The Ecclesistical History of Sozomen - Book III
|
Advanced Information
comprising a history of the church, from a.d. 323 to a.d. 425.
translated from the Greek.
Revised by Chester d. Hartranft,
Hartford Theological Seminary.
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 1886 by Philip Schaff,
New York: Christian Literature Publishing Co.
Book III.
Chapter I.--After the Death of Constantine the Great, the Adherents of
Eusebius and Theognis attack the Nicene Faith.
We have now seen what events transpired in the churches during the
reign of Constantine. [1208] On his death the doctrine which had been
set forth at Nicæa, was subjected to renewed examination. Although
this doctrine was not universally approved, no one, during the life of
Constantine, had dared to reject it openly. At his death, however,
many renounced this opinion, especially those who had previously been
suspected of treachery. Of all these Eusebius and Theognis, bishops of
the province of Bithynia, did everything in their power to give
predominance to the tenets of Arius. They believed that this object
would be easily accomplished, if the return of Athanasius from exile
could be prevented, and by giving the government of the Egyptian
churches to a bishop of like opinion with them. They found an
efficient coadjutor in the presbyter who had obtained from Constantine
the recall of Arius. He was held in high esteem by the emperor
Constantius, on account of the service he had rendered in delivering
to him the testament of his father; since he was trusted, he boldly
seized the opportunities, until he became an intimate of the emperor's
wife, and of the powerful eunuchs of the women's sleeping apartments.
At this period Eusebius [1209] was appointed to superintend the
concerns of the royal household, and being zealously attached to
Arianism, he induced the empress and many of the persons belonging to
the court to adopt the same sentiments. Hence disputations concerning
doctrines again became prevalent, both in private and in public, and
revilings and animosities were renewed. This state of things was in
accordance with the views of Theognis and his partisans.
Footnotes
[1208] This section is manifestly an abridgment of Soc. ii. 2.
[1209] This Eusebius was a eunuch, who was now made chief chamberlain,
and became a disciple of the alleged presbyter.
Chapter II.--Return of Athanasius the Great from Rome; Letter of
Constantine Cæsar, Son of Constantine the Great; Renewed Machinations
of the Arians against Athanasius; Acacius of Berroea; War between
Constans and Constantine.
|
|
At this period Athanasius returned from Gaul to Alexandria. [1210] It
is said that Constantine intended to have recalled him, and that in
his testament he even gave orders to that effect. But as he was
prevented by death from performing his intention, his son who bore his
name, and who was then commanding in Western Gaul, recalled
Athanasius, and wrote a letter on the subject to the people of
Alexandria. Having met with a copy of this letter translated from the
Latin into Greek, I shall insert it precisely as I found it. It is as
follows:--
"Constantine Cæsar, to the people of the Catholic Church in the city
of Alexandria. [1211]
"You cannot, I believe, be unacquainted with the fact that Athanasius,
the interpreter of the venerated law, since the cruelty of his
bloodthirsty and hostile enemies continued, to the danger of his
sacred person, was sent for a time into Gaul in order that he might
not incur irretrievable extremities through the perversity of these
worthless opponents; in order then to make this danger futile, he was
taken out of the jaws of the men, who pressed upon him, and was
commanded to live near me, so that in the city where he dwelt, he
might be amply furnished with all necessaries; but his virtue is so
famous and extraordinary, because he is confident of Divine aid, that
he sets at naught all the rougher burdens of fortune. Our lord and my
father, Constantine Augustus, of blessed memory, intended to have
reinstated this bishop in his own place, and thus especially to have
restored him to your much beloved piety; but, since he was anticipated
by the human lot, and died before fulfilling his intention, I, as his
successor, purpose to carry into execution the design of the emperor
of Divine memory. Athanasius will inform you, when he shall see your
face, in how great reverence he was held by me. Nor is it surprising
that I should have acted as I have done towards him, for the image of
your own desire and the appearance of so noble a man, moved and
impelled me to this step. May Divine Providence watch over you, my
beloved brethren."
In consequence of this letter from the emperor Athanasius went home,
and resumed the government of the Egyptian churches. Those who were
attached to the Arian doctrines were thrown into consternation and
could not keep the peace; they excited continuous seditions, and had
recourse to other machinations against him. The partisans of Eusebius
accused him before the emperor of being a seditious person, and of
having reversed the decree of exile, contrary to the laws of the
church, and without the consent of the bishops. I shall presently
relate in the proper place, how, by their intrigues, Athanasius was
again expelled from Alexandria.
Eusebius, surnamed Pamphilus, died [1212] about this period, and
Acacius succeeded to the bishopric of Cæsarea in Palestine. He was a
zealous imitator of Eusebius because he had been instructed by him in
the Sacred Word; he possessed a capable mind and was polished in
expression, so that he left many writings worthy of commendation. Not
long after, [1213] the emperor Constantine declared war against his
brother Constans at Aquileia, [1214] and was slain by his own
generals. The Roman Empire was divided between the surviving brothers;
the West fell to the lot of Constans and the East to Constantius.
Footnotes
[1210] This Chapter follows the order of Soc. ii. 2-5. Cf. Philost.
ii. 18.
[1211] This letter is translated in Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 87; the
original was in Latin, and Athan. probably translated it.
[1212] Soc. ii. 4.
[1213] Soc. ii. 5.
[1214] The mention of Aquileia, which is omitted by Socrates, shows
consultation with another source. The statement of the agents in his
death is different also.
Chapter III.--Paul, Bishop of Constantinople, and Macedonius, the
Pneumatomachian.
