Amphilochius, bp. of Sida
Amphilochius (2), bp. of Sida in Pamphylia. Like his more famous namesake
of Iconium, he appears as an antagonist of the Messalians. He was urged, as one
of the Pamphylian metropolitans, to take measures against them in encyclical letters
written by two successive bps. of Constantinople, Atticus and Sisinnius (Phot.
Bibl. 52), and seems to have prosecuted the matter with zeal. He brought
forward the subject at the council of Ephesus (A.D. 431)
in conjunction with Valerianus; and in consequence of their representations the
council confirmed the decrees of former synods against these heretics (Labbe,
Conc. iii. 1331 seq., ed. Coleti). At this same council we find him assenting
to Cyril's letter, and subscribing in very strong language to the condemnation and
deposition of Nestorius (ib. pp. 1012, 1046, 1077, 1133). His conduct, later,
was marked by great vacillation, if not insincerity. It is sometimes stated that
he was present at the "Robbers' Synod" (A.D. 449), and there
committed himself to the policy of Dioscorus and the heresy of Eutyches (Le Quien,
Oriens Christ. i. 998); but his name does not appear in the list of bishops
assembled there (Labbe, Conc. iv. 889 seq.). At the council of Chalcedon,
however (A.D. 451), he shewed great tenderness for Dioscorus,
and here his career of tergiversation began. He tried to defer the second citation
of Dioscorus (iv. 1260); and when after three citations Dioscorus did not appear,
he consented to his condemnation, though with evident reluctance (iv. 1310, 1337).
At a later session, too, he subscribed his assent to the epistle of pope Leo (iv.
1358, 1366); and we find his name also appended to the canons of the council (iv.
1715). Thus he committed himself fully to the principles of this council, and to
the reversal of the proceedings of Latrocinium. But a few years later (A.D.
458) when the emperor Leo wrote to the bishops to elicit their opinions, Amphilochius
stated, in reply, that, while he disapproved the appointment of Timotheus Aelurus,
he did not acknowledge the authority of the council of Chalcedon (Evagr. H. E.
ii. 10). Yet, as if this were not enough, we are told that he shortly afterwards
assented and subscribed to its decrees (Eulogius in Phot. Bibl. 230).