644, and *De consensu*, p. 513, and finally *De Methodiis*, p. 367 and 377, in which last place he also recites a small part. For that other particle which is read on p. 514 *De cons.* emanates from a different writing of the Ephesian. This Joannes was the fifth among the metropolitans of Ephesus by this name, who became known at the time of the Constantinopolitan synod, under Andronicus the Second, son of Michael the Eighth, which was gathered for the sake of calming the movements of the Greek Church, or the schism between the Arsenites and the Josephines, stirred up on account of the ambition for the patriarchal see. Although, however, it is said in Le Quien's *Oriens Christianus* that the Ephesian did not take part in the synod, we now perceive that the contrary happened; for indeed

he recited this discourse before the synod or presented it, regarding the removal of the schism, a discourse copious and eloquent, and full of ecclesiastical learning: similar to which is the treatise of the monk Methodius, written at the same time and for the same occasion, and published by us in the third volume of *Scripta vetera*. Wherefore both works, on account of their general condemnation of schisms, seem very useful and prudent. The title and beginning of this work in the Vatican codex Ottob. 213 are as follows.

The discourse of John, Metropolitan of Ephesus, composed against the schismatics, proving from various canons and scriptural demonstrations that, since the Church is orthodox, some persons absurdly separate themselves from her.

There is nothing in human life more exalted and sweeter than charity, and nothing in the world more useful and delightful than peace and concord; for God is, and is called, love. And the peace that is according to God and of God surpasses every mind, as we have been taught. These are the things which persuaded the Creator and Master of all both to incline the heavens and to descend upon the earth. And indeed He has descended, and for our sake and in our likeness, sin excepted, He has truly become man; and, both doing and suffering all human things, He proclaimed the good of peace to those who are near and to those who are far. The most faithful Emperor of our race, desiring these—peace, that is, and charity—more than any other, has convened all, as you see, in this place, that with God he himself might also announce to us the blessings of peace, and dissolve the long-standing war, and lead back those who are at variance to their ancient communion. ^A

^B The Ephesian then proceeds to describe and lament the history of the schisms of the various churches throughout the world, and of the Greeks themselves among one another, in a very expansive discourse, and to chastise them by the authority of the canons and of the ancient Fathers. The sum of the discourse is that the Ephesian denies that any schism is ever lawful unless for an evident and judged cause of heresy: for other offenses, even if they must be punished with penalties, are not, however, of such magnitude that they should compel the supreme evil of secession—much less is it lawful, as the holy Basil says, to bring such great destruction upon the peoples of God on account of some pettiness of mind or bitterness. In this doctrine, long handed down, the Greek writes a memorable sentiment: "Note this doctrine, which perhaps will profit those who wrongly say that we have separated from Rome before he himself or his followers have been condemned as harboring evil dogma." This is well put: nevertheless, because of what is said in folio 25 b, the Ephesian must be judged a schismatic. For there he praises Andronicus, because, having obtained the scepter, he immediately professed the ancestral (that is, his father's) dogma, having excluded everyone else on account of their foreignness, and because he rejected all novelty and corruption of doctrine, etc.; by which words he seems to signify and applaud the return of Andronicus to the schism after the death of his parent Michael, which occurred in the year 1282.

I omit the rest, which is much, until the author writes below on ecclesiastical prudence, namely, that when necessity or some grave force is urgent (except in the matter of faith), one must decline from the strict law of the canons, lest, while we wish to hold a part firmly, we lose the whole. He confirms this sentiment by the authority of Saint Cyril, in a brief Epistle to Gennadius the archimandrite, which is among those published in Volume V, Part II, page 191. The Ephesian soon proceeds to strengthen his purpose with various examples, and having recited part of the Epistle of Pope John VIII to Emperor Basil, which is read in the Photian synod, he discusses the antiquity of many canons changed on account of the times; which passage I shall therefore record here all the more willingly, because I have published the summaries of two Latin collections of canons in this volume; for however good these canons may be, and most of them useful, they are certainly not so immobile and fixed that the authority of the Church, according to the exigencies of things and times, cannot prudently vary them.

Here are the words of the Ephesian from cod. 213, f. 202: "Note also these things, for perhaps those who wrongly [(1)] say that we have separated from Rome before he and those with him were condemned as evil-minded will be benefited." ^{C D}

As for all the canons of the ancients which the bishops and great Fathers who followed them consigned to total neglect, why need we speak? Those who are schooled in the sacred teachings of the canons know them well. For where is that canon which commands bishops to live with their own wives? Where is that which orders schismatics and heretics to be rebaptized? Where, again, is the one which determines that there are seven deacons and only seven in each of the cities? Where is the one which, after we have eaten on the great Thursday, legislates our participating in the dread mysteries of Christ, perhaps in imitation of that Lord’s Supper? Where is that one which entrusted the election of, and the vote for, bishops to the multitudes of the people? It would be a long task now to select all the dormant and ignored canons and bring them into the open. ^B

JOANNIS CHILAS, METROPOLITAN OF EPHESUS, LIBELLUS TO EMPEROR ANDRONICUS THE ELDER ON THE PROCESSION OF THE HOLY SPIRIT

The common belief of the Church recognizes the procession as the immutable property of the most holy Spirit, and as expressing nothing other than His natural existence from the Father alone. Therefore, to think and to write of this procession—now, indeed, in theological contexts, as meaning the very existence [of the Spirit], but now again as expressing His eternal manifestation, or illumination, or revelation—is blasphemous and alien to the apostolic dogmas, and therefore worthy of being struck with anathema. ^C Again, the common judgment of the Fathers knows and confesses the producer of the most holy Spirit as Cause, just as the Begetter of the Son is Cause. Likewise, it is fully confessed among all that "production" and "procession" mean the same thing. Therefore, whoever, holding a different opinion from this, either thinks, or declares, or commits to writing in any other way—one time, that is to say, signifying by "production" the Cause of the holy Spirit, and by "production from the Father" His natural existence; but at another time signifying by [these terms] revelation, and that eternal explanation, or illumination, or revelation of the most holy Spirit—this person is openly a blasphemer among us and a manifest prevaricator, and is therefore worthy of being cast out and detested. By the same reasoning, again, the "production" spoken of regarding the most holy Spirit, and the sole ^D