bishop’s dignity to refuse signing what he knows not
specifically when it is that which concerns the majesty of
the Faith”.^45
- Complete silence ensued. Then one of the bishops
accused Abba Dioscorus and his monks, headed by
Barsumas, of having assassinated bishop Flavianus.
Thereupon the Egyptians requested the reading of
Pulcheria’s letter to Leo, in answer to his plea for the
convocation of a council, and his reply to her. Both these
letters disclosed that Flavianus died in exile, and his body
was brought to Constantinople by Pulcheria and
Marcianus with due honour. After reading them, the
accuser felt shamed and discomfited. His feelings
permeated those bishops who were in league with him.
To dispel the tension, the imperial deputies asked the
chief notary to resume reading the minutes of the
Ephesian-Dioscorian council. He read to the point which
mentioned the Tomos of Leo; immediately the delegates
of the West interposed asking Abba Dioscorus why the
letter of their bishop had not been read. He replied: “I
ordered its reading, not once but twice”.^46 Again he was
asked: “Then why was it not read?” He answered: “Ask
my colleagues the bishops of Jerusalem and Antioch.
Juvenal then said: “When Dioscorus ordered its reading,
the chief notary had presented to us all the letters of his
imperial majesty Theodosius, of blessed memory, - and
these were naturally given precedence. After reading
them, none of the notaries reminded us of Leo’s Tomos,
so it was simply forgotten”.
This answer seemed to have satisfied the
questioners, for they kept quiet.