The Ecclesiastical History of Theodoret

Advanced Information

Translated with Notes by the Rev. Blomfield Jackson, M.A.
Vicar of St. Bartholomew's, Moor Lane, and Fellow of King's College, London.

Under the editorial supervision of Philip Schaff, D.D., LL.D., Professor of Church History in the Union Theological Semimary, New York, and Henry Wace, D.D., Principal of King's College, London

Published in 1892 by Philip Schaff, New York: Christian Literature Publishing Co.

Book I.

Prologue.--Design of the History.

When artists paint on panels and on walls the events of ancient history, they alike delight the eye, and keep bright for many a year the memory of the past. Historians substitute books for panels, bright description for pigments, and thus render the memory of past events both stronger and more permanent, for the painter's art is ruined by time. For this reason I too shall attempt to record in writing events in ecclesiastical history hitherto omitted, deeming it indeed not right to look on without an effort while oblivion robs [235] noble deeds and useful stories of their due fame. For this cause too I have been frequently urged by friends to undertake this work. But when I compare my own powers with the magnitude of the undertaking, I shrink from attempting it. Trusting, however, in the bounty of the Giver of all good, I enter upon a task beyond my own strength. Eusebius of Palestine [236] has written a history of the Church from the time of the holy Apostles to the reign of Constantine, the prince beloved of God. I shall begin my history from the period at which his terminates. [237]

Footnotes

[235] sulao. Cf. 2 Cor. xi. 8 [236] Cf. Basil de Spir. Sanct., 29. "ho palaistinos" means "of C�sarea," his see, to distinguish him from his namesake, Bishop of Nicomedia. [237] The last event mentioned by Eusebius is the defeat of Licinius, who was put to death a.d. 324.

Chapter I.--Origin of the Arian Heresy.

After the overthrow of the wicked and impious tyrants, Maxentius, Maximinus, and Licinius, the surge which those destroyers, like hurricanes, had roused was hushed to sleep; the whirlwinds were checked, and the Church henceforward began to enjoy a settled calm. This was established for her by Constantine, a prince deserving of all praise, whose calling, like that of the divine Apostle, was not of men, nor by man, but from heaven. He enacted laws prohibiting sacrifices to idols, and commanding churches [238] to be erected. He appointed Christians to be governors of the provinces, ordering honour to be shown to the priests, and threatening with death those who dared to insult them. By some the churches which had been destroyed were rebuilt; others erected new ones still more spacious and magnificent. Hence, for us, all was joy and gladness, while our enemies were overwhelmed with gloom and despair. The temples of the idols were closed; but frequent assemblies were held, and festivals celebrated, in the churches. But the devil, full of all envy and wickedness, the destroyer of mankind, unable to bear the sight of the Church sailing on with favourable winds, stirred up plans of evil counsel, eager to sink the vessel steered by the Creator and Lord of the Universe. When he began to perceive that the error of the Greeks had been made manifest, that the various tricks of the demons had been detected, and that the greater number of men worshipped the Creator, instead of adoring, as heretofore, the creature, he did not dare to declare open war against our God and Saviour; but having found some who, though dignified with the name of Christians, were yet slaves to ambition and vainglory, he made them fit instruments for the execution of his designs, and by their means drew others back into their old error, not indeed by the former method of setting up the worship of the creature, but by bringing it about that the Creator and Maker of all should be reduced to a level with the creature. I shall now proceed to relate where and by what means he sowed these tares.

BELIEVE
Religious
Information
Source
web-site

Our List of 2,300 Religious Subjects

E-mail

Alexandria is an immense and populous city, charged with the leadership not only of Egypt, but also of the adjacent countries, the Thebaid and Libya. After Peter [239] , the victorious champion of the faith, had, during the sway of the aforesaid impious tyrants, obtained the crown of martyrdom, the Church in Alexandria was ruled for a short time by Achillas [240] . He was succeeded by Alexander [241] , who proved himself a noble defender of the doctrines of the gospel. At that time, Arius, who had been enrolled in the list of the presbytery, and entrusted with the exposition of the Holy Scriptures, fell a prey to the assaults of jealousy, when he saw that the helm of the high priesthood was committed to Alexander. Stung by this passion, he sought opportunities for dispute and contention; and, although he perceived that Alexander's irreproachable conduct forbade his bringing any charges against him, envy would not allow him to rest. In him the enemy of the truth found an instrument whereby to stir and agitate the angry waters of the Church, and persuaded him to oppose the apostolical doctrine of Alexander. While the Patriarch, in obedience to the Holy Scriptures, taught that the Son is of equal dignity with the Father, and of the same substance with God who begat Him, Arius, in direct opposition to the truth, affirmed that the Son of God is merely a creature or created being, adding the famous dictum, "There once was a time when He was not [242] ;" with other opinions which may be learned from his own writings. He taught these false doctrines perseveringly, not only in the church, but also in general meetings and assemblies; and he even went from house to house, endeavouring to make men the slaves of his error. Alexander, who was strongly attached to the doctrines of the Apostles, at first tried by exhortations and counsels to convince him of his error; but when he saw him playing the madman [243] and making public declaration of his impiety, he deposed him from the order of the presbytery, for he heard the law of God loudly declaring, "If thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee [244] ."

Footnotes

[238] ekklesia. The use of the word in 1 Cor. xi. 18 indicates a transition stage between "Assembly" and "Building." The brethren met "in assembly:" soon they met in a church. Cf. Aug. Ep. 190, 5. 19: "ut nomine ecclesi�, id est populi qui continetur, significemus locum qui continet." Chrysost. Hom. xxix. in Acta: hoi progonoi tas ekklesias okodomesan [239] Succeeded Theonas as Archbishop of Alexandria, a.d. 300. Beheaded by order of Maximinus, a.d. 311. Euseb. vii. 32. [240] Patriarch of Alexandria, a.d. 311-312. Promoted Arius to the priesthood. Soz. i. 15. [241] Patriarch, a.d. 312-326. [242] en pote hote ouk en [243] korubantionta [244] ean...skandalize, St. Matt. v. 29 and xviii. 9; ei...skandalizei, cf. Mark ix. 43

Chapter II.--List of the Principal Bishops

Of the church of Rome at this period Silvester [245] held the reins. His predecessor in the see was Miltiades [246] , the successor of that Marcellinus [247] who had so nobly distinguished himself during the persecution. In Antioch, after the death of Tyrannus [248] , when peace began to be restored to the churches, Vitalis [249] received the chief authority, and restored the church in the "Pal�a [250] " which had been destroyed by the tyrants. He was succeeded by Philogonius [251] , who completed all that was wanting in the work of restoration: he had, during the time of Licinius, signalised himself by his zeal for religion. After the administration of Hermon [252] , the government of the church in Jerusalem was committed to Macarius [253] , a man whose character was equal to his name, and whose mind was adorned by every kind of virtue. At this same period also, Alexander, illustrious for his apostolical gifts, governed the church of Constantinople [254] . It was at this time that Alexander, bishop of Alexandria, perceiving that Arius, enslaved by the lust of power, was assembling those who had been taken captive by his blasphemous doctrines, and was holding private meetings, communicated an account of his heresy by letter to the rulers of the principal churches. That the authenticity of my history may not be suspected, I shall now insert in my narrative the letter which he wrote to his namesake, containing, as it does, a clear account of all the facts I have mentioned. I shall also subjoin the letter of Arius, together with the other letters which are necessary to the completeness of this narrative, that they may at once testify to the truth of my work, and make the course of events more clear. The following letter was written by Alexander of Alexandria, to the bishop of the same name as himself.

Footnotes

[245] Bp. of Rome, from Jan. 31, a.d. 314, to Dec. 31, a.d. 335. [246] Otherwise Melchiades. July 2, a.d. 310, to Jan. 10, a.d. 314. [247] Jan. 30, a.d. 296, to Oct. 25, a.d. 304. Accused of apostasy, under Diocletian. [248] Bishop of Antioch during the persecution of Diocletian, kath' hon ekmasen he ton ekklesion poliorkia. Eus. H.E. vii. 32. [249] 21st Bp. of Antioch, a.d. 312-a.d. 318. [250] The ancient part of the city of Antioch. [251] a.d. 319-323. [252] a.d. 302-311. [253] Macarius = Blessed. a.d. 311-?334. Vide Chapters iv. and xvii. [254] Circa ?a.d. 313 or 317-340.

Chapter III.--The Epistle of Alexander, Bishop of Alexandria to Alexander, Bishop of Constantinople.