Alexander died [1215] about this time, and Paul succeeded to the high
priesthood of Constantinople. The followers of Arius and Macedonius
assert that he took possession at his own motion, and against the
advice of Eusebius, bishop of Nicomedia, or of Theodore, bishop of
Heraclea, in Thrace; upon whom, as being the nearest bishops, the
right of conferring ordination devolved. Many, however, maintain, on
the testimony of Alexander, whom he succeeded, that he was ordained by
the bishops who were then assembled at Constantinople. [1216] For when
Alexander, who was ninety-eight years of age, and who had conducted
the episcopal office vigorously for twenty-three years, was at the
point of death, his clergy, asked him to whom he wished to turn over
his church. "If," replied he, "you seek a man good in Divine matters
and one who is apt to teach you, have Paul. But if you desire one who
is conversant with public affairs, and with the councils of rulers,
Macedonius is better." The Macedonians themselves admit that this
testimony was given by Alexander; but they say that Paul was more
skilled in the transaction of business and the art of eloquence; but
they put emphasis for Macedonius, on the testimony of his life; and
they accuse Paul of having been addicted to effeminacy and an
indifferent conduct. [1217] It appears, however, from their own
acknowledgment, that Paul was a man of eloquence, and brilliant in
teaching the Church. Events proved that he was not competent to combat
the casualties of life, or to hold intercourse with those in power;
for he was never successful in subverting the machinations of his
enemies, [1218] like those who are adroit in the management of
affairs. Although he was greatly beloved by the people, he suffered
severely from the treachery of those who then rejected the doctrine
which prevailed at Nicæa. In the first place, he was expelled from the
church of Constantinople, as if some accusation of misconduct had been
established against him. [1219] He was then condemned to banishment,
and finally, it is said, fell a victim to the devices of his enemies,
and was strangled. But these latter events took place at a subsequent
period.
Footnotes
[1215] Cf. Soc. ii. 6. While the order of events is the same, Soz. had
a different source, for he makes additions. Cf. Athan. Hist. Arian. 7.
[1216] An endemic Synod.
[1217] adiaphoros bios, literally "an indifferent life." St. Nilus,
St. Basil, and others of the Christian Fathers use this phrase as
opposed to an ascetic life.
[1218] He had been originally accused by his presbyter Macedonius. The
accusation, according to Theodoret, after his restoration was sedition
(H. E. ii. 5), the crime usually imputed to the homoousians. Cf.
Athan. Hist. Arian.
[1219] He had been originally accused by his presbyter Macedonius. The
accusation, according to Theodoret, after his restoration was sedition
(H. E. ii. 5), the crime usually imputed to the homoousians. Cf.
Athan. Hist. Arian.
Chapter IV.--A Sedition was excited on the Ordination of Paul.
The ordination of Paul occasioned a great commotion in the Church of
Constantinople. [1220] During the life of Alexander, the Arians did
not act very openly; for the people by being attentive to him were
well governed and honored Divine things, and especially believed that
the unexpected occurrence which befell Arius, whom they believed met
such a death, was the Divine wrath, drawn down by the imprecations of
Alexander. After the death of this bishop, however, the people became
divided into two parties, and disputes and contests concerning
doctrines were openly carried on. The adherents of Arius desired the
ordination of Macedonius, while those who maintained that the Son is
consubstantial with the Farther wished to have Paul as their bishop;
and this latter party prevailed. After the ordination of Paul, the
emperor, who chanced to be away from home, returned to Constantinople,
and manifested as much displeasure at what had taken place as though
the bishopric had been conferred upon an unworthy man. Through the
machinations of the enemies of Paul a Synod was convened, and he was
expelled from the Church. It handed over the Church of Constantinople
to Eusebius, bishop of Nicomedia.
Footnotes
[1220] Soc. ii. 6, 7.
Chapter V.--The Partial Council of Antioch; it deposed Athanasius; it
substituted Gregory; its Two Statements of the Faith; those who agreed
with them.
