EUTYCHIANISM. The teaching of Eutyches, who was archimandrite of a monastery near Constantinople. In 44S A.D. he was definitely accused of heresy by Euse bins of Dorylaeum, at a synod convened in Constan tinople. When Eutyches refused to present himself, deputies were sent to him to ascertain his views exactly. According to their report, he said that he was unable to find in the writings of the Fathers of the Church the doctrine that Jesus Christ subsisted of two Persons united in one Hypostasis; and that in any case he could not accept such a doctrine, as it is not found in Holy Scripture. He held that He who was born of the Virgin Mary was very God and very man, but that His body was not of like substance with ours. Summoned to come to the synod in person, antyches again refused. To those who were sent to qnestion him again, he is said to have argued that the word homoaus-ios (" of the same substance ") does not occur in Holy Scripture, but was derived from the Fathers, as was also the affirmation of the two natures. Finally Eutyches presented himself, but his answers to the questions put to him were of the same kind, and were considered unorthodox. He was condemned to be " excluded from all priestly functions, from our communion, and from his primacy in his monastery." Eutyches and Dioscorns, patriarch of Alexandria, requested the Emperor to summon another synod. This was done, and in 449 the synod met at Ephesus, the chief opponent of Eutyches being Flavian, bishop of Constantinople. Eutyches was acquitted, but
the synod became known a-s the Latrocinium or Robber Synod on account of its violence. " The Christian world was rent in pieces by its proceedings. Egypt, Thrace, and Palestine ranged themselves with Dioscorus and the emperor; Syria, Pontus, Asia, Rome, protested against the treatment of Flavian and the acquittal of Eutyches " (Wace and Piercy). In 451 a fourth great Council of the Church met at Chalcedon. At this the verdict of the Latrocininm was reversed, and Eutyches was condemned. It was decreed that Christ must be " acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, in separably, the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one person and one hypostasis, not parted or divided into two persons, hut one and the same Son and Only-begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ, as the prophets from the beginning have declared concerning Him, and the Lord Jesus Christ Himself has taught us, and the creed of the holy Fathers has delivered to us." Eutyches was crushed, hut Eutychlanism still exists. See William Benham; J. H. Blunt; the Prot. Diet.; Waee and Piercy.