"To his most revered and likeminded brother Alexander, Alexander sendeth greeting in the Lord. "Impelled by avarice and ambition, evil-minded persons have ever plotted against the wellbeing of the most important dioceses. Under various pretexts, they attack the religion of the Church; and, being maddened by the devil, who works in them, they start aside from all piety according to their own pleasure, and trample under foot the fear of the judgment of God. Suffering as I do from them myself, I deem it necessary to inform your piety, that you may be on your guard against them, lest they or any of their party should presume to enter your diocese (for these cheats are skilful in deception), or should circulate false and specious letters, calculated to delude one who has devoted himself to the simple and undefiled faith. "Arius and Achillas have lately formed a conspiracy, and, emulating the ambition of Colluthus, have gone far beyond him [255] . He indeed sought to find a pretext for his own pernicious line of action in the charges he brought against them. But they, beholding his making a trade of Christ for lucre [256] , refused to remain any longer in subjection to the Church; but built for themselves caves, like robbers, and now constantly assemble in them, and day and night ply slanders there against Christ and against us. They revile every godly apostolical doctrine, and in Jewish fashion have organized a gang to fight against Christ, denying His divinity, and declaring Him to be on a level with other men. They pick out every passage which refers to the dispensation of salvation, and to His humiliation for our sake; they endeavour to collect from them their own impious assertion, while they evade all those which declare His eternal divinity, and the unceasing [257] glory which He possesses with the Father. They maintain the ungodly doctrine entertained by the Greeks and the Jews concerning Jesus Christ; and thus, by every means in their power, hunt for their applause. Everything which outsiders ridicule in us they officiously practise. They daily excite persecutions and seditions against us. On the one hand they bring accusations against us before the courts, suborning as witnesses certain unprincipled women whom they have seduced into error. On the other they dishonour Christianity by permitting their young women to ramble about the streets. Nay, they have had the audacity to rend the seamless garment of Christ, which the soldiers dared not divide. "When these actions, in keeping with their course of life, and the impious enterprise which had been long concealed, became tardily known to us, we unanimously ejected them from the Church which worships the divinity of Christ. They then ran hither and thither to form cabals against us, even addressing themselves to our fellow-ministers who were of one mind with us, under the pretence of seeking peace and unity with them, but in truth endeavouring by means of fair words, to sweep some among them away into their own disease. They ask them to write a wordy letter, and then read the contents to those whom they have deceived, in order that they may not retract, but be confirmed in their impiety, by finding that bishops agree with and support their views. They make no acknowledgment of the evil doctrines and practices for which they have been expelled by us, but they either impart them without comment, or carry on the deception by fallacies and forgeries. Thus concealing their destructive doctrine by persuasive and meanly truckling language, they catch the unwary, and lose no opportunity of calumniating our religion. Hence it arises that several have been led to sign their letter, and to receive them into communion, a proceeding on the part of our fellow-ministers which I consider highly reprehensible; for they thus not only disobey the apostolical rule, but even help to inflame their diabolical action against Christ. It is on this account, beloved brethren, that without delay I have stirred myself up to inform you of the unbelief of certain persons who say that "There was a time when the Son of God was not [258] ;" and "He who previously had no existence subsequently came into existence; and when at some time He came into existence He became such as every other man is." God, they say, created all things out of that which was non-existent, and they include in the number of creatures, both rational and irrational, even the Son of God. Consistently with this doctrine they, as a necessary consequence, affirm that He is by nature liable to change, and capable both of virtue and of vice, and thus, by their hypothesis of his having been created out of that which was non-existent, they overthrow the testimony of the Divine Scriptures, which declare the immutability of the Word and the Divinity of the Wisdom of the Word, which Word and Wisdom is Christ. `We are also able,' say these accursed wretches, `to become like Him, the sons of God; for it is written,--I have nourished and brought up children [259] .' When the continuation of this text is brought before them, which is, `and they have rebelled against Me,' and it is objected that these words are inconsistent with the Saviour's nature, which is immutable, they throw aside all reverence, and affirm that God foreknew and foresaw that His Son would not rebel against Him, and that He therefore chose Him in preference to all others. They likewise assert that He was not chosen because He had by nature any thing superior to the other sons of God; for no man, say they, is son of God by nature, nor has any peculiar relation to Him. He was chosen, they allege, because, though mutable by nature, His painstaking character suffered no deterioration. As though, forsooth, even if a Paul and a Peter made like endeavours, their sonship would in no respects differ from His. "To establish this insane doctrine they insult the Scriptures, and bring forward what is said in the Psalms of Christ, `Thou hast loved righteousness and hated iniquity, therefore thy God hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows [260] .' Now that the Son of God was not created out of the non-existent [261] , and that there never was a time in which He was not, is expressly taught by John the Evangelist, who speaks of Him as `the only begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father [262] .' This divine teacher desired to show that the Father and the Son are inseparable; and, therefore, he said, `that the Son is in the bosom of the Father.' Moreover, the same John affirms that the Word of God is not classed among things created out of the non-existent, for, he says that `all things were made by Him [263] ,' and he also declares His individual personality [264] in the following words: `In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God....All things were made by Him, and without Him was not any thing made that was made [265] .' If, then, all things were made by Him, how is it that He who thus bestowed existence on all, could at any period have had no existence himself? The Word, the creating power, can in no way be defined as of the same nature as the things created, if indeed He was in the beginning, and all things were made by Him, and were called by Him out of the non-existent into being. `That which is [266] ' must be of an opposite nature to, and essentially different from, things created out of the non-existent. This shows, likewise, that there is no separation between the Father and the Son, and that the idea of separation cannot even be conceived by the mind; while the fact that the world was created out of the non-existent involves a later and fresh genesis of its essential nature [267] , all things having been endowed with such an origin of existence by the Father through the Son. John, the most pious apostle, perceiving that the word `was' applied to the Word of God [268] was far beyond and above the intelligence of created beings, did not presume to speak of His generation or creation, nor yet dared to name the Maker and the creature in equivalent syllables. Not that the Son of God is unbegotten, for the Father alone is unbegotten; but that the ineffable personality of the only-begotten God is beyond the keenest conception of the evangelists and perhaps even of angels. Therefore, I do not think men ought to be considered pious who presume to investigate this subject, in disobedience to the injunction, `Seek not what is too difficult for thee, neither enquire into what is too high for thee [269] .' For if the knowledge of many other things incomparably inferior is beyond the capacity of the human mind, and cannot therefore be attained, as has been said by Paul, `Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love Him [270] ,' and as God also said to Abraham, that the stars could not be numbered by him [271] ; and it is likewise said, `Who shall number the grains of sand by the sea-shore, or the drops of rain [272] ?' how then can any one but a madman presume to enquire into the nature of the Word of God? It is said by the Spirit of prophecy, `Who shall declare His generation [273] ?' And, therefore, our Saviour in His kindness to those men who were the pillars of the whole world, desiring to relieve them of the burden of striving after this knowledge, told them that it was beyond their natural comprehension, and that the Father alone could discern this most divine mystery; `No man,' said He, `knoweth the Son but the Father, and no man knoweth the Father save the Son [274] .' It was, I think, concerning this same subject that the Father said, `My secret is for Me and for Mine [275] .' "But the insane folly of imagining that the Son of God came into being out of that which had no being, and that His sending forth took place in time, is plain from the words `which had no being,' although the foolish are incapable of perceiving the folly of their own utterances. For the phrase `He was not' must either have reference to time, or to some interval in the ages. If then it be true that all things were made by Him, it is evident that every age, time, all intervals of time, and that `when' in which `was not' has its place, were made by Him. And is it not absurd to say that there was a time when He who created all time, and ages, and seasons, with which the `was not' is confused, was not? For it would be the height of ignorance, and contrary indeed to all reason, to affirm that the cause of any created thing can be posterior to that caused by it. The interval during which they say the Son was still unbegotten of the Father was, according to their opinion, prior to the wisdom of God, by whom all things were created. They thus contradict the Scripture which declares Him to be `the firstborn of every creature [276] .' In consonance with this doctrine, Paul with his usual mighty voice cries concerning Him; `whom He hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also He made the worlds [277] ' `For by Him were all things created that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by Him and for Him: and He is before all things [278] ' Since the hypothesis implied in the phrase `out of the non-existent' is manifestly impious, it follows that the Father is always Father. And He is Father from the continual presence of the Son, on account of whom He is called [279] Father. And the Son being ever present with Him, the Father is ever perfect, wanting in no good thing, for He did not beget His only Son in time, or in any interval of time, nor out of that which had no previous existence. "Is it not then impious to say that there was a time when the wisdom of God was not? Who saith, `I was by Him as one brought up with Him: I was daily His delight [280] ?' Or that once the power of God was not, or His Word, or anything else by which the Son is known, or the Father designated, defective? To assert that the brightness of the Father's glory `once did not exist,' destroys also the original light of which it is the brightness [281] ; and if there ever was a time in which the image of God was not, it is plain that He Whose image He is, is not always: nay, by the non-existence of the express image of God's Person, He also is taken away of whom this is ever the express image. Hence it may be seen, that the Sonship of our Saviour has not even anything in common with the sonship of men. For just as it has been shown that the nature of His existence cannot be expressed by language, and infinitely surpasses in excellence all things to which He has given being, so His Sonship, naturally partaking in His paternal Divinity, is unspeakably different from the sonship of those who, by His appointment, have been adopted as sons. He is by nature immutable, perfect, and all-sufficient, whereas men are liable to change, and need His help. What further advance can be made by the wisdom of God [282] ? What can the Very Truth, or God the Word, add to itself? How can the Life or the True Light in any way be bettered? And is it not still more contrary to nature to suppose that wisdom can be susceptible of folly? that the power of God can be united with weakness? that reason itself can be dimmed by unreasonableness, or that darkness can be mixed with the true light? Does not the Apostle say, `What communion hath light with darkness? and what concord hath Christ with Belial [283] ?' and Solomon, that `the way of a serpent upon a rock [284] ' was `too wonderful' for the human mind to comprehend, which `rock,' according to St. Paul, is Christ [285] . Men and angels, however, who are His creatures, have received His blessing, enabling them to exercise themselves in virtue and in obedience to His commands, that thus they may avoid sin. And it is on this account that our Lord being by nature the Son of the Father, is worshipped by all; and they who have put off the spirit of bondage, and by brave deeds and advance in virtue have received the spirit of adoption through the kindness of Him Who is the Son of God by nature, by adoption also become sons. "His true, peculiar, natural, and special Sonship was declared by Paul, who, speaking of God, says, that `He spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us [286] ,' who are not by nature His sons. It was to distinguish Him from those who are not `His own,' that he called Him `His own son.' It is also written in the Gospel, `This is My beloved Son in whom I am well pleased [287] ;' and in the Psalms the Saviour says, `The Lord said unto Me, Thou art My Son [288] .' By proclaiming natural sonship He shows that there are no other natural sons besides Himself. "And do not these words, I begot thee `from the womb before the morning [289] ,' plainly show the natural sonship of the paternal birth [290] of One whose lot it is, not from diligence of conduct, or exercise in moral progress, but by individuality of nature? Hence it ensues that the filiation of the only-begotten Son of the Father is incapable of fall; while the adoption of reasonable beings who are not His sons by nature, but merely on account of fitness of character, and by the bounty of God, may fall away, as it is written in the word, `The sons of God saw the daughters of men, and took them as wives,' and so forth [291] . And God, speaking by Isaiah, said, `I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against Me [292] .' "I have many things to say, beloved, but because I fear that I shall cause weariness by further admonishing teachers who are of one mind with myself, I pass them by. You, having been taught of God, are not ignorant that the teaching at variance with the religion of the Church which has just arisen, is the same as that propagated by Ebion [293] and Artemas [294] , and rivals that of Paul of Samosata, bishop of Antioch, who was excommunicated by a council of all the bishops. Lucianus [295] , his successor, withdrew himself from communion with these bishops during a period of many years. "And now amongst us there have sprung up, `out of the non-existent' men who have greedily sucked down the dregs of this impiety, offsets of the same stock: I mean Arius and Achillas, and all their gang of rogues. Three bishops [296] of Syria, appointed no one knows how, by consenting to them, fire them to more fatal heat. I refer their sentence to your decision. Retaining in their memory all that they can collect concerning the suffering, humiliation, emptying of Himself [297] , and so-called poverty, and everything of which the Saviour for our sake accepted the acquired name, they bring forward those passages to disprove His eternal existence and divinity, while they forget all those which declare His glory and nobility and abiding with the Father; as for instance, `I and My father are one [298] .' In these words the Lord does not proclaim Himself to be the Father, neither does He represent two natures as one; but that the essence of the Son of the Father preserves accurately the likeness of the Father, His nature taking off the impress of likeness to Him in all things, being the exact image of the Father and the express stamp of the prototype. When, therefore, Philip, desirous of seeing the Father, said to Him, `Lord, show us the Father,' the Lord with abundant plainness said to him, `He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father [299] ,' as though the Father were beheld in the spotless and living mirror of His image. The same idea is conveyed in the Psalms, where the saints say, `In Thy light we shall see light [300] .' It is on this account that `he who honoureth the Son, honoureth the Father [301] .' And rightly, for every impious word which men dare to utter against the Son is spoken also against the Father. "After this no one can wonder at the false calumnies which I am about to detail, my beloved brethren, propagated by them against me, and against our most religious people. They not only set their battle in array against the divinity of Christ, but ungratefully insult us. They think it beneath them to be compared with any of those of old time, nor do they endure to be put on a par with the teachers we have been conversant with from childhood. They will not admit that any of our fellow-ministers anywhere possess even mediocrity of intelligence. They say that they themselves alone are the wise and the poor, and discoverers of doctrines, and to them alone have been revealed those truths which, say they, have never entered the mind of any other individuals under the sun. O what wicked arrogance! O what excessive folly! What false boasting, joined with madness and Satanic pride, has hardened their impious hearts! They are not ashamed to oppose the godly clearness of the ancient scriptures, nor yet does the unanimous piety of all our fellow-ministers concerning Christ blunt their audacity. Even devils will not suffer impiety like this; for even they refrain from speaking blasphemy against the Son of God. "These then are the questions I have to raise, according to the ability I possess, with those who from their rude resources throw dust on the Christ, and try to slander our reverence for Him. These inventors of silly tales assert that we, who reject their impious and unscriptural blasphemy concerning the creation of Christ from the non-existent, teach that there are two unbegotten Beings. For these ill-instructed men contend that one of these alternatives must hold; either He must be believed to have come out of the non-existent, or there are two unbegotten Beings. In their ignorance and want of practice in theology they do not realize how vast must be the distance between the Father who is uncreate, and the creatures, whether rational or irrational, which He created out of the non-existent; and that the only-begotten nature of Him Who is the Word of God, by Whom the Father created the universe out of the non-existent, standing, as it were, in the middle between the two, was begotten of the self-existent Father, as the Lord Himself testified when He said, `Every one that loveth the Father, loveth also the Son that is begotten of Him [302] .' "We believe, as is taught by the apostolical Church, in an only unbegotten Father, Who of His being hath no cause, immutable and invariable, and Who subsists always in one state of being, admitting neither of progression nor of diminution; Who gave the law, and the prophets, and the gospel; of patriarchs and apostles, and of all saints, Lord: and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten not out of that which is not, but of the Father, Who is; yet not after the manner of material bodies, by severance or emanation, as Sabellius [303] and Valentinus [304] taught; but in an inexpressible and inexplicable manner, according to the saying which we quoted above, `Who shall declare His generation [305] ?' since no mortal intellect can comprehend the nature of His Person, as the Father Himself cannot be comprehended, because the nature of reasonable beings is unable to grasp the manner in which He was begotten of the Father [306] . "But those who are led by the Spirit of truth have no need to learn these things of me, for the words long since spoken by the Saviour yet sound in our ears, `No one knoweth who the Father is but the Son, and no one knoweth who the Son is but the Father [307] .' We have learnt that the Son is immutable and unchangeable, all-sufficient and perfect, like the Father, lacking only His "unbegotten." He is the exact and precisely similar image of His Father. For it is clear that the image fully contains everything by which the greater likeness exists, as the Lord taught us when He said, `My Father is greater than I [308] .' And in accordance with this we believe that the Son always existed of the Father; for he is the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His Father's Person [309] ." But let no one be led by the word `always' to imagine that the Son is unbegotten, as is thought by some who have their intellects blinded: for to say that He was, that He has always been, and that before all ages, is not to say that He is unbegotten. "The mind of man could not possibly invent a term expressive of what is meant by being unbegotten. I believe that you are of this opinion; and, indeed, I feel confident in your orthodox view that none of these terms in any way signify the unbegotten. For all the terms appear to signify merely the extension of time, and are not adequate to express the divinity and, as it were, the prim�val being of the only-begotten Son. They were used by the holy men who earnestly endeavoured to clear up the mystery, and who asked pardon from those who heard them, with a reasonable excuse for their failure, by saying `as far as our comprehension has reached.' But if those who allege that what was `known in part' has been `done away [310] ' for them, expect from human lips anything beyond human powers, it is plain that the terms `was,' and `ever,' and `before all ages,' fall far short of this expectation. But whatever they may mean, it is not the same as `the unbegotten.' Therefore His own individual dignity must be reserved to the Father as the Unbegotten One, no one being called the cause of His existence: to the Son likewise must be given the honour which befits Him, there being to Him a generation from the Father which has no beginning; we must render Him worship, as we have already said, only piously and religiously ascribing to Him the `was' and the `ever,' and the `before all ages;' not however rejecting His divinity, but ascribing to Him a perfect likeness in all things to His Father, while at the same time we ascribe to the Father alone His own proper glory of `the unbegotten,' even as the Saviour Himself says, `My Father is greater than I [311] .' "And in addition to this pious belief respecting the Father and the Son, we confess as the Sacred Scriptures teach us, one Holy Ghost, who moved the saints of the Old Testament, and the divine teachers of that which is called the New. We believe in one only Catholic Church, the apostolical, which cannot be destroyed even though all the world were to take counsel to fight against it, and which gains the victory over all the impious attacks of the heterodox; for we are emboldened by the words of its Master, `Be of good cheer, I have overcome the world [312] .' After this, we receive the doctrine of the resurrection from the dead, of which Jesus Christ our Lord became the first-fruits; Who bore a Body, in truth, not in semblance, derived from Mary the mother of God [313] ; in the fulness of time sojourning among the race, for the remission of sins: who was crucified and died, yet for all this suffered no diminution of His Godhead. He rose from the dead, was taken into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high. "In this epistle I have only mentioned these things in part, deeming it, as I have said, wearisome to dwell minutely on each article, since they are well known to your pious diligence. These things we teach, these things we preach; these are the dogmas of the apostolic Church, for which we are ready to die, caring little for those who would force us to forswear them; for we will never relinquish our hope in them, though they should try to compel us by tortures. "Arius and Achillas, together with their fellow foes, have been expelled from the Church, because they have become aliens from our pious doctrine: according to the blessed Paul, who said, `If any of you preach any other gospel than that which you have received, let him be accursed, even though he should pretend to be an angel from heaven [314] , and `But if any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness, he is proud, knowing nothing [315] ,' and so forth. Since, then, they have been condemned by the brotherhood, let none of you receive them, nor attend to what they say or write. They are deceivers, and propagate lies, and they never adhere to the truth. They go about to different cities with no other intent than to deliver letters under the pretext of friendship and in the name of peace, and by hypocrisy and flattery to obtain other letters in return, in order to deceive a few `silly women who are laden with sins [316] .' I beseech you, beloved brethren, to avoid those who have thus dared to act against Christ, who have publicly held up the Christian religion to ridicule, and have eagerly sought to make a display before judicial tribunals, who have endeavoured to excite a persecution against us at a period of the most entire peace, and who have enervated the unspeakable mystery of the generation of Christ. Unite unanimously in opposition to them, as some of our fellow-ministers have already done, who, being filled with indignation, wrote to me against them, and signed our formulary [317] . "I have sent you these letters by my son Apion, the deacon; being those of (the ministers in) all Egypt and the Thebaid, also of those of Libya, and the Pentapolis, of Syria, Lycia, Pamphylia, Asia, Cappadocia, and in the other adjoining countries. Whose example you likewise, I trust, will follow. Many kindly attempts have been made by me to gain back those who have been led astray, but no remedy has proved more efficacious in restoring the laity who have been deceived by them and leading them to repentance, than the manifestation of the union of our fellow-ministers. Salute one another, with the brotherhood that is with you. I pray that you may be strong in the Lord, my beloved, and that I may receive the fruit of your love to Christ. "The following are the name of those who have been anathematized as heretics: among the presbyters, Arius; among the deacons, Achillas, Euzoius, A�thales, Lucius, Sarmates, Julius, Menas, another Arius, and Helladius." Alexander wrote in the same strain to Philogonius [318] , bishop of Antioch, to Eustathius [319] , who then ruled the church of the Beroeans, and to all those who defended the doctrines of the Apostles. But Arius could not endure to keep quiet, but wrote to all those whom he believed to agree with him in opinion. His letter to Eusebius, bishop of Nicomedia, is a clear proof that the divine Alexander wrote nothing that was false concerning him. I shall here insert his letter, in order that the names of those who were implicated in his impiety may become generally known.