Soon after these occurrences, the emperor went to Antioch, a city of
Syria. [1221] Here a church had already been completed, which excelled
in size and beauty. Constantine began to build it during his lifetime,
and as the structure had been just finished by his son Constantius, it
was deemed a favorable opportunity by the partisans of Eusebius, who
of old were zealous for it, to convene a council. They, therefore,
with those from various regions who held their sentiments, met
together in Antioch; [1222] their bishops were about ninety-seven in
number. Their professed object was the consecration of the newly
finished church; but they intended nothing else than the abolition of
the decrees of the Nicæan Council, and this was fully proved by the
sequel. The Church of Antioch was then governed by Placetus, [1223]
who had succeeded Euphronius. The death of Constantine the Great had
taken place about five years prior to this period. When all the
bishops had assembled in the presence of the emperor Constantius, the
majority expressed great indignation, and vigorously accused
Athanasius of having contemned the sacerdotal regulation which they
had enacted, [1224] and taken possession of the bishopric of
Alexandria without first obtaining the sanction of a council. They
also deposed that he was the cause of the death of several persons,
who fell in a sedition excited by his return; and that many others had
on the same occasion been arrested and delivered up to the judicial
tribunals. By these accusations they contrived to cast odium on
Athanasius, and it was decreed that Gregory should be invested with
the government of the Church of Alexandria. They then turned to the
discussion of doctrinal questions, and found no fault with the decrees
of the council of Nice. They dispatched letters to the bishops of
every city, in which they declared that, as they were bishops
themselves, they had not followed Arius. "For how," said they, "could
we have been followers of him, when he was but a presbyter, [1225] and
we were placed above him?" Since they were the testers of his faith,
they had readily received him; and they believed in the faith which
had from the beginning been handed down by tradition. This they
further explained at the bottom of their letter, but without
mentioning the substance of the Father or the Son, or the term
consubstantial. They resorted, in fact, to such ambiguity of
expression, that neither the Arians nor the followers of the decrees
of the Nicæan Council could call the arrangement of their words into
question, as though they were ignorant of the holy Scriptures. They
purposely avoided all forms of expression which were rejected by
either party, and only made use of those which were universally
admitted. They confessed [1226] that the Son is with the Father, that
He is the only begotten One, and that He is God, and existed before
all things; and that He took flesh upon Him, and fulfilled the will of
His Father. They confessed these and similar truths, but they did not
describe the doctrine of the Son being co-eternal or consubstantial
with the Father, or the opposite. They subsequently changed their
minds, it appears, about this formulary, and issued another, [1227]
which, I think, very nearly resembled that of the council of Nice,
unless, indeed, some secret meaning be attached to the words which is
not apparent to me. Although they refrained--I know not from what
motive--from saying that the Son is consubstantial, they confessed
that He is immutable, that His Divinity is not susceptible of change,
that He is the perfect image of the substance, and counsel, and power,
and glory of the Father, and that He is the first-born of every
creature. They stated that they had found this formulary of faith, and
that it was entirely written by Lucianus, [1228] who was martyred in
Nicomedia, and who was a man highly approved and exceedingly accurate
in the sacred Scriptures. I know not whether this statement was really
true, or whether they merely advanced it in order to give weight to
their own document, by connecting with it the dignity of a martyr. Not
only did Eusebius (who, on the expulsion of Paul, had been transferred
from Nicomedia to the throne of Constantinople) participate in this
council, but likewise Acacius, the successor of Eusebius Pamphilus,
Patrophilus, bishop of Scythopolis, Theodore, bishop of Heraclea,
formerly called Perinthus, Eudoxius, bishop of Germanicia, who
subsequently directed the Church of Constantinople after Macedonius,
and Gregory, who had been chosen to preside over the Church of
Alexandria. It was universally acknowledged that all these bishops
held the same sentiments, such as Dianius, [1229] bishop of Cæsarea in
Cappadocia, George, bishop of Laodicea in Syria, and many others who
acted as bishops over metropolitan and other distinguished churches.
Footnotes
[1221] Soc. ii. 7.
[1222] Soc. ii. 8-10. Soz. with independent matter borrows from the
same sources as Soc., one of which is Athan. de Synodis, 22-25.
[1223] Also called Flaccillus. Soc. ii. 8.
[1224] Cf. Soc. ii. 10.
[1225] Athan. de Synodis, 22.
[1226] This creed is given in Athan. de Synodis, 23. Cf. Soc. ii. 10;
here only in a suggestion and criticism.
[1227] Theophronius' statement is passed over, and the final creed is
here given in summary. Athan. de Synodis, 24, 25.
[1228] This person was a presbyter of Antioch. Cf. vi. 12; Philost.
ii. 12-14; Eus. H. E. ix. 6.
[1229] He is also called Dianoeus.
Chapter VI.--Eusebius surnamed Emesenus; Gregory accepted Alexandria;
Athanasius seeks Refuge in Rome.
Eusebius, surnamed Emesenus, likewise attended the council. [1230] He
sprang from a noble family of Edessa, a city of Osroënæ. According to
the custom of his country, he had from his youth upwards, learned the
Holy Word, and was afterwards made acquainted with the learning of the
Greeks, by the teachers who then frequented his native city. He
subsequently acquired a more intimate knowledge of sacred literature
under the guidance of Eusebius Pamphilus and Patrophilus, the
president of Scythopolis. He went to Antioch at the time that
Eustathius was deposed on the accusation of Cyrus, and lived with
Euphronius, his successor, on terms of intimacy. He fled to escape
being invested with the priestly dignity, went to Alexandria and
frequented the schools of the philosophers. After acquainting himself
with their mode of discipline, he returned to Antioch and dwelt with
Placetus, the successor of Euphronius. During the time that the
council was held in that city, Eusebius, bishop of Constantinople,
entreated him to accept the see of Alexandria for it was thought that,
by his great reputation for sanctity and consummate eloquence, he
would easily supplant Athanasius in the esteem of the Egyptians. He,
however, refused the ordination, on the plea that he could otherwise
only incur the ready hatred of the Alexandrians, who would have no
other bishop but Athanasius. Gregory was, therefore, appointed to the
church of Alexandria, and Eusebius to that of Emesa.
There he suffered from a sedition; for the people accused him of
practicing that variety of astronomy which is called astrological, and
being obliged to seek safety by flight, he repaired to Laodicea, and
dwelt with George, bishop of that city, who was his particular friend.
He afterwards accompanied this bishop to Antioch, and obtained
permission from the bishops Placetus and Narcissus to return to Emesa.
He was much esteemed by the emperor Constantius, and attended him in
his military expedition against the Persians. It is said that God
wrought miracles through his instrumentality, as is testified by
George of Laodicea, [1231] who has related these and other incidents
about him.
But although he was endowed with so many exalted qualities, he could
not escape the jealousy of those who are irritated by witnessing the
virtues of others. He endured the censure of having embraced the
doctrines of Sabellius. At the present time, however, he voted with
the bishops who had been convened at Antioch. It is said that Maximus,
bishop of Jerusalem, purposely, kept aloof from this council, because
he repented having unawares consented to the deposition of Athanasius.
