Page:Introduction to the Assyrian church.djvu/157

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
BAR-SOMA AND ACACIUS
151

monophysite Shimun of B. Arsham,[1] is a proof that there was no controversy in the Church as yet. Still, things were uneasy. In particular there was trouble, if not with the Government, yet with the Magians, in spite of the royal favour to particular Christians. It is possible that we ought to date the imprisonment of Babowai the patriarch somewhere in the period 470–480,[2] and it is certain that those years saw what we may call a minor persecution. Churches were burnt and Christians imprisoned, though we have no evidence that there were any martyrdoms.

A more dangerous thing was, that the relations between the patriarch and Bar-soma became exceedingly hostile. We have no information as to what the casus belli may have been; but both were Assyrians, and therefore not prone to peace; and of Bar-soma we know that he had separate quarrels with almost every authority, colleague or subordinate, with whom he came in contact. Babowai used discipline,[3] righteously or otherwise, on some bishops, who fled to Bar-soma and found the prelate of Nisibis ready to take their part. Bar-Hebræus hints, and quite possibly with truth, that the attempt to enforce episcopal celibacy was at the root of this trouble between the two. Apparently this was a point on which party feeling ran high; and though there was no canon on the matter, a strict section wished to enforce it, while a majority were strongly opposed to its enforcement. Whatever the cause, the two quarrelled fiercely, even while persecution was threatening, and while things were so the patriarch made a fatal

  1. Assem. declares Shimun to have been orthodox, but a man who accepted the Henoticon and rejected Chalcedon can only have belonged to one party in sympathy.
  2. Bedj., ii. 631–634.
  3. Bar-soma, Letter 3. Syn. Or., 528, 534; Bedj., ii. 631.