Footnotes

[255] Alexander's words seem to imply that Colluthus began his schismatical proceedings in assuming to exercise episcopal functions before the separation of Arius from the Church, and that one cause of his wrong action was impatience at the mild course at first adopted by Alexander towards Arius. The Council of Alexandria held in a.d. 324 under Hosius, decided that he was only a Presbyter. [256] chriostemporia. The word christemporos is applied in the "Didache" to lazy consumers of alms. Cf. Ps. Ignat. ad Trall.: ou christianoi alla christemporoi, Ps. Ignat. ad Mag. ix., and Bp. Lightfoot's note. [257] Readings vary between alektos = indescribable, and alektos = ceaseless. Cf. 'Alekto, the Fury. [258] ?;En pote hote ouk en ho huiès tou theou. kai Gegonen husteron ho proteron me huparchon toioutos genomenos hote kai pote gegonen hoios kai pas pephuken anthropos [259] Isai. i. 2 huious egennesa kai hupsosa, as in Sept. Vulg., filios enutrivi et exaltavi. Revd., marg., "made great and exalted." [260] Ps. xlv. 7, as in Sept., except that adikian is substituted for anomian [261] Oute ex ouk onton gegenetai [262] John i. 18 [263] John i. 3 [264] hupostasin [265] John i. 1, 3 [266] to on, the self-existent of philosophy. [267] The history of the word hupostasis is of crucial value in the study of the Arian controversy. Its various usages may be classified as (i) Classical; (ii) Scriptural; (iii) Ecclesiastical. The correlative substantive of the verb huphistemi, I make to stand under, [from hupo = sub. under, and histemi, [STA]; it means primarily a standing under. Hence, materially, it means in (i) Classical Greek, sediment, prop. foundation: substances as opposed to their reflexions, substantial nature, as of timber [Theoph. C. P. 5. 16. 4]. So naturally grew the signification of ground of hope, actual existence; and, in the later philosophy, it had come to be employed instead of ousia for the noetic substratum "underlying" the ph�nomena. (ii) Scriptural. In the N.T. it is found five times, twice in 2 Cor. and thrice in Heb. (a) 2 Cor. ix. 4, and (b) xi. 17. "Confidence" of boasting. (g) Heb. i. 3, ho charakter tes hupostaseos, A.V. the express image of His "person." R.V., the very image of His "substance." (d) Heb. iii. 14, "Confidence". (e) Heb. xi. 1, A.V. "substance" of things hoped for. R.V. Assurance of things hoped for. (iii) Ecclesiastical. The earlier ecclesiastical use, like the later philosophical, identified it with ousia, and so the Nicene Confession anathematized those who maintained the Son to be of a different substance or essence from the Father (hupostaseos e ousias). In the version of Hilary of Poictiers (de Synodis, �84; Op. ii. 510) ousia is translated by "substantia," the etymological equivalent of hupostasis, except in the phrase quoted, when "substantia aut essentia" represents ousia by its own etymological equivalent "essentia." Thus in a.d. 325 to have contended for treis hupostaseis would have been heretical. But as the subtilty of controversy required greater nicety of phrase, it was laid down (Basil the Great, Ep. 38) that while ousia is an universal denoting that which is common to the individuals of a species, hupostasis makes an individual that which it is, and constitutes personal existence. Hence mia hupostasis became Sabellian, and treis ousiai Arian, while treis hupostaseis was orthodox. cf Theod. Dial. i. 7. Eranistes loq. "Is there any distinction between ousia and hupostasis?" Orthodoxus. "In extra-Christian philosophy there is not; for ousia signifies to on, that which is, and hupostasis that which subsists. But according to the doctrine of the Fathers there is the same difference between ousia and hupostasis as between the common and the particular; the race, and the species or individual."..."The Divine ousia (substance) means the Holy Trinity; but the hupostasis indicates any prosopon (person) as of the Father, the Son, or of the Holy Ghost. For we who follow the definitions of the Fathers assert hupostasis, prosopon and idiotes (substantial nature, person, or individuality) to mean the same thing." Vide also Newman's Arians of the Fourth Century, Appendix, Note iv. fourth Edition. [268] "In the beginning was the word." John i. 1 [269] Ecclus. iii. 21 [270] 1 Cor. ii. 9 [271] Gen. xv. 5 [272] Ecclus. i. 2 [273] Isai. liii. 8 [274] Matt. xi. 27 [275] Is. xxiv. 16: "My leanness, my leanness, woe unto me." A.V. "Secretum meum mihi." Vulg. [276] Col. i. 15 [277] Heb. i. 2. Vide Alford. proleg. to Ep. to Heb., "Nowhere except in the Alexandrian Church does there seem to have existed any idea that the Epistle was St. Paul's." "At Alexandria the conventional habit of quoting the Epistle as St. Paul's gradually prevailed over critical suspicion and early tradition." [278] Col. i. 16, 17 [279] chrematizo = (i) to have dealings with; (ii) to deal with an oracle or divine power; (iii) to get a name for dealing, and so to be called. Cf. Matt. ii. 12; Acts xi. 26 [280] Prov. viii. 30 [281] Heb. i. 3 on apaugasma tes Doxes kai charakter tes hupostaseos autou [282] Contrast the advance of the manhood. Luke ii. 52, "proukopte," the word used in the text. [283] 2 Cor. vi. 14, 15 [284] Prov. xxx. 19 [285] 1 Cor. x. 4 [286] Rom. viii. 32 [287] Matt. iii. 17 [288] Ps. ii. 7 [289] Ps. cx. 3. Sept. ek gastros pro 'Eosphorou egennesa se [290] The readings vary between genneseos, geneseos, and maieuseos (cf. Plat. The�t. 150 B), which is adopted by Valesius. [291] Gen. vi. 2 [292] Isa. i. 2 [293] The imaginary name for the founder of Ebionism, first started by Tertullian. N%W+�J+B+i#� = poor. [294] Artemas, or Artemon, a philosophizing denier of Christ's divinity, excommunicated by Pope Zephyrinus (a.d. 202-21). [295] Lucianus, the presbyter of Antioch, who became the head of the theological school of that city in which the leaders of the Arian heresy were trained, after the deposition of Paulus refused to hold communion with his three successors in the patriarchate, Domnus, Tim�us, and Cyril. During the episcopate of the last named he once more entered into communion with the church of Antioch. On the importance of Lucianus as founder of the Arians, Vide Newman's Arians of the Fourth Century, Chap. I. Sec. i. and cf. the letter of Arius post. Chap. iv. [296] Eusebius of C�sarea, Theodotus of Laodicea, and Paulinus of Tyre. See Arius' letter to Eusebius of Nicomedia, ch. iv. [297] kenosis, cf. Phil. ii. 7 [298] John x. 30 [299] John xiv. 9 [300] Ps. xxxvi. 9 [301] John v. 23 [302] 1 John v. 1 [303] Condemned a.d. 261 by Council held at Alexandria. [304] Taught in Rome in a.d. 140, and died in Cyprus in a.d. 160. [305] Isa. liii. 8 [306] he patrike theogonia [307] Matt. xi. 27: observe the slight variation. [308] John xiv. 28 [309] Heb. i. 3 [310] 1 Cor. xiii. 10 [311] John xiv. 28 [312] John xvi. 33 [313] ek tes Theotokou Marias [314] Gal. i. 9 [315] 1 Tim. vi. 3, 4 [316] 2 Tim. iii. 6 [317] Tomos. (i) a cut or slice; (ii) a portion of a roll, volume, or "tome." [318] Vide supra. [319] Bp. first Beroea in Syria and then of Antioch, c. 324-331. Beroea, the Helbon of Ezekiel (xxvii. 18) is now Aleppo or Haleb.

Chapter IV.--The Letter of Arius to Eusebius, Bishop of Nicomedia

"To his very dear lord, the man of God, the faithful and orthodox Eusebius, Arius, unjustly persecuted by Alexander the Pope [320] , on account of that all-conquering truth of which you also are a champion, sendeth greeting in the Lord. "Ammonius, my father, being about to depart for Nicomedia, I considered myself bound to salute you by him, and withal to inform that natural affection which you bear towards the brethren for the sake of God and His Christ, that the bishop greatly wastes and persecutes us, and leaves no stone unturned [321] against us. He has driven us out of the city as atheists, because we do not concur in what he publicly preaches, namely, God always, the Son always; as the Father so the Son; the Son co-exists unbegotten with God; He is everlasting; neither by thought nor by any interval does God precede the Son; always God, always Son; he is begotten of the unbegotten; the Son is of God Himself. Eusebius, your brother bishop of C�sarea, Theodotus, Paulinus, Athanasius, Gregorius, Aetius, and all the bishops of the East, have been condemned because they say that God had an existence prior to that of His Son; except Philogonius, Hellanicus, and Macarius, who are unlearned men, and who have embraced heretical opinions. Some of them say that the Son is an eructation, others that He is a production, others that He is also unbegotten. These are impieties to which we cannot listen, even though the heretics threaten us with a thousand deaths. But we say and believe, and have taught, and do teach, that the Son is not unbegotten, nor in any way part of the unbegotten; and that He does not derive His subsistence from any matter; but that by His own will and counsel He has subsisted before time, and before ages, as perfect God, only begotten and unchangeable, and that before He was begotten, or created, or purposed, or established, He was not. For He was not unbegotten. We are persecuted, because we say that the Son has a beginning, but that God is without beginning. This is the cause of our persecution, and likewise, because we say that He is of the non-existent [322] . And this we say, because He is neither part of God, nor of any essential being [323] . For this are we persecuted; the rest you know. I bid thee farewell in the Lord, remembering our afflictions, my fellow-Lucianist [324] , and true Eusebius [325] ." Of those whose names are mentioned in this letter, Eusebius was bishop of C�sarea [326] , Theodotus of Laodicea, Paulinus of Tyre, Athanasius of Anazarbus, Gregorius of Berytus, and Aetius of Lydda. Lydda is now called Diospolis. Arius prided himself on having these men of one mind with himself. He names as his adversaries, Philogonius, bishop of Antioch, Hellanicus, of Tripolis, and Macarius, of Jerusalem. He spread calumnies against them because they said that the Son is eternal, existing before all ages, of equal honour and of the same substance with the Father. When Eusebius received the epistle, he too vomited forth his own impiety, and wrote to Paulinus, chief [327] of the Tyrians, in the following words.