[1232] The manager of the Roman see, nor any representative from the
east of Italy, nor from the parts beyond Rome were present at Antioch.
[1233] At the same period of time, the Franks devastated Western Gaul;
and the provinces of the East, and more particularly Antioch after the
Synod, were visited by tremendous earthquakes. [1234] After the Synod,
Gregory repaired to Alexandria with a large body of soldiers, who were
enjoined to provide an undisturbed and safe entrance into the city;
the Arians also, who were anxious for the expulsion of Athanasius,
sided with him. Athanasius, fearful lest the people should be exposed
to sufferings on his account, [1235] assembled them by night in the
church, and when the soldiers came to take possession of the church,
prayers having been concluded, he first ordered a psalm to be sung.
During the chanting of this psalm the soldiers remained without and
quietly awaited its conclusion, and in the meantime Athanasius passed
under the singers and secretly made his escape, and fled to Rome. In
this manner Gregory possessed himself of the see of Alexandria. The
indignation of the people was aroused, and they burnt the church which
bore the name of Dionysius, one of their former bishops.
Footnotes
[1230] From his life by George, bishop of Laodicea. Cf. Soc. ii. 9.
[1231] Soc. also quotes him (ii. 9), and says he wrote an Encomium of
Eusebius Emesenus, ii. 24.
[1232] Soc. ii. 8.
[1233] Soc. ii. 8.
[1234] Soc. ii. 10.
[1235] Athan. Ep. Encyc. 2-7; Apol. cont. Arian. 30; Hist. Arian.
10-14, 57, 74: Soc. ii. 11.
Chapter VII.--High Priests of Rome and of Constantinople; Restoration
of Paul after Eusebius; the Slaughter of Hermogenes, a General of the
Army; Constantius came from Antioch and removed Paul, and was
wrathfully disposed toward the City; he allowed Macedonius to be in
Doubt, and returned to Antioch.
Thus were the schemes of those who upheld various heresies in
opposition to truth successfully carried into execution; and thus did
they depose those bishops who strenuously maintained throughout the
East the supremacy of the doctrines of the Nicæan Council. These
heretics had taken possession of the most important sees, such as
Alexandria in Egypt, Antioch in Syria, and the imperial city of the
Hellespont, and they held all the persuaded bishops in subjection. The
ruler of the Church at Rome and all the priests of the West regarded
these deeds as a personal insult; for they had accorded from the
beginning with all the decisions in the vote made by those convened at
Nice, nor did they now cease from that way of thinking. On the arrival
of Athanasius, they received him kindly, and espoused his cause among
themselves. Irritated at this interference, Eusebius wrote to Julius,
exhorting him to constitute himself a judge of the decrees that had
been enacted against Athanasius by the council of Tyre. [1236] But
before he had been able to ascertain the sentiments of Julius, and,
indeed, not long after the council of Antioch, Eusebius died.
Immediately upon this event, those citizens of Constantinople who
maintained the doctrines of the Nicæan Council, conducted Paul to the
church. At the same time those of the opposing multitude seized this
occasion and came together in another church, among whom were the
adherents of Theognis, bishop of Nicæa, of Theodore, bishop of
Heraclea, and others of the same party who chanced to be present, and
they ordained Macedonius bishop of Constantinople. This excited
frequent seditions in the city which assumed all the appearance of a
war, for the people fell upon one another, and many perished. The city
was filled with tumult, so that the emperor, who was then at Antioch,
on hearing of what had occurred, was moved to wrath, and issued a
decree for the expulsion of Paul. Hermogenes, general of the cavalry,
endeavored to put this edict of the emperor's into execution; for
having been sent to Thrace, he had, on the journey, to pass by
Constantinople, and he thought, by means of his army, to eject Paul
from the church by force. But the people, instead of yielding, met him
with open resistance, and while the soldiers, in order to carry out
the orders they had received, attempted still greater violence, the
insurgents entered the house of Hermogenes, set fire to it, killed
him, and attaching a cord to his body, dragged it through the city.
[1237] The emperor had no sooner received this intelligence than he
took horse for Constantinople, in order to punish the people. But he
spared them when he saw them coming to meet him with tears and
supplications. He deprived the city of about half of the corn which
his father, Constantine, had granted them annually out of the public
treasury from the tributes of Egypt, probably from the idea that
luxury and excess made the populace idle and disposed to sedition. He
turned his anger against Paul and commanded his expulsion from the
city. He manifested great displeasure against Macedonius also, because
he was the occasion of the murder of the general and of other
individuals and also, because he had been ordained without first
obtaining his sanction. He, however, returned to Antioch, without
having either confirmed or dissolved his ordination. Meanwhile the
zealots of the Arian tenets deposed Gregory, because he was
indifferent in the support of their doctrines, and had moreover
incurred the ill-will of the Alexandrians on account of the calamities
which had befallen the city at his entrance, especially the
conflagration of the church. They elected George, a native of
Cappadocia, in his stead; [1238] this new bishop was admired on
account of his activity and his zeal in support of the Arian dogma.
Footnotes
[1236] Soc. ii. 11-14; Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 22.
[1237] Cf. Am. Marcel. xiv. 10. 2.
[1238] Soc. ii. 14. Cf. Philost. iii. 3.
Chapter VIII.--Arrival of the Eastern High Priests at Rome; Letter of
Julius, Bishop of Rome, concerning them; by means of the Letters of
Julius, Paul and Athanasius receive their own Sees; Contents of the
Letter from the Archpriests of the East to Julius.
Athanasius, on leaving Alexandria, had fled to Rome. [1239] Paul,
bishop of Constantinople, Marcellus, bishop of Ancyra, and Asclepas,
bishop of Gaza, repaired thither at the same time. Asclepas, who was
opposed to the Arians and had therefore been deposed, after having
been accused by some of the heterodox of having thrown down an altar;
Quintianus had been appointed in his stead over the Church of Gaza.
Lucius also, bishop of Adrianople, who had been deposed from the
church under his care on another charge, was dwelling at this period
in Rome. The Roman bishop, on learning the accusation against each
individual, and on finding that they held the same sentiments about
the Nicæan dogmas, admitted them to communion as of like orthodoxy;
and as the care for all was fitting to the dignity of his see, he
restored them all to their own churches. He wrote to the bishops of
the East, and rebuked them for having judged these bishops unjustly,
and for harassing the Churches by abandoning the Nicæan doctrines. He
summoned a few among them to appear before him on an appointed day, in
order to account to him for the sentence they had passed, and
threatened to bear with them no longer, unless they would cease to
make innovations. This was the tenor of his letters. Athanasius and
Paul were reinstated in their respective sees, and forwarded the
letter of Julius to the bishops of the East. The bishops could
scarcely brook such documents, and they assembled together at Antioch,
[1240] and framed a reply to Julius, beautifully expressed and
composed with great legal skill, yet filled with considerable irony
and indulging in the strongest threats. They confessed in this
epistle, that the Church of Rome was entitled to universal honor,
because it was the school of the apostles, and had become the
metropolis of piety from the outset, although the introducers of the
doctrine had settled there from the East. They added that the second
place in point of honor ought not to be assigned to them, because they
did not have the advantage of size or number in their churches; for
they excelled the Romans in virtue and determination. They called
Julius to account for having admitted the followers of Athanasius into
communion, and expressed their indignation against him for having
insulted their Synod and abrogated their decrees, and they assailed
his transactions as unjust and discordant with ecclesiastical right.
After these censures and protestations against such grievances, they
proceeded to state, that if Julius would acknowledge the deposition of
the bishops whom they had expelled, and the substitution of those whom
they had ordained in their stead, they would promise peace and
fellowship; but that, unless he would accede to these terms, they
would openly declare their opposition. They added that the priests who
had preceded them in the government of the Eastern churches had
offered no opposition to the deposition of Novatian, by the Church of
Rome. They made no allusion in their letter to any deviations they had
manifested from the doctrines of the council of Nice, but merely
stated they had various reasons to allege in justification of the
course they had pursued, and that they considered it unnecessary to
enter at that time upon any defense of their conduct, as they were
suspected of having violated justice in every respect.
Footnotes
[1239] Apol. cont. Arian. 20-35; Soc. ii. 15. Soz. is more extended
than Soc.
[1240] From Sabinus? Cf. Soc. ii. 15.
Chapter IX.--Ejection of Paul and Athanasius; Macedonius is invested
with the Government of the Church of Constantinople.
After having written in this strain to Julius, the bishops of the East
brought accusations against those whom they had deposed before the
emperor Constantius. [1241] Accordingly, the emperor, who was then at
Antioch, wrote to Philip, the prefect of Constantinople, commanding
him to surrender the Church to Macedonius, and to expel Paul from the
city. The prefect feared the commotion among the people, and before
the order of the emperor could be divulged, he repaired to the public
bath which is called Zeuxippus, a conspicuous and large structure, and
summoned Paul, as if he wished to converse with him on some affairs of
general interest; as soon as he had arrived, he showed him the edict
of the emperor. Paul was, according to orders, secretly conducted
through the palace contiguous to the bath, to the seaside, and placed
on board a vessel and was sent to Thessalonica, whence, it is said,
his ancestors originally came. He was strictly prohibited from
approaching the Eastern regions, but was not forbidden to visit
Illyria and the remoter provinces.
On quitting the court room, Philip, accompanied by Macedonius,
proceeded to the church. The people, who had in the meantime been
assembling together in untold numbers, quickly filled the church, and
the two parties into which they were divided, namely, the supporters
of the Arian heresy and the followers of Paul respectively, strove to
take possession of the building. When the prefect and Macedonius
arrived at the gates of the church, the soldiers endeavored to force
back the people, in order to make way for these dignitaries, but as
they were so crowded together, it was impossible for them to recede,
since they were closely packed to the farthest point, or to make way;
the soldiers, under the impression that the crowd was unwilling to
retire, slew many with their swords, and a great number were killed by
being trampled upon. The edict of the emperor was thus accomplished,
and Macedonius received the Churches, while Paul was unexpectedly
ejected from the Church in Constantinople.
Athanasius in the meantime had fled, and concealed himself, fearing
the menace of the emperor Constantius, for he had threatened to punish
him with death; for the heterodox had made the emperor believe that he
was a seditious person, and that he had, on his return to the
bishopric, occasioned the death of several persons. But the anger of
the emperor had been chiefly excited by the representation that
Athanasius had sold the provisions which the emperor Constantine had
bestowed on the poor of Alexandria, and had appropriated the price.
Footnotes
[1241] Soc. ii. 16, 17; Athan. Hist. Arian. 7; and Apol. de fuga sua,
3, 6-8. Cf. Theodoret, H. E. ii. 5.
Chapter X.--The Bishop of Rome writes to the Bishops of the East in
Favor of Athanasius, and they send an Embassy to Rome who, with the
Bishop of Rome, are to investigate the Charges against the Eastern
Bishops; this Deputation is dismissed by Constans, the Cæsar.