Footnotes

[320] On the name "Pope," vide Dict. Christ. Ant., s.v. 1st, it was applied to the teachers of converts, 2ndly, to Bishops and Abbots, and was, 3rdly, confined to the Patriarchs of Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, Constantinople, and to the Bp. of Rome; 4thly, it was claimed by the Bp. of Rome exclusively. [321] panta kalon kinei. Cf. Luc. Scyth. ii. The common proverb was panta exienai kalon, to let out every reef. Ar. Eq. 756 Eur. Med. 278, &c. [322] ex ouk onton estin [323] ex hupokeimenou tinos. Aristotle, Metaph. vi. 3, 1, defines to hupokeimenon as that kath' hou ta alla legetai....maliota de dokei einai ousia to hupokeimenon proton [324] Arius and Eusebius had been fellow disciples of Lucianus the Priest of Antioch martyred under Maximinus in a.d. 311 or 312. Vide note on page 38. [325] Arius plays on the name Eusebius, eusebes, pious. [326] From the phrase "ho adelphos sou ho en Kaisarei‹," it has been inferred by some that the two Eusebii were actually brothers. Eusebius of Nicomedia, in the letter of Chapter V., calls the Palestinian despotes; but this alone would not be fatal to the brotherhood, for Seneca (Ep. Mor. 104), calls his brother Gallio dominus. The phrase of Arius is not worth much against the silence of every one else. Vid. Dict. Christ. Biog. Article, Eusebius. Theodotus, bishop of Laodicea, Syria, (not the Phrygian Laodicea of the Apocalypse), was a Physician of the body was well as of the soul (Euseb. H.E. vii. 32). Paulinus, bishop first of Tyre, and then of Antioch for six months, died in a.d. 329. (Philost. H.E. iii. 15, cf. Bishop Lightfoot in Dict. Christian Biog. Article, Eusebius of C�sarea). Athanasius, bishop of Anazarbus, an important town of Cilicia Campestris, is accused of dangerous Arianism by his great namesake. (Athan. de Synod, 584.) Gregorius succeeded Eusebius of Nicomedia at Berytus (Beyrout), on the translation of the latter to Nicomedia. Aetius, Bishop of Lydda, (the Lydda of the Acts, on the plain of Sharon, now Ludd, the city of El-Khudr, who is identified with St. George), died soon after the Arian Synod of Antioch, a.d. 330 (Philost. H.E. iii. 12), and is to be distinguished from the arch-Arian Aetius, Julian's friend, who survived till a.d. 367 (Phil. H.E. ix. 6). Philogonius was raised to the episcopate per saltum, like St. Ambrose (Chrysost. Orat. 71, tom. v. p. 507), he preceded the Arian Paulinus. Hellanicus was present at Nic�a, but was driven from the See of Tripolis, in Phoenicia, by the Arians (Athan. Hist. Ar. ad Mon. �5). Macarius is praised by Athanasius (Orat. I. adv. Arian. p. 291). On a possible "passage of arms" between him and Eusebius of C�sarea at Nic�a, vide Stanley, Eastern Church, Lect. V. Cf. post, cap. xvii. [327] hegoumenos

Chapter V.--The Letter of Eusebius, Bishop of Nicomedia, to Paulinus, Bishop of Tyre.

"To my lord Paulinus, Eusebius sendeth greeting in the Lord. "The zeal of my lord Eusebius in the cause of the truth, and likewise your silence concerning it, have not failed to reach our ears. Accordingly, if, on the one hand, we rejoiced on account of the zeal of my lord Eusebius; on the other we are grieved at you, because even the silence of such a man appears like a defeat of our cause. Hence, as it behoves not a wise man to be of a different opinion from others, and to be silent concerning the truth, stir up, I exhort you, within yourself the spirit of wisdom to write, and at length begin what may be profitable to yourself and to others, specially if you consent to write in accordance with Scripture, and tread in the tracks of its words and will. "We have never heard that there are two unbegotten beings, nor that one has been divided into two, nor have we learned or believed that it has ever undergone any change of a corporeal nature; but we affirm that the unbegotten is one and one also that which exists in truth by Him, yet was not made out of His substance, and does not at all participate in the nature or substance of the unbegotten, entirely distinct in nature and in power, and made after perfect likeness both of character and power to the maker. We believe that the mode of His beginning not only cannot be expressed by words but even in thought, and is incomprehensible not only to man, but also to all beings superior to man. These opinions we advance not as having derived them from our own imagination, but as having deduced them from Scripture, whence we learn that the Son was created, established, and begotten in the same substance and in the same immutable and inexpressible nature as the Maker; and so the Lord says, `God created me in the beginning of His way; I was set up from everlasting; before the hills was I brought forth [328] .' "If He had been from Him or of Him, as a portion of Him, or by an emanation of His substance, it could not be said that He was created or established; and of this you, my lord, are certainly not ignorant. For that which is of the unbegotten could not be said to have been created or founded, either by Him or by another, since it is unbegotten from the beginning. But if the fact of His being called the begotten gives any ground for the belief that, having come into being of the Father's substance, He also has from the Father likeness of nature, we reply that it is not of Him alone that the Scriptures have spoken as begotten, but that they also thus speak of those who are entirely dissimilar to Him by nature. For of men it is said, `I have begotten and brought up sons, and they have rebelled against me [329] ;' and in another place, `Thou hast forsaken God who begat thee [330] ;' and again it is said, `Who begat the drops of dew [331] ?' This expression does not imply that the dew partakes of the nature of God, but simply that all things were formed according to His will. There is, indeed, nothing which is of His substance, yet every thing which exists has been called into being by His will. He is God; and all things were made in His likeness, and in the future likeness of His Word, being created of His free will. All things were made by His means by God. All things are of God. "When you have received my letter, and have revised it according to the knowledge and grace given you by God, I beg you will write as soon as possible to my lord Alexander. I feel confident that if you would write to him, you would succeed in bringing him over to your opinion. Salute all the brethren in the Lord. May you, my lord, be preserved by the grace of God, and be led to pray for us." It is thus that they wrote to each other, in order to furnish one another with weapons against the truth [332] . And so when the blasphemous doctrine had been disseminated in the churches of Egypt and of the East, disputes and contentions arose in every city, and in every village, concerning theological dogmas. The common people looked on, and became judges of what was said on either side, and some applauded one party, and some the other. These were, indeed, scenes fit for the tragic stage, over which tears might have been shed. For it was not, as in bygone days, when the church was attacked by strangers and by enemies, but now natives of the same country, who dwelt under one roof, and sat down at one table, fought against each other not with spears, but with their tongues. And what was still more sad, they who thus took up arms against one another were members of one another, and belonged to one body.

Footnotes

[328] Prov. viii. 22-26 Sept. [329] Isa. i. 2 [330] Deut. xxxii. 18 [331] Job xxxviii. 28 [332] Arius first published his heresy, a.d. 319.

Chapter VI.--General Council of Nic�a.

The emperor, who possessed the most profound wisdom, having heard of these things, endeavoured, as a first step, to stop up their fountain-head. He therefore despatched a messenger renowned for his ready wit to Alexandria with letters, in the endeavour to extinguish the dispute, and expecting to reconcile the disputants. But his hopes having been frustrated, he proceeded to summon the celebrated council of Nic�a [333] ; and pledged his word that the bishops and their officials should be furnished with asses, mules, and horses for their journey at the public expense. When all those who were capable of enduring the fatigue of the journey had arrived at Nic�a, he went thither himself, with both the wish of seeing the multitude of bishops, and the yearning desire of maintaining unanimity amongst them. He at once arranged that all their wants should be liberally supplied. Three hundred and eighteen bishops were assembled. The bishop of Rome [334] , on account of his very advanced age, was absent, but he sent two presbyters [335] to the council, with authority to agree to what was done. At this period many individuals were richly endowed with apostolical gifts; and many, like the holy apostle, bore in their bodies the marks of the Lord Jesus Christ [336] . James, bishop of Antioch, a city of Mygdonia, which is called Nisibis by the Syrians and Assyrians, raised the dead and restored them to life, and performed many other wonders which it would be superfluous to mention again in detail in this history, as I have already given an account of them in my work, entitled "Philotheus [337] ." Paul, bishop of Neo-C�sarea, a fortress situated on the banks of the Euphrates, had suffered from the frantic rage of Licinius. He had been deprived of the use of both hands by the application of a red-hot iron, by which the nerves which give motion to the muscles had been contracted and rendered dead. Some had had the right eye dug out, others had lost the right arm. Among these was Paphnutius of Egypt. In short, the Council looked like an assembled army of martyrs. Yet this holy and celebrated gathering was not entirely free from the element of opposition; for there were some, though so few as easily to be reckoned, of fair surface, like dangerous shallows, who really, though not openly, supported the blasphemy of Arius. When they were all assembled [338] , the emperor ordered a great hall to be prepared for their accommodation in the palace, in which a sufficient number of benches and seats were placed; and having thus arranged that they should be treated with becoming dignity, he desired the bishops to enter in, and discuss the subjects proposed. The emperor, with a few attendants, was the last to enter the room; remarkable for his lofty stature, and worthy of admiration for personal beauty, and for the still more marvellous modesty which dwelt on his countenance. A low stool was placed for him in the middle of the assembly, upon which, however, he did not seat himself until he had asked the permission of the bishops. Then all the sacred assembly sat down around him. Then forthwith rose first the great Eustathius, bishop of Antioch, who, upon the translation of Philogonius, already referred to, to a better life, had been compelled reluctantly to become his successor by the unanimous suffrages of the bishops, priests, and of the Christ-loving laity. He crowned the emperor's head with the flowers of panegyric, and commended the diligent attention he had manifested in the regulation of ecclesiastical affairs. The excellent emperor next exhorted the Bishops to unanimity and concord; he recalled to their remembrance the cruelty of the late tyrants, and reminded them of the honourable peace which God had, in his reign and by his means, accorded them. He pointed out how dreadful it was, aye, very dreadful, that at the very time when their enemies were destroyed, and when no one dared to oppose them, they should fall upon one another, and make their amused adversaries laugh, especially as they were debating about holy things, concerning which they had the written teaching of the Holy Spirit. "For the gospels" (continued he), "the apostolical writings, and the oracles of the ancient prophets, clearly teach us what we ought to believe concerning the divine nature. Let, then, all contentious disputation be discarded; and let us seek in the divinely-inspired word the solution of the questions at issue." These and similar exhortations he, like an affectionate son, addressed to the bishops as to fathers, labouring to bring about their unanimity in the apostolical doctrines. Most members of the synod, won over by his arguments, established concord among themselves, and embraced sound doctrine. There were, however, a few, of whom mention has been already made, who opposed these doctrines, and sided with Arius; and amongst them were Menophantus, bishop of Ephesus, Patrophilus, bishop of Scythopolis, Theognis, bishop of Nic�a, and Narcissus, bishop of Neronias, which is a town of the second Cilicia, and is now called Irenopolis; also Theonas, bishop of Marmarica, and Secundus, bishop of Ptolemais in Egypt [339] . They drew up a formulary of their faith, and presented it to the council. As soon as it was read it was torn to pieces, and was declared to be spurious and false. So great was the uproar raised against them, and so many were the reproaches cast on them for having betrayed religion, that they all, with the exception of Secundus and Theonas, stood up and took the lead in publicly renouncing Arius. This impious man, having thus been expelled from the Church, a confession of faith which is received to this day was drawn up by unanimous consent; and, as soon as it was signed, the council was dissolved.