The bishops of Egypt, [1242] having sent a declaration in writing that
these allegations were false, and Julius having been apprised that
Athanasius was far from being in safety in Egypt, sent for him to his
own city. He replied at the same time to the letter of the bishops who
were convened at Antioch, for just then he happened to have received
their epistle, [1243] and accused them of having clandestinely
introduced innovations contrary to the dogmas of the Nicene council,
and of having violated the laws of the Church, by neglecting to invite
him to join their Synod; for he alleged that there is a sacerdotal
canon which declares that whatever is enacted contrary to the judgment
of the bishop of Rome is null. He also reproached them for having
deviated from justice in all their proceedings against Athanasius,
both at Tyre and Mareotis, and stated that the decrees enacted at the
former city had been annulled, on account of the calumny concerning
the hand of Arsenius, and at the latter city, on account of the
absence of Athanasius. Last of all he reprehended the arrogant style
of their epistle.
Julius was induced by all these reasons to undertake the defense of
Athanasius and of Paul: the latter had arrived in Italy not long
previously, and had lamented bitterly these calamities. When Julius
perceived that what he had written to those who held the sacerdotal
dignity in the East was of no avail, he made the matter known to
Constans the emperor. Accordingly, Constans wrote to his brother
Constantius, requesting him to send some of the bishops of the East,
that they might assign a reason for the edicts of deposition which
they had passed. Three bishops were selected for this purpose; namely,
Narcissus, bishop of Irenopolis, in Cilicia; Theodore, bishop of
Heraclea, in Thrace; and Mark, bishop of Arethusa, in Syria. On their
arrival in Italy, they strove to justify their actions and to persuade
the emperor that the sentence passed by the Eastern Synod was just.
Being required to produce a statement of their belief, they concealed
the formulary they had drawn up at Antioch, and presented another
written confession [1244] which was equally at variance with the
doctrines approved at Nicæa. Constans perceived that they had unjustly
entrapped both Paul and Athanasius, and had ejected them from
communion, not for charges against his conduct, as the depositions
held, but simply on account of differences in doctrine; and he
accordingly dismissed the deputation without giving any credit to the
representations for which they had come.
Footnotes
[1242] Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 3-19.
[1243] Id. 20-35, 36; Soc. ii. 17, 18. Soz. gives more points. Soc.
accuses Sabinus of omitting the Julian letters.
[1244] Athan. de Synodis, 25, and given in full by Soc. ii. 18.
Chapter XI.--The Long Formulary and the Enactments issued by the Synod
of Sardica. Julius, Bishop of Rome, and Hosius, the Spanish Bishop,
deposed by the Bishops of the East, because they held Communion with
Athanasius and the Rest.
Three years afterwards, the bishops of the East [1245] sent to those
of the West a formulary of faith, which, because it had been framed
with verbiage and thoughts in excess of any former confession, was
called makrostichos ekthesis. [1246] In this formulary they made no
mention of the substance of God, but those are excommunicated who
maintain that the Son arose out of what had no previous existence, or
that He is of Another hypostasis, and not of God, or that there was a
time or an age in which He existed not. Eudoxius, who was still bishop
of Germanicia, Martyrius, and Macedonius, carried this document, but
the Western priests did not entertain it; for they declared that they
felt fully satisfied with the doctrines established at Nicæa, and
thought it entirely unnecessary to be too curious about such points.
After the Emperor Constans [1247] had requested his brother to
reinstate the followers of Athanasius in their sees, and had found his
application to be unavailing, on account of the counteracting
influence of those who adopted a hostile heresy; and when, moreover,
the party of Athanasius and Paul entreated Constans to assemble a
Synod on account of the plots for the abolition of orthodox doctrines,
both the emperors were of the opinion that the bishops of the East and
of the West should be convened on a certain day at Sardica, a city of
Illyria. The bishops of the East, who had previously assembled at
Philippopolis, a city of Thrace, wrote to the bishops of the West, who
had already assembled at Sardica, that they would not join them,
unless they would eject the followers of Athanasius from their
assembly, and from communion with them, because they had been deposed.
They afterwards went to Sardica, but declared they would not enter the
church, while those who had been deposed by them were admitted
thither. The bishops of the West replied, that they never had ejected
them, and that they would not yield this now, particularly as Julius,
bishop of Rome, after having investigated the case, had not condemned
them, and that besides, they were present and ready to justify
themselves and to refute again the offenses imputed to them. These
declarations, however, were of no avail; and since the time they had
appointed for the adjustment of their differences, concerning which
they had convened, had expired, they finally wrote letters to one
another on these points, and by these they were led to an increase of
their previous ill-will. And after they had convened separately, they
brought forward opposite decisions; for the Eastern bishops confirmed
the sentences they had already enacted against Athanasius, Paul,
Marcellus, and Asclepas, and deposed Julius, bishop of Rome, because
he had been the first to admit those who had been condemned by them,
into communion; and Hosius, the confessor, was also deposed, partly
for the same reason, and partly because he was the friend of Paulinus
and Eustathius, the rulers of the church in Antioch. Maximus, bishop
of Treves, was deposed, because he had been among the first who had
received Paul into communion, and had been the cause of his returning
to Constantinople, and because he had excluded from communion the
Eastern bishops who had repaired to Gaul. Besides the above, they
likewise deposed Protogenes, bishop of Sardica, and Gaudentius; [1248]
the one because he favored Marcellus, although he had previously
condemned him, and the other because he had adopted a different line
of conduct from that of Cyriacus, his predecessor, and had supported
many individuals then deposed by them. After issuing these sentences,
they made known to the bishops of every region, that they were not to
hold communion with those who were deposed, and that they were not to
write to them, nor to receive letters from them. They likewise
commanded them to believe what was said concerning God in the
formulary which they subjoined to their letter, and in which no
mention was made of the term "consubstantial," but in which, those
were excommunicated who said there are three Gods, or that Christ is
not God, or that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are the same,
or that the Son is unbegotten, or that there was a time or an age in
which He existed not. [1249]
Footnotes
[1245] Athan. de Synodis, 26, in ten heads, and given by Soc. ii. 19,
and with like introduction.