Footnotes

[333] Originally named Antigonea, after its founder; then Nic�a after the Queen of Lysimachus; now Isnik. [334] Sylvester. [335] Vitus and Vincentius. [336] Cf. Gal. vi. 17. The "stigmata" here meant are the marks of persecution. [337] i.e. The Philotheos historia, "Religious History," a work containing the lives of celebrated ascetics, composed before the Ecclesiastical History. For Dr. Newman's explanation of its apparent credulity, Vide Hist. Sketches, iii. 314, and compare his Apologia pro Vita sua, on his own acceptance of the marvellous, Appendix, p. 57. [338] On the circumstances and scene of the opening of the Council consult Stanley's Eastern Church, Lecture IV. [339] Menophantus was one of the disciples of Lucianus (Philos. H.E. ii. 14). He accepted the Nicene decision, but was excommunicated by the Sardican Fathers. Cf. Book II. Chap. 6. Patrophilus, bishop of Scythopolis, the Bethshan of Scripture, was an ardent and persistent Arian. Theodoret mentions his share in the deposition of Eustathius (I. 20). Theognis was sentenced to banishment on account of the Arian sympathies he displayed at Nic�a, but escaped by a feigned acceptance. Narcissus of Irenopolis, a town of Cilicia Secunda, took an active part in the Arian movement: Athanasius says that he was thrice degraded by different synods, and is the worst of the Eusebians (Ath. Ap. de fuga, sec. 28). Marmarica is not a town, but a district. It lay west of Egypt, about the modern Barca. There were two cities in Egypt named Ptolemais, one in Upper Egypt below Abydos; one a port of the Red Sea. After the time of Constantine, Cilicia was divided into three districts; Cilicia Prima, with Tarsus for chief town; Secunda, with Anazarbus; Tertia, with Seleuceia.

Chapter VII.--Confutation of Arianism deduced from the Writings of Eustathius and Athanasius.

The above-named bishops, however, did not consent to it in sincerity, but only in appearance. This was afterwards shewn by their plotting against those who were foremost in zeal for religion, as well as by what these latter have written about them. For instance, Eustathius, the famous bishop of Antioch, who has been already mentioned, when explaining the text in the Proverbs, `The Lord created me in the beginning of His way, before His works of old [340] ,' wrote against them, and refuted their blasphemy. [341] "I will now proceed to relate how these different events occurred. A general council was summoned at Nic�a, and about two hundred and seventy bishops were convened. There were, however, so many assembled that I cannot state their exact number, neither, indeed, have I taken any great trouble to ascertain this point. When they began to inquire into the nature of the faith, the formulary of Eusebius was brought forward, which contained undisguised evidence of his blasphemy. The reading of it before all occasioned great grief to the audience, on account of its departure from the faith, while it inflicted irremediable shame on the writer. After the Eusebian gang had been clearly convicted, and the impious writing had been torn up in the sight of all, some amongst them by concert, under the pretence of preserving peace, imposed silence on all the ablest speakers. The Ariomaniacs, fearing lest they should be ejected from the Church by so numerous a council of bishops, sprang forward to anathematize and condemn the doctrines condemned, and unanimously signed the confession of faith. Thus having retained possession of their episcopal seats through the most shameful deception, although they ought rather to have been degraded, they continue, sometimes secretly, and sometimes openly, to patronize the condemned doctrines, plotting against the truth by various arguments. Wholly bent upon establishing these plantations of tares, they shrink from the scrutiny of the intelligent, avoid the observant, and attack the preachers of godliness. But we do not believe that these atheists can ever thus overcome the Deity. For though they `gird themselves' they `shall be broken in pieces,' according to the solemn prophecy of Isaiah [342] ." These are the words of the great Eustathius. Athanasius, his fellow combatant, the champion of the truth, who succeeded the celebrated Alexander in the episcopate, added the following, in a letter addressed to the Africans. "The bishops convened in council being desirous of refuting the impious assertions invented by the Arians, that the Son was created out of that which was non-existent [343] , that He is a creature and created being [344] , that there was a period in which He was not [345] , and that He is mutable by nature, and being all agreed in propounding the following declarations, which are in accordance with the holy Scriptures; namely, that the Son is by nature only-begotten of God, Word, Power, and sole Wisdom of the Father; that He is, as John said, `the true God [346] ,' and, as Paul has written, `the brightness of the glory, and the express image of the person of the Father [347] ,' the followers of Eusebius, drawn aside by their own vile doctrine, then began to say one to another, Let us agree, for we are also of God; `There is but one God, by whom are all things [348] ; `Old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new, and all things are of God [349] .' They also dwelt particularly upon what is contained in `The Shepherd [350] :' `Believe above all that there is one God, who created and fashioned all things, and making them to be out of that which is not.' "But the bishops saw through their evil design and impious artifice, and gave a clearer elucidation of the words `of God,' and wrote, that the Son is of the substance of God; in order that while the creatures, which do not in any way derive their existence of or from themselves, are said to be of God, the Son alone is said to be of the substance of the Father; this being peculiar to the only-begotten Son, the true Word of the Father. This is the reason why the bishops wrote, that He is of the substance of the Father. "But when the Arians, who seemed few in number, were again interrogated by the Bishops as to whether they admitted `that the Son is not a creature, but Power, and sole Wisdom, and eternal unchangeable [351] Image of the Father; and that He is very God,' the Eusebians were noticed making signs to one another to shew that these declarations were equally applicable to us. For it is said, that we are `the image and glory of God [352] ;' and `for always we who live [353] :' there are, also, they said, many powers; for it is written--`All the power of God went out of the land of Egypt [354] .' The canker-worm and the locust are said to be `a great power [355] .' And elsewhere it is written, The God of powers is with us, the God of Jacob helper [356] .' To which may be added that we are God's own not simply, but because the Son called us `brethren [357] .' The declaration that Christ is `the true God' does not distress us, for, having come into being, He is true. "Such was the corrupt opinion of the Arians; but on this the bishops, having detected their deceitfulness in this matter, collected from Scripture those passages which say of Christ that He is the glory, the fountain, the stream, and the express image of the person; and they quoted the following words: `In thy light we shall see light [358] ;' and likewise, `I and the Father are one [359] .' They then, with still greater clearness, briefly declared that the Son is of one substance with the Father; for this, indeed, is the signification of the passages which have been quoted. The complaint of the Arians, that these precise words are not to be found in Scripture, is proved groundless by their own practice, for their own impious assertions are not taken from Scripture; for it is not written that the Son is of the non-existent, and that there was a time when He was not: and yet they complain of having been condemned by expressions which, though not actually in Scripture, are in accordance with true religion. They themselves, on the other hand, as though they had found their words on a dunghill, uttered things verily of earth. The bishops, on the contrary, did not find their expressions for themselves; but, received their testimony from the fathers, and wrote accordingly. Indeed, there were bishops of old time, nearly one hundred and thirty years ago, both of the great city of Rome and of our own city [360] , who condemned those who asserted that the Son is a creature, and that He is not of one substance with the Father. Eusebius, the bishop of C�sarea, was acquainted with these facts; he, at one time, favoured the Arian heresy, but he afterwards signed the confession of faith of the Council of Nic�a. He wrote to the people of his diocese, maintaining that the word `consubstantial' was `used by illustrious bishops and learned writers as a term for expressing the divinity of the Father and of the Son [361] .'" So these men concealed their unsoundness through fear of the majority, and gave their assent to the decisions of the council, thus drawing upon themselves the condemnation of the prophet, for the God of all cries unto them, "This people honour Me with their lips, but in their hearts they are far from Me [362] ." Theonas and Secundus, however, did not like to take this course, and were excommunicated by common consent as men who esteemed the Arian blasphemy above evangelical doctrine. The bishops then returned to the council, and drew up twenty laws to regulate the discipline of the Church.

Footnotes

[340] Prov. viii. 22, lxx. Kurios ektise me archen hodon autou eis erga autou [341] At this point, according to Valesius, a quotation from the homily of Eustathius on the above text from Proverbs viii. 22, begins. On Eustathius, see notes on Chapters III. and XX. [342] Is. viii. 9, lxx. ean gar palin ischusete palin hettethesesthe [343] 'Ex ouk onton [344] Ktisma kai poiema [345] Pote hote ouk en [346] 1 Joh. v. 20 [347] Heb. i. 3. Cf. p. 37, note xxvii. [348] 2 Cor. viii. 6 [349] 2 Cor. v. 17, 18 [350] Herm. Pastor. Vis. v. Mand. i. [351] aparallaktos, cf. James i. 17, Par' o ouk eni parallage [352] 1 Cor. xi. 7 [353] 2 Cor. iv. 11 aei gar hemeis hoi zontes. The aei of St. Paul qualifies not "hoi zontes" but the paradidometha which follows, "For we who live are ever being delivered to death." [354] Exod. xii. 41, "The Hosts of the Lord," A.V. exelthe pasa he dunamis Kuriou, Sept. [355] Joel ii. 25, "My great army," A.V. [356] "The Lord of hosts is with us, the God of Jacob is our refuge," Ps. xlvi. 7 [357] Heb. ii. 11 [358] Ps. xxvi. 9 [359] Joh. x. 30 [360] Alexandria. The allusion, according to Valesius, is to Dionysius, Bishop of Rome, 259-269, and to Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria. The Letter of Athanasius to the Africans was written, according to Baronius, in 369. So trion may suit the chronology better than triakonta [361] Ath. Ep. ad Afros 5 and 6. [362] Isai. xxix. 13

Chapter VIII.--Facts relating to Meletius the Egyptian, from whom originated the Meletian Schism, which remains to this day.--Synodical Epistle respecting him.

After Meletius [363] had been ordained bishop, which was not long before the Arian controversy, he was convicted of certain crimes by the most holy Peter, bishop of Alexandria, who also received the crown of martyrdom. After being deposed by Peter he did not acquiesce in his deposition, but filled the Thebaid and the adjacent part of Egypt with tumult and disturbance, and rebelled against the primacy of Alexandria. A letter was written by the council to the Church of Alexandria, stating what had been decreed against his revolutionary practices. It was as follows:-- Synodical Epistle. "To the Church of Alexandria which, by the grace of God, is great and holy, and to the beloved brethren in Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis, the bishops who have been convened to the great and holy council of Nic�a, send greeting in the Lord. "The great and holy council of Nic�a having been convened by the grace of God, and by the most religious emperor, Constantine, who summoned us from different provinces and cities, we judge it requisite that a letter be sent from the whole Holy Synod to inform you also what questions have been mooted and debated, and what has been decreed and established. "In the first place, the impious doctrines of Arius were investigated before our most religious emperor Constantine; and his impiety was unanimously anathematized, as well as the blasphemous language and views which he had propounded, alleging that the Son of God was out of what was not, that before He was begotten He was not, that there was a period in which He was not, and that He can, according to His own freewill, be capable either of virtue or of vice. The holy council anathematized all these assertions, and even refused so much as to listen to such impious and foolish opinions, and such blasphemous expressions. The final decision concerning him you already know, or will soon hear; but we will not mention it now, lest we should appear to trample upon a man who has already received the recompense due to his sins. Such influence has his impiety obtained as to involve Theonas, bishop of Marmarica, and Secundus, bishop of Ptolemais, in his ruin, and they have shared his punishment. "But after Egypt had, by the grace of God, been delivered from these false and blasphemous opinions, and from persons who dared to raise discord and division among a hitherto peaceable people, there yet remained the question of the temerity of Meletius, and of those ordained by him. We now inform you, beloved brethren, of the decrees of the council on this subject. It was decided by the holy council, that Meletius should be treated with clemency, though, strictly speaking, he was not worthy of even the least concession. He was permitted to remain in his own city, but was divested of all power, whether of nomination or of ordination, neither was he to shew himself in any province or city for these purposes: but only to retain the bare name of his office. Those who had received ordination at his hands were to submit to a more religious re-ordination; and were to be admitted to communion on the terms of retaining their ministry, but of ranking in every diocese and church below those who had been ordained before them by Alexander, our much-honoured fellow-minister. Thus they would have no power of choosing or nominating others to the ministry, according to their pleasure, or indeed of doing anything with out the consent of the bishops of the Catholic and Apostolic Church, who are under Alexander. But they who, by the grace of God, and in answer to your prayers, have been detected in no schism, and have continued spotless in the Catholic and Apostolic Church, are to have the power of electing, and of nominating men worthy of the clerical office, and are permitted to do whatsoever is in accordance with law and the authority of the Church. If it should happen, that any of those now holding an office in the Church should die, then let these recently admitted be advanced to the honours of the deceased, provided only that they appear worthy, and that the people choose them, and that the election be confirmed and ratified by the catholic bishop of Alexandria. The same privilege has been conceded to all the others. With respect to Meletius, however, an exception has been made, both on account of his former insubordination, and of the rashness and impetuosity of his disposition; for if the least authority were accorded to him, he might abuse it by again exciting confusion. These are the chief points which relate to Egypt, and to the holy Church of Alexandria. Whatever other canons were made, or dogmas decreed, you will hear of them from Alexander, our most-honoured fellow-minister and brother, who will give you still more accurate information, because he himself directed, as well as participated in, every thing that took place. "We also give you the good news that, according to your prayers, the celebration of the most holy paschal feast was unanimously rectified, so that our brethren of the East, who did not previously keep the festival at the same time as those of Rome, and as yourselves, and, indeed, all have done from the beginning, will henceforth celebrate it with you. Rejoice, then, in the success of our undertakings, and in the general peace and concord, and in the extirpation of every heresy, and receive with still greater honour and more fervent love, Alexander, our fellow-minister and your bishop, who imparted joy to us by his presence, and who, at a very advanced age, has undergone so much fatigue for the purpose of restoring peace among you. Pray for us all, that what has been rightly decreed may remain steadfast, through our Lord Jesus Christ, being done, as we trust, according to the good pleasure of God and the Father in the Holy Ghost, to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen." Notwithstanding the endeavours of that divine assembly of bishops to apply this medicine to the Meletian disease, vestiges of his infatuation remain even to this day; for there are in some districts bodies of monks who refuse to follow sound doctrine, and observe certain vain points of discipline, agreeing with the infatuated views of the Jews and the Samaritans.