[1246] For the whole section, Soc. ii. 19, 20; Athan. de Synodis, 26.
Cf. Hil. Frag. ii. and iii.; Sulp. Sev. H. S. ii. 36.
[1247] Soc. ii. 20, but Soz. has other details.
[1248] He was bishop of Naïssus in Moesia Superior.
[1249] This section concerning the Synod of the Eastern bishops is
probably from Sabinus. Cf. Hil. Frag. iii.
Chapter XII.--The Bishops of the Party of Julius and Hosius held
another Session and deposed the Eastern High Priests, and also made a
Formulary of Faith.
The adherents of Hosius, [1250] in the meantime, assembled together,
and declared them innocent: Athanasius, because unjust machinations
had been carried on against him by those who had convened at Tyre; and
Marcellus, because he did not hold the opinions with which he was
charged; and Asclepas, because he had been re-established in his
diocese by the vote of Eusebius Pamphilus and of many other judges;
that this was true he proved by the records of the trial; and lastly,
Lucius, because his accusers had fled. They wrote to the parishes of
each of the acquitted, commanding them to receive and recognize their
bishops. They stated that Gregory had not been nominated by them
bishop of Alexandria; nor Basil, bishop of Ancyra; nor Quintianus,
bishop of Gaza; and that they had not received these men into
communion, and did not even account them Christians. They deposed from
the episcopates, Theodore, bishop of Thrace; Narcissus, bishop of
Irenopolis; Acacius, bishop of Cæsarea, in Palestine; Menophantus,
bishop of Ephesus; Ursacius, bishop of Sigidunus in Moesia; Valens,
bishop of Mursia in Pannonia; and George, bishop of Laodicea, although
this latter had not attended the Synod with the Eastern bishops. They
ejected the above-named individuals from the priesthood and from
communion, because they separated the Son from the substance of the
Father, and had received those who had been formerly deposed on
account of their holding the Arian heresy, and had, moreover, promoted
them to the highest offices in the service of God. After they had
excided them for these perversions and decreed them to be aliens to
the Catholic Church, they afterwards wrote to the bishops of every
nation, [1251] commanding them to confirm these decrees, and to be of
one mind on doctrinal subjects with themselves. They likewise compiled
another document of faith, which was more copious than that of Nicæa,
although the same thought was carefully preserved, and very little
change was made in the words of that instrument. Hosius and
Protogenes, who held the first rank among the Western bishops
assembled at Sardica, fearing perhaps lest they should be suspected of
making any innovations upon the doctrines of the Nicene council, wrote
to Julius, [1252] and testified that they were firmly attached to
these doctrines, but, pressed by the need of perspicuity, they had to
expand the identical thought, in order that the Arians might not take
advantage of the brevity of the document, to draw those who were
unskilled in dialectics into some absurdity. When what I have related
had been transacted by each party, the conference was dissolved, and
the members returned to their respective homes. This Synod was held
during the consulate of Rufinus and Eusebius, and about eleven years
after the death of Constantine. [1253] There were about three hundred
[1254] bishops of cities in the West, and upwards of seventy-six
Eastern bishops, among whom was Ischyrion, who had been appointed
bishop of Mareotis by the enemies of Athanasius.
Footnotes
[1250] Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 36-50; Hil. Frag. ii. and iii.; Soc.
ii. 20, 22. Cf. Sulp. Sev. H. S. ii. 36. Soz. used the same source as
Soc., but independently.
[1251] This letter is in Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 44-49; and cf.
Theod. H. E. ii. 8; Hil. Frag. ii.
[1252] This epistle is nowhere extant. Güldenpenning suggests Sabinus
as the source, but hardly from the statement which Socrates makes as
to Sabinian partiality.
[1253] a.d. 347-8. But a.d. 344 is probably the true date.
[1254] So Soc.; but Theodoret says 250, ii. 7.
Chapter XIII.--After the Synod, the East and the West are separated;
the West nobly adheres to the Faith of the Nicene Council, while the
East is disturbed by Contention here and there over this Dogma.
After this Synod, the Eastern and the Western churches ceased to
maintain the intercourse which usually exists among people of the same
faith, and refrained from holding communion with each other. [1255]
The Christians of the West separated themselves from all as far as
Thrace; those of the East as far as Illyria. This divided state of the
churches was mixed, as might be supposed, with dissentient views and
calumnies. Although they had previously differed on doctrinal
subjects, yet the evil had attained no great height, for they had
still held communion together and were wont to have kindred feelings.