Footnotes

[363] Meletius (Meletios), Bishop of Lycopolis, in Upper Egypt, was accused of apostasy. During the Patriarch Peter's withdrawal under persecution he intruded into the see of Alexandria. He was deposed in 306.

Chapter IX.--The Epistle of the Emperor Constantine, concerning the matters transacted at the Council, addressed to those Bishops who were not present.

The great emperor also wrote an account of the transactions of the council to those bishops who were unable to attend. And I consider it worth while to insert this epistle in my work, as it clearly evidences the piety of the writer. "Constantinus Augustus to the Churches. "Viewing the common public prosperity enjoyed at this moment, as the result of the great power of divine grace, I am desirous above all things that the blessed members of the Catholic Church should be preserved in one faith, in sincere love, and in one form of religion, towards Almighty God. But, since no firmer or more effective measure could be adopted to secure this end, than that of submitting everything relating to our most holy religion to the examination of all, or most of all, the bishops, I convened as many of them as possible, and took my seat among them as one of yourselves; for I would not deny that truth which is the source of my greatest joy, namely, that I am your fellow-servant. Every point obtained its due investigation, until the doctrine pleasing to the all-seeing God, and conducive to unity, was made clear, so that no room should remain for division or controversy concerning the faith. "The commemoration of the most sacred paschal feast being then debated, it was unanimously decided, that it would be well that it should be everywhere celebrated upon the same day. What can be more fair, or more seemly, than that that festival by which we have received the hope of immortality should be carefully celebrated by all, on plain grounds, with the same order and exactitude? It was, in the first place, declared improper to follow the custom of the Jews in the celebration of this holy festival, because, their hands having been stained with crime, the minds of these wretched men are necessarily blinded. By rejecting their custom, we establish and hand down to succeeding ages one which is more reasonable, and which has been observed ever since the day of our Lord's sufferings. Let us, then, have nothing in common with the Jews, who are our adversaries. For we have received from our Saviour another way. A better and more lawful line of conduct is inculcated by our holy religion. Let us with one accord walk therein, my much-honoured brethren, studiously avoiding all contact with that evil way. They boast that without their instructions we should be unable to commemorate the festival properly. This is the highest pitch of absurdity. For how can they entertain right views on any point who, after having compassed the death of the Lord, being out of their minds, are guided not by sound reason, but by an unrestrained passion, wherever their innate madness carries them. Hence it follows that they have so far lost sight of truth, wandering as far as possible from the correct revisal, that they celebrate a second Passover in the same year. What motive can we have for following those who are thus confessedly unsound and in dire error? For we could never tolerate celebrating the Passover twice in one year. But even if all these facts did not exist, your own sagacity would prompt you to watch with diligence and with prayer, lest your pure minds should appear to share in the customs of a people so utterly depraved. It must also be borne in mind, that upon so important a point as the celebration of a feast of such sanctity, discord is wrong. One day has our Saviour set apart for a commemoration of our deliverance, namely, of His most holy Passion. One hath He wished His Catholic Church to be, whereof the members, though dispersed throughout the most various parts of the world, are yet nourished by one spirit, that is, by the divine will. Let your pious sagacity reflect how evil and improper it is, that days devoted by some to fasting, should be spent by others in convivial feasting; and that after the paschal feast, some are rejoicing in festivals and relaxations, while others give themselves up to the appointed fasts. That this impropriety should be rectified, and that all these diversities of commemoration should be resolved into one form, is the will of divine Providence, as I am convinced you will all perceive. Therefore, this irregularity must be corrected, in order that we may no more have any thing in common with those parricides and the murderers of our Lord. An orderly and excellent form of commemoration is observed in all the churches of the western, of the southern, and of the northern parts of the world, and by some of the eastern; this form being universally commended, I engaged that you would be ready to adopt it likewise, and thus gladly accept the rule unanimously adopted in the city of Rome, throughout Italy, in all Africa, in Egypt, the Spains, the Gauls, the Britains, Libya, Greece, in the dioceses of Asia, and of Pontus, and in Cilicia, taking into your consideration not only that the churches of the places above-mentioned are greater in point of number, but also that it is most pious that all should unanimously agree in that course which accurate reasoning seems to demand, and which has no single point in common with the perjury of the Jews. "Briefly to summarize the whole of the preceding, the judgment of all is, that the holy Paschal feast should be held on one and the same day; for, in so holy a matter, it is not becoming that any difference of custom should exist, and it is better to follow the opinion which has not the least association with error and sin. This being the case, receive with gladness the heavenly gift and the plainly divine command; for all that is transacted in the holy councils of the bishops is to be referred to the Divine will. Therefore, when you have made known to all our beloved brethren the subject of this epistle, regard yourselves bound to accept what has gone before, and to arrange for the regular observance of this holy day, so that when, according to my long-cherished desire, I shall see you face to face, I may be able to celebrate with you this holy festival upon one and the same day; and may rejoice with you all in witnessing the cruelty of the devil destroyed by our efforts, through Divine grace, while our faith and peace and concord flourish throughout the world. May God preserve you, beloved brethren."

Chapter X.--The daily wants of the Church supplied by the Emperor, and an account of his other virtues.

Thus did the emperor write to the absent. To those who attended the council, three hundred and eighteen in number, he manifested great kindness, addressing them with much gentleness, and presenting them with gifts. He ordered numerous couches to be prepared for their accommodation and entertained them all at one banquet. Those who were most worthy he received at his own table, distributing the rest at the others. Observing that some among them had had the right eye torn out, and learning that this mutilation had been undergone for the sake of religion, he placed his lips upon the wounds, believing that he would extract a blessing from the kiss. After the conclusion of the feast, he again presented other gifts to them. He then wrote to the governors of the provinces, directing that provision-money should be given in every city to virgins and widows, and to those who were consecrated to the divine service; and he measured the amount of their annual allowance more by the impulse of his own generosity than by their need. The third part of the sum is distributed to this day. Julian impiously withheld the whole. His successor [364] conferred the sum which is now dispensed, the famine which then prevailed having lessened the resources of the state. If the pensions were formerly triple in amount to what they are at present, the generosity of the emperor can by this fact be easily seen. I do not account it right to pass over the following circumstance in silence. Some quarrelsome individuals wrote accusations against certain bishops, and presented their indictments to the emperor. This occurring before the establishment of concord, he received the lists, formed them into a packet which he sealed with his ring, and ordered them to be kept safely. After the reconciliation had been effected, he brought out these writings, and burnt them in their presence, at the same time declaring upon oath that he had not read a word of them. He said that the crimes of priests ought not to be made known to the multitude, lest they should become an occasion of offence, and lead them to sin without fear. It is reported also that he added that if he were to detect a bishop in the very act of committing adultery, he would throw his imperial robe over the unlawful deed, lest any should witness the scene, and be thereby injured. Thus did he admonish all the priests, as well as confer honours upon them, and then exhorted them to return each to his own flock.

Footnotes

[364] Jovian.

Chapter XI

I shall here insert the letter respecting the faith, written by Eusebius, bishop of C�sarea, as it describes the effrontery of the Arians, who not only despise our fathers, but reject their own: it contains a convincing proof of their madness. They certainly honour Eusebius, because he adopted their sentiments, but yet they openly contradict his writings. He wrote this epistle to some of the Arians, who were accusing him, it seems, of treachery. The letter itself explains the writer's object. Epistle of Eusebius, Bishop of C�sarea, which he wrote from Nic�a when the great Council was assembled. "You will have probably learnt from other sources what was decided respecting the faith of the church at the general council of Nic�a, for the fame of great transactions generally outruns the accurate account of them: but lest rumours not in strict accordance with the truth should reach you, I think it necessary to send to you, first, the formulary of faith originally proposed by us, and, next, the second, published with additions made to our terms. The following is our formulary, which was read in the presence of our most pious emperor, and declared to be couched in right and proper language. The Faith put forth by us. "`As in our first catechetical instruction, and at the time of our baptism, we received from the bishops who were before us and as we have learnt from the Holy Scriptures, and, alike as presbyters, and as bishops, were wont to believe and teach; so we now believe and thus declare our faith. It is as follows:-- "`We believe in one God, Father Almighty, the Maker of all things, visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Word of God, God of God, Light of Light, Life of Life, Only-begotten Son, First-born of every creature, begotten of the Father before all worlds; by Whom all things were made; Who for our salvation was incarnate, and lived among men [365] . He suffered and rose again the third day, and ascended to the Father; and He will come again in glory to judge the quick and the dead. We also believe in one Holy Ghost. "`We believe in the being and continual existence of each of these; that the Father is in truth the Father; the Son in truth the Son; the Holy Ghost in truth the Holy Ghost; as our Lord, when sending out His disciples to preach the Gospel, said, `Go forth and teach all nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost [366] .' We positively affirm that we hold this faith, that we have always held it, and that we adhere to it even unto death, condemning all ungodly heresy. We testify, as before God the Almighty and our Lord Jesus Christ, that we have thought thus from the heart, and from the soul, ever since we have known ourselves; and we have the means of showing, and, indeed, of convincing you, that we have always during the past thus believed and preached.' "When this formulary had been set forth by us, there was no room to gainsay it; but our beloved emperor himself was the first to testify that it was most orthodox, and that he coincided in opinion with it; and he exhorted the others to sign it, and to receive all the doctrine it contained, with the single addition of the one word--`consubstantial.' He explained that this term implied no bodily condition or change [367] , for that the Son did not derive His existence from the Father either by means of division or of abscission, since an immaterial, intellectual, and incorporeal nature could not be subject to any bodily condition or change [368] . These things must be understood as bearing a divine and mysterious signification. Thus reasoned our wisest and most religious emperor. The addition of the word consubstantial has given occasion for the composition of the following formulary:-- The Creed published by the Council. "`We believe in one God, Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father; only-begotten, that is, of the substance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, Very God of very God, begotten not made, being of one substance with the Father: by Whom all things were made both in heaven and on earth: Who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate, and was made man; He suffered, and rose gain the third day; He ascended into heaven, and is coming to judge both quick and dead. And we believe in the Holy Ghost. The holy Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematizes all who say that there was a time when the Son of God was not; that before He was begotten He was not; that He was made out of the non-existent; or that He is of a different essence and of a different substance [369] from the Father; and that He is susceptible of variation or change.' "When they had set forth this formulary, we did not leave without examination that passage in which it is said that the Son is of the substance of the Father, and consubstantial with the Father. Questions and arguments thence arose, and the meaning of the terms was exactly tested. Accordingly they were led to confess that the word consubstantial signifies that the Son is of the Father, but not as being a part of the Father. We deemed it right to receive this opinion; for that is sound doctrine which teaches that the Son is of the Father, but not part of His substance. From the love of peace, and lest we should fall from the true belief, we also accept this view, neither do we reject the term `consubstantial.' For the same reason we admitted the expression, `begotten, but not made;' for they alleged that the word `made' applies generally to all things which were created by the Son, to which the Son is in no respect similar; and that consequently He is not a created thing, like the things made by Him, but is of a substance superior to all created objects. The Holy Scriptures teach Him to be begotten of the Father, by a mode of generation which is incomprehensible and inexplicable to all created beings. So also the term `of one substance with the Father,' when investigated, was accepted not in accordance with bodily relations or similarity to mortal beings. For it was also shown that it does not either imply division of substance, nor abscission, nor any modification or change or diminution in the power of the Father, all of which are alien from the nature of the unbegotten Father. It was concluded that the expression `being of one substance with the Father,' implies that the Son of God does not resemble, in any one respect, the creatures which He has made; but that to the Father alone, who begat Him, He is in all points perfectly like: for He is of the essence and of the substance [370] of none save of the Father. This interpretation having been given of the doctrine, it appeared right to us to assent to it, especially as we were aware that of the ancients some learned and celebrated bishops and writers have used the term `consubstantial' with respect to the divinity of the Father and of the Son. "These are the circumstances which I had to communicate respecting the published formulary of the faith. To it we all agreed, not without investigation, but, after having subjected the views submitted to us to thorough examination in the presence of our most beloved emperor, for the above reasons we all acquiesced in it. We also allowed that the anathema appended by them to their formulary of faith should be accepted, because it prohibits the use of words which are not scriptural; through which almost all the disorder and troubles of the Church have arisen. And since no passage of the inspired Scripture uses the terms `out of the non-existent,' or that `there was a time when He was not,' nor indeed any of the other phrases of the same class, it did not appear reasonable to assert or to teach such things. In this opinion, therefore, we judged it right to agree; since, indeed, we had never, at any former period, been accustomed to use such terms [371] . Moreover, the condemnation of the assertion that before He was begotten He was not, did not appear to involve any incongruity, because all assent to the fact that He was the Son of God before He was begotten according to the flesh. And here our emperor, most beloved by God, began to reason concerning His divine origin, and His existence before all ages. He was virtually in the Father without generation [372] , even before He was actually begotten, the Father having always been the Father, just as He has always been a King and a Saviour, and, virtually, all things, and has never known any change of being or action. "We have thought it requisite, beloved brethren, to transmit you an account of these circumstances, in order to show you what examination and investigation we bestowed on all the questions which we had to decide; and also to prove how at one time we resisted firmly, even to the last hour, when doctrines improperly expressed offended us, and, at another time, we, without contention, accepted the articles which contained nothing objectionable, when after a thorough and candid investigation of their signification, they appeared perfectly conformable with what had been confessed by us in the formulary of faith which we had published."

Footnotes

[365] "politeusamenon." Cf. Phil. i. 27, and iii. 20, and Acts xxiii. 1 [366] Matt. xxviii. 19 [367] pathe, pathos [368] pathe, pathos [369] hupostaseos and ousias [370] hupostaseos and ousias [371] The genuineness of the following sentence is doubted. It is not found in Socrates or in Epiphanius. But it is not unreasonably held by Valesius that Socrates, who seems to have undertaken to clear the character of Eusebius of all heretical taint, purposely suppressed the passage as inconsistent with orthodoxy. Soc. i. 8. Dr. Newman writes of this passage, "It is remarkable as shewing his (Constantine's) utter ignorance of doctrines which were never intended for discussion among the unbaptized heathen, or the secularized Christian, that, in spite of bold avowal of the orthodox faith in detail" (i.e. in his letter to Arius), "yet shortly after he explained to Eusebius one of the Nicene declarations in a sense which even Arius would scarcely have allowed, expressed as it is almost after the manner of Paulus. "Arians," 3rd ed., p. 256. [372] Here it has been proposed to read for agennetos, without generation, which does not admit of an orthodox interpretation, aeigennetos, i.e. by eternal generation.

Chapter XII.--Confutation of the blasphemies of the Arians of our time, from the writings of Eusebius, Bishop of C�sarea.

Eusebius clearly testifies that the aforesaid term "consubstantial" is not a new one, nor the invention of the fathers assembled at the council; but that, from the very first [373] it has been handed down from father to son. He states that all those then assembled unanimously received the creed then published; and he again bears testimony to the same fact in another work, in which he highly extols the conduct of the great Constantine. He writes as follows [374] :-- "The emperor having delivered this discourse in Latin, it was translated into Greek by an interpreter, and then he gave liberty of speech to the leaders of the council. Some at once began to bring forward complaints against their neighbours, while others had recourse to recriminations and reproaches. Each party had much to urge, and at the beginning the debate waxed very violent. The emperor patiently and attentively listened to all that was advanced, and gave full attention to what was urged by each party in turn. He calmly endeavoured to reconcile the conflicting parties; addressing them mildly in Greek, of which language he was not ignorant, in a sweet and gentle manner. Some he convinced by argument, others he put to the blush; he commended those who had spoken well, and excited all to unanimity; until, at length, he reduced them all to oneness of mind and opinion on all the disputed points, so that they all agreed to hold the same faith, and to celebrate the festival of Salvation upon the same day. What had been decided was committed to writing, and was signed by all the bishops." Soon after the author thus continues the narrative:-- "When matters had been thus arranged, the emperor gave them permission to return to their own dioceses. They returned with great joy, and have ever since continued to be of the one opinion, agreed upon in the presence of the emperor, and, though once widely separated, now united together, as it were, in one body. Constantine, rejoicing in the success of his efforts, made known these happy results by letter to those who were at a distance. He ordered large sums of money to be liberally distributed both among the inhabitants of the country and of the cities, in order that the twentieth anniversary of his reign might be celebrated with public festivities." Although the Arians impiously gainsay the statements of the other fathers, yet they ought to believe what has been written by this father, whom they have been accustomed to admire. They ought, therefore, to receive his testimony to the unanimity with which the confession of faith was signed by all. But, since they impugn the opinions of their own leaders, they ought to become acquainted with the most foul and terrible manner of the death of Arius and with all their powers to flee from the impious doctrine of which he was the parent. As it is likely that the mode of his death is not known by all, I shall here relate it.

Footnotes

[373] anothen. Cf. St. Luke i. 3. Plat. Phil. 44 D. &c. [374] Euseb. Vit. Constant. lib. iii. c. 13.

Chapter XIII.--Extract from the Letter of Athanasius on the Death of Arius [375] .

After Arius had remained a long time in Alexandria, he endeavoured riotously to obtrude himself again into the assemblies of the Church, professing to renounce his impiety, and promising to receive the confession of faith drawn up by the fathers. But not succeeding in obtaining the confidence of the divine Alexander, nor of Athanasius, who followed [376] Alexander alike in the patriarchate and in piety, he, helped and encouraged by Eusebius, bishop of Nicomedia, betook himself to Constantinople. The intrigues upon which he then entered, and their punishment by the righteous Judge are all best narrated by the excellent Athanasius, in his letter to Apion [377] . I shall therefore now insert this passage in my work. He writes:-- "I was not at Constantinople when he died; but Macarius, the presbyter, was there, and from him I learnt all the circumstances. The emperor Constantine was induced by Eusebius and his party to send for Arius. Upon his arrival, the emperor asked him whether he held the faith of the Catholic church. Arius then swore that his faith was orthodox, and presented a written summary of his belief; concealing, however, the reasons of his ejection from the Church by the bishop Alexander, and making a dishonest use of the language of Holy Scripture. When, therefore, he had declared upon oath that he did not hold the errors for which he had been expelled from the Church by Alexander, Constantine dismissed him, saying, `If thy faith is orthodox, thou hast well sworn; but if thy faith is impious and yet thou hast sworn, let God from heaven judge thee.' When he quitted the emperor, the partizans of Eusebius, with their usual violence, desired to conduct him into the church; but Alexander, of blessed memory, bishop of Constantinople, refused his permission, alleging that the inventor of the heresy ought not to be admitted into communion. Then at last the partizans of Eusebius pronounced the threat: `As, against your will, we succeeded in prevailing on the emperor to send for Arius, so now, even if you forbid it, shall Arius join in communion [378] with us in this church to-morrow.' It was on Saturday that they said this. The bishop Alexander, deeply grieved at what he had heard, went into the church and poured forth his lamentations, raising his hands in supplication to God, and throwing himself on his face on the pavement in the sanctuary [379] , prayed. Macarius went in with him, prayed with him, and heard his prayers. He asked one of two things. `If Arius,' said he, `is to be joined to the Church to-morrow, let me Thy servant depart, and do not destroy the pious with the impious. If Thou wilt spare Thy Church, and I know that Thou dost spare her, look upon the words of the followers of Eusebius, and give not over Thy heritage to destruction and to shame. Remove Arius, lest if he come into the Church, heresy seem to come in with him, and impiety be hereafter deemed piety.' Having thus prayed, the bishop left the church deeply anxious, and then a horrible and extraordinary catastrophe ensued. The followers of Eusebius had launched out into threats, while the bishop had recourse to prayer. Arius, emboldened by the protection of his party, delivered many trifling and foolish speeches, when he was suddenly compelled by a call of nature to retire, and immediately, as it is written, `falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst [380] ,' and gave up the ghost, being deprived at once both of communion and of life. This, then, was the end of Arius [381] . The followers of Eusebius were covered with shame, and buried him whose belief they shared. The blessed Alexander completed the celebration, rejoicing with the Church in piety and orthodoxy, praying with all the brethren and greatly glorifying God. This was not because he rejoiced at the death of Arius--God forbid; for `it is appointed unto all men once to die [382] ;' but because the event plainly transcended any human condemnation. For the Lord Himself passing judgment upon the menaces of the followers of Eusebius, and the prayer of Alexander, condemned the Arian heresy, and shewed that it was unworthy of being received into the communion of the Church; thus manifesting to all that, even if it received the countenance and support of the emperor, and of all men, yet by truth itself it stood condemned." These were the first fruits, reaped by Arius, of those pernicious seeds which he had himself sown, and formed the prelude to the punishments that awaited him hereafter. His impiety was condemned by his punishment. I shall now turn my narrative to the piety of the emperor. He addressed a letter to all the subjects of the Roman empire, exhorting them to renounce their former errors, and to embrace the doctrines of our Saviour, and trying to guide them to this truth. He stirred up the bishops in every city to build churches, and encouraged them not only by his letter, but also by presenting them with large sums of money, and defraying all the expenses of building. This his own letter sets forth, which was after this manner:--

Footnotes

[375] The letter was written to Serapion, Bishop of Thmuis, not Tmi el Emdid, in Egypt. St. Anthony left one of his sheepskin to Serapion, the other to Athanasius. Cf. Jer. de Vir. illust. 99. [376] Athanasius, chosen alike by the designation of the dying Alexander, by popular acclamation, and by the election of the Bishop of the Province, was, in spite of his reluctance and retirement, consecrated, a.d. 326. [377] The name does not vary in the mss. of Theodoretus, but Schulze would alter it to Serapion on the authority of the mss. of Athanasius. [378] sunachthesetai. The word sunaxis, originally equivalent to sunagoge, and little used before the Christian era, means sometimes the gathering of the congregation, sometimes the Holy Communion. Vide Suicer s.v. Here the meaning is determined by parallel authority. (Cf. Soc. I. 38.) [379] hierateion. The sacrarium or chancel, also to hagion. Cf. Book V. cap. 17, where Ambrosius rebukes Theodosius for entering within the rails. [380] Acts i. 18 [381] We are not necessarily impaled on Gibbon's dilemma of poison or miracle. There are curious instances of sudden death under similar circumstances, e.g. that of George Valla of Piacenza, at Venice circa 1500. Vide Bayle's Dict. s.v. [382] Heb. ix. 27

Chapter XIV.--Letter written by the Emperor Constantine respecting the building of Churches [383] .

"Constantinus Augustus, the great and the victorious, to Eusebius. "I am well aware, and am thoroughly convinced, my beloved brother, that as the servants of our Saviour Christ have been suffering up to the present time from nefarious machinations and tyrannical persecutions, the fabrics of all the churches must have either fallen into utter ruin from neglect, or, through apprehension of the impending iniquity, have been reduced below their proper dignity. But now that freedom is restored, and that dragon [384] , through the providence of God, and by our instrumentality, thrust out from the government of the Empire, I think that the divine power has become known to all, and that those who hitherto, from fear or from incredulity or from depravity, have lived in error, will now, upon becoming acquainted with Him who truly is, be led into the true and correct manner of life. Exert yourself, therefore, diligently in the reparation of the churches under your own jurisdiction, and admonish the principal bishops, priests, and deacons of other places to engage zealously in the same work; in order that all the churches which still exist may be repaired or enlarged, and that new ones may be built wherever they are required. You, and others through your intervention, can apply to magistrates [385] and to provincial governments [386] , for all that may be necessary for this purpose; for they have received written injunctions to render zealous obedience to whatever your holiness may command. May God preserve you, beloved brother." Thus the emperor wrote to the bishops in each province respecting the building of churches. From his letter to Eusebius of Palestine, it is easily learnt what measures he adopted to obtain copies of the Holy Bible [387] .

Footnotes

[383] This letter, according to Du Pin, was written a.d. 324 or 325. [384] Either Maxentius or Licinius. [385] hegemoneuo, used in Luke ii. 2, of Quirinus, and iii. 1, of Pontius Pilate, but Theodoretus employs it and its correlatives of both civil and ecclesiastical authorities. [386] eparchike taxis` eparchia occurs Acts xxiii. 34, of Cilicia, and in xxv. 1, of Jud�a, the province of the Procurator Festus, but in the time of Constantine the eparchoi were civil pr�fects, without any military command, governing four great eparchiai, viz. (i) Thrace, Egypt, and the East, (ii) Illyricum, Macedonia, and Greece, (iii) Italy and Africa, and (iv) Gaul, Spain, and Britain. (Zos. ii. 33.) On the accurate use of titles in the N.T. vide Bp. Lightfoot in Appendix to Essays on Supernatural Religion. [387] ta iera biblia, or, "the holy books:" The Books, par excellence, were about this time becoming The Book, whence Biblia Sacra as a singular.

Chapter XV.--The Epistle of Constantine concerning the preparation of copies of the Holy Scriptures.

"Constantinus Augustus, the great and the victorious, to Eusebius. "In the city [388] which bears our name, a great number of persons have, through the providential care of God the Saviour, united themselves to the holy Church. As all things there are in a state of rapid improvement, we deemed it most important that an additional number of churches should be built. Adopt joyfully the mode of procedure determined upon by us, which we have thought expedient to make known to your prudence, namely, that you should get written, on fine parchment, fifty volumes [389] , easily legible and handy for use; these you must have transcribed by skilled calligraphers, accurately acquainted with their art. I mean, of course, copies of the Holy Scriptures, which, as you know, it is most necessary that the congregation of the Church should both have and use. A letter has been sent from our clemency to the catholicus [390] of the diocese, in order that he may be careful that everything necessary for the undertaking is supplied. The duty devolving upon you is to take measures to ensure the completion of these manuscripts within a short space of time. When they are finished, you are authorised by this letter to order two public carriages for the purpose of transmitting them to us; and thus the fair manuscripts will be easily submitted to our inspection. Appoint one of the deacons of your church to take charge of this part of the business; when he comes to us, he shall receive proofs of our benevolence. May God preserve you, beloved brother." What has been already said is enough to shew, nay to clearly prove, how great zeal the emperor manifested on the matters of religion. I will, however, add his noble acts with regard to the Sepulchre of our Saviour. For having learnt that the idolaters, in their frantic rage, had heaped earth over the Lord's tomb, eager thus to destroy all remembrance of His Salvation, and had built over it a temple to the goddess of unbridled lust, in mockery of the Virgin's birth, the emperor ordered the foul shrine to be demolished, and the soil polluted with abominable sacrifices to be carried away and thrown out far from the city, and a new temple of great size and beauty to be erected on the site. All this is clearly set forth in the letter which he wrote to the president [391] of the church of Jerusalem, Macarius, whom we have already mentioned as a member of the great Nicene Council, and united with his brethren in withstanding the blasphemies of Arius. The following is the letter.

Footnotes

[388] Constantinople was dedicated a.d. 330 on the site of the ancient Byzantium. [389] somatia. The Codex Sinaiticus has been thought to be one of these. [390] i.e. the "Comes fisci," or officer managing the revenues of the Province. Dioecesis is used in civil sense by Cicero, Ep. Fam. 3, 8, 4, and Ammianus (17, 7, 6), mentions the compliment paid by Constantius II. to his empress Eusebia, by naming a "Diocese" of the Empire after her. [391] proedros. Cf. Thuc. iii. 25. The prutaneis in office in the Athenian ekklesia were so called. In our author a common synonym for Bishop. proedria = sedes = see.

Chapter XVI.--Letter from the Emperor to Macarius, Bishop of Jerusalem, concerning the building of the Holy Church.

"Constantinus, the victorious and the great, to Macarius. "The grace of our Saviour is so wonderful, that no words are adequate to express the present marvel. The fact that the monument of His most holy sufferings should have remained concealed beneath the earth, during so long a course of years, until the time when, on the death of the common enemy of all, it was destined to shine forth on His liberated servants, surpasses every other subject of admiration. If all the wise men throughout the world were collected into one place, and were to endeavour to express themselves worthily of it, they could not approach within an infinite distance of it; for this miracle is as much beyond all human power of belief, as heavenly things by their nature are mightier than human. Hence it is my first and only object that, as by new miracles the faith in the truth is daily confirmed, so the minds of us all may be more earnestly devoted to the holy law, wisely, zealously, and with one accord. As my design is, I think, now generally known, I desire that you, above all, should be assured that my most intense anxiety is to decorate with beautiful edifices that consecrated spot, which by God's command I have relieved from the burden of the foul idol which encumbered it. For from the beginning He declared it holy, and has rendered it still more holy from the time that He brought to light the proof and memorial of the sufferings of our Lord. I trust, then, to your sagacity to take every necessary care, not only that the basilica itself surpass all others; but that all its arrangements be such that this building may be incomparably superior to the most beautiful structures in every city throughout the world. We have entrusted our friend Dracilianus [392] , who discharges the functions of the most illustrious pr�fect of the province, with the superintendence of the work of the erection and decoration of the walls. He has received our orders to engage workmen and artisans, and to provide all that you may deem requisite for the building. Let us know, by letter, when you have inspected the work, what columns or marbles you consider would be most ornamental, in order that whatever you may inform us is necessary for the work may be conveyed thither from all quarters of the world. For that which is of all places the most wonderful, ought to be decorated in accordance with its dignity. I wish to learn from you whether you think that the vaulted roof of the basilica ought to be panelled [393] , or to be adorned in some other way; for if it is to be panelled it may also be gilt. Your holiness must signify to the aforesaid officers, as soon as possible, what workmen and artificers, and what sums of money, are requisite; and let me know promptly not only about the marbles and columns, but also about the panelled ceiling, if you decide that this will be the most beautiful mode of construction. May God preserve you, beloved brother [394] ."

Footnotes

[392] Vide note 4 on chap. xiv. [393] lakonaria, fr. Lat lacunar, (lacuna lacus LAK) = fretted ceiling. Cf. Hor. Od. II. xviii. 2. [394] On the traditional site of the Holy Sepulchre, and the buildings on it, vide Stanley's "Sinai and Palestine," pp. 457 and seqq., and Canon Bright in Dict. Christ. Ant., article "Holy Sepulchre."

Chapter XVII.--Helena [395] , Mother of the Emperor Constantine.--Her zeal in the Erection of the Holy Church.

The bearer of these letters was no less illustrious a personage than the mother of the emperor, even she who was glorious in her offspring, whose piety was celebrated by all; she who brought forth that great luminary and nurtured him in piety. She did not shrink from the fatigue of the journey on account of her extreme old age, but undertook it a little before her death, which occurred in her eightieth year [396] . When the empress beheld the place where the Saviour suffered, she immediately ordered the idolatrous temple, which had been there erected [397] , to be destroyed, and the very earth on which it stood to be removed. When the tomb, which had been so long concealed, was discovered, three crosses were seen buried near the Lord's sepulchre. All held it as certain that one of these crosses was that of our Lord Jesus Christ, and that the other two were those of the thieves who were crucified with Him. Yet they could not discern to which of the three the Body of the Lord had been brought nigh, and which had received the outpouring of His precious Blood. But the wise and holy Macarius, the president of the city, resolved this question in the following manner. He caused a lady of rank, who had been long suffering from disease, to be touched by each of the crosses, with earnest prayer, and thus discerned the virtue residing in that of the Saviour. For the instant this cross was brought near the lady, it expelled the sore disease, and made her whole. The mother of the emperor, on learning the accomplishment of her desire, gave orders that a portion of the nails should be inserted in the royal helmet, in order that the head of her son might be preserved from the darts of his enemies [398] . The other portion of the nails she ordered to be formed into the bridle of his horse, not only to ensure the safety of the emperor, but also to fulfil an ancient prophecy; for long before Zechariah, the prophet, had predicted that "There shall be upon the bridles of the horses Holiness unto the Lord Almighty [399] ." She had part of the cross of our Saviour conveyed to the palace [400] . The rest was enclosed in a covering of silver, and committed to the care of the bishop of the city, whom she exhorted to preserve it carefully, in order that it might be transmitted uninjured to posterity [401] . She then sent everywhere for workmen and for materials, and caused the most spacious and most magnificent churches to be erected. It is unnecessary to describe their beauty and grandeur; for all the pious, if I may so speak, hasten thither and behold the magnificence of the buildings [402] . This celebrated and admirable empress performed another action worthy of being remembered. She assembled all the women who had vowed perpetual virginity, and placing them on couches, she herself fulfilled the duties of a handmaid, serving them with food and handing them cups and pouring out wine, and bringing a basin and pitcher, and pouring out water to wash their hands. After performing these and other laudable actions, the empress returned to her son, and not long after, she joyfully entered upon the other and a better life, after having given her son much pious advice and her fervent parting blessing. After her death, those honours were rendered to her memory which her stedfast and zealous service to God deserved [403] .

Footnotes

[395] Flavia Julia Helena, the first wife of Constantius Chlorus, born of obscure parents in Bithynia, /-a.d. 328. "Stabulariam hanc primo fuisse adserunt, sic cognitam Constantio seniori." (Ambr. de obitu Theod. �42, p. 295.) The story of her being the daughter of a British Prince, and born at York or Colchester, is part of the belief current since William of Malmesbury concerning Constantine's British Origin, which is probably due to two passages of uncertain interpretation in the Panegyrici: (a) Max. et Const. iv., "liberavit ille (Constantius) Britannias servitute, tu etiam nobiles, illic oriendo, fecisti." (b) Eum. Pan. Const. ix., "O fortunata et nunc omnibus beatior terris Britannia, qu� Constantinum C�sarem prima vidisti." But is this said of birth or accession? Cf. Gibbon, chap. xiv. [396] Crispus and Fausta were put to death in 326. "If it was not in order to seek expiation for her son's crimes, and consolation for her own sorrows, that Helen made her famous journey to the Holy Land, it was immediately consequent upon them." Stanley, Eastern Church, p. 211. [397] i.e. of Venus, said to have been erected by Hadrian to pollute a spot hallowed by Christians. [398] The traditional which identifies the nail in Constantine's helmet with the iron band in the famous crown of Queen Theodolinda at Monza dates from the sixteenth century. [399] Zech. xiv. 20 estai to epi ton chalinon tou hippou ;'Lgion to Kuriû to pantokratori. lxx. [400] This portion Socrates says (i. 17) was enclosed by Constantine in a statue placed on a column of porphyry in his forum at Constantinople. [401] Carried away from Jerusalem by Chosroes II. in 614, it was recovered, says the legend, by Heraclius in 628. The feast of the "Exaltation of the Cross" on Sept. 14th, combines the Commemoration of the Vision of Constantine, the exaltation of the relic at Jerusalem, and its triumphal entry after its exile under Chosroes. In later years it was, as is well known, supposed to have a miraculous power of self-multiplication, and such names as St. Cross at Winchester, Santa Croce at Florence, and Vera Cruz in Mexico illustrate its cultus. Paulinus of Nola, at the beginning of the fifth century, sending a piece to Sulpicius Severus, says that though bits were frequently taken from it, it grew no smaller (Ep. xxxi.). [402] May 3rd has been kept since the end of the eighth century in honour of the "Invention of the Cross" and the Commemoration of the ancient "Ellinmas" was retained in the reformed Anglican Calendar. [403] Tillemont puts her death in 328. Eusebius (V. Const. iii. 47), says she was carried epi ten basileuousan polin, by which he generally means Rome, but Socrates (i. 17) writes, eis ten basileuousan nean Romen, i.e. Constantinople. There is a chapel in her honour in the church of the Ara Coeli at Rome, but her traditional burial-place is a mile and a half beyond the Porta Maggiore, on the Via Labicana, and thence came the porphyry sarcophagus called St. Helena's, which was placed by Pius VI. in the Hall of the Greek Cross in the Vatican.

Chapter XVIII.--The Unlawful Translation of Eusebius, Bishop of Nicomedia.

The Arian party did not desist from their evil machinations. They had only signed the confession of faith for the purpose of disguising themselves in sheeps'-skins, while they were acting the part of wolves. The holy Alexander, of Byzantium, for the city was not yet called Constantinople, who by his prayer had pierced Arius to the heart, had, at the period to which we are referring, been translated to a better life. Eusebius, the propagator of impiety, little regarding the definition which, only a short time previously, he with the other bishops had agreed upon, without delay quitted Nicomedia and seized upon the see of Constantinople, in direct violation of that canon [404] which prohibits bishops and presbyters from being translated from one city to another. But that those who carry their infatuation so far as to deny the divinity of the only-begotten Son of God, should likewise violate the other laws, cannot excite surprise. Nor was this the first occasion that he made this innovation; for, having been originally entrusted with the see of Berytus, he leapt from thence to Nicomedia. Whence he was expelled by the synod, on account of his manifest impiety, as was likewise Theognis, bishop of Nic�a. This is related a second time in the letters of the emperor Constantine; and I shall here insert the close of the letter which he wrote to the Nicomedians.

Footnotes

[404] i.e. Apost. Can. xiv., which forbids translation without an "eulogos aitia, or prospect of more spiritual gain in saving souls; and guards the application of the rule by the proviso that neither the bishop himself, nor the paroikia desiring him, but many bishops, shall decide the point." Dict. Christ. Ant. i. 226.

Chapter XIX.--Epistle of the Emperor Constantine against Eusebius and Theognis, addressed to the Nicomedians.

"Who has taught these doctrines to the innocent multitude? It is manifestly Eusebius, the co-operator in the cruelty of the tyrants. For that he was the creature [405] of the tyrant has been clearly shown; and, indeed, is proved by the slaughter of the bishops, and by the fact that these victims were true bishops. The relentless persecution of the Christians proclaims this fact aloud. "I shall not here say anything of the insults directed against me, by which the conspiracies of the opposite faction were mainly carried out. But he went so far as to send spies to watch me, and scarcely refrained from raising troops in aid of the tyrant. Let not any one imagine that I allege what I am not prepared to prove. I am in possession of clear evidence; for I have caused the bishops and presbyters belonging to his following to be seized. But I pass over all these facts. I only mention them for the purpose of making these persons ashamed of their conduct, and not from any feeling of resentment. "There is one thing I fear, one thing which causes me anxiety, and t