The Church throughout the whole of the West in its entirety regulated
itself by the doctrines of the Fathers, and kept aloof from all
contentions and hair-splitting about dogma. Although Auxentius, who
had become bishop of Milan, and Valens and Ursacius, bishops of
Pannonia, had endeavored to lead that part of the empire into the
Arian doctrines, their efforts had been carefully anticipated by the
president of the Roman see and the other priests, who cut out the
seeds of such a troublesome heresy. As to the Eastern Church, although
it had been racked by dissension since the time of the council of
Antioch, and although it had already openly differed from the Nicæan
form of belief, yet I think it is true that the opinion of the
majority united in the same thought, and confessed the Son to be of
the substance of the Father. There were some, however, who were fond
of wrangling and battled against the term "consubstantial" for those
who had been opposed to the word at the beginning, thought, as I
infer, and as happens to most people, that it would be a disgrace to
appear as conquered. Others were finally convinced of the truth of the
doctrines concerning God, by the habit of frequent disputation on
these themes, and ever afterwards continued firmly attached to them.
Others again, being aware that contentions ought not to arise,
inclined toward that which was gratifying to each of the sides, on
account of the influence, either of friendship or they were swayed by
the various causes which often induce men to embrace what they ought
to reject, and to act without boldness, in circumstances which require
thorough conviction. Many others, accounting it absurd to consume
their time in altercations about words, quietly adopted the sentiments
inculcated by the council of Nicæa. Paul, bishop of Constantinople,
Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, the entire multitude of monks,
Antony the Great, who still survived, his disciples, and a great
number of Egyptians and of other places in the Roman territory, firmly
and openly maintained the doctrines of the Nicæan council throughout
the other regions of the East. As I have been led to allude to the
monks, I shall briefly mention those who flourished during the reign
of Constantius.
Footnotes
[1255] Soc. ii. 22. The rest of the Chapter is marked by an
independent survey of the division.
Chapter XIV.--Of the Holy Men who flourished about this time in Egypt,
namely, Antony, the Two Macariuses, Heraclius, Cronius, Paphnutius,
Putubastus, Arsisius, Serapion, Piturion, Pachomius, Apollonius,
Anuph, Hilarion, and a Register of many other Saints.
I shall commence my recital [1256] with Egypt and the two men named
Macarius, who were the celebrated chiefs of Scetis and of the
neighboring mountain; the one was a native of Egypt, the other was
called Politicus, because he was a citizen and was of Alexandrian
origin. They were both so wonderfully endowed with Divine knowledge
and philosophy, that the demons regarded them with terror, and they
wrought many extraordinary works and miraculous cures. The Egyptian,
the story says, restored a dead man to life, in order to convince a
heretic of the truth of the resurrection from the dead. He lived about
ninety years, sixty of which he passed in the deserts. When in his
youth he commenced the study of philosophy, he progressed so rapidly,
that the monks surnamed him "old child," and at the age of forty he
was ordained presbyter. The other Macarius became a presbyter at a
later period of his life; he was proficient in all the exercises of
asceticism, some of which he devised himself, and what particulars he
heard among other ascetics, he carried through to success in every
form, so that by thoroughly drying up his skin, the hairs of his beard
ceased to grow. Pambo, Heraclides, Cronius, Paphnutius, Putubastus,
Arsisius, Serapion the Great, Piturion, who dwelt near Thebes, and
Pachomius, the founder of the monks called the Tabennesians,
flourished at the same place and period. The attire and government of
this sect differed in some respects from those of other monks. Its
members were, however, devoted to virtue, they contemned the things of
earth, excited the soul to heavenly contemplation, and prepared it to
quit the body with joy. They were clothed in skins in remembrance of
Elias, it appears to me, because they thought that the virtue of the
prophet would be thus always retained in their memory, and that they
would be enabled, like him to resist manfully the seductions of
amorous pleasures, to be influenced by similar zeal, and be incited to
the practice of sobriety by the hope of an equal reward. It is said
that the peculiar vestments of these Egyptian monks had reference to
some secret connected with their philosophy, and did not differ from
those of others without some adequate cause. They wore their tunics
without sleeves, in order to teach that the hands ought not to be
ready to do presumptuous evil. They wore a covering on their heads
called a cowl, to show that they ought to live with the same innocence
and purity as infants who are nourished with milk, and wear a covering
of the same form. Their girdle, and a species of scarf, which they
wear across the loins, shoulders, and arms, admonish them that they
ought to be always ready in the service and work of God. I am aware
that other reasons have been assigned for their peculiarity of attire,
but what I have said appears to me to be sufficient. It is said that
Pachomius at first practiced philosophy alone in a cave, but that a
holy angel appeared to him, and commanded him to call together some
young monks, and live with them, for he had succeeded well in pursuing
philosophy by himself, and to train them by the laws which were about
to be delivered to him, and now he was to possess and benefit many as
a leader of communities. A tablet was then given to him, which is
still carefully preserved. Upon this tablet were inscribed injunctions
by which he was bound to permit every one to eat, to drink, to work,
and to fast, according to his capabilities of so doing; those who ate
heartily were to be subjected to arduous labor, and the ascetic were
to have more easy tasks assigned them; he was commanded to have many
cells erected, in each of which three monks were to dwell, who were to
take their meals at a common refectory in silence, and to sit around
the table with a veil thrown over the face, so that they might not be
able to see each other or anything but the table and what was set
before them; they were not to admit strangers to eat with them, with
the exception of travelers, to whom they were to show hospitality;
those who desired to live with them, were first to undergo a probation
of three years, during which time the most laborious tasks were to be
done, and, by this method they could share in their community. They
were to clothe themselves in skins, and to wear woolen tiaras adorned
with purple nails, and linen tunics and girdles. They were to sleep in
their tunics and garments of skin, reclining on long chairs specially
constructed by being closed on each side, so that it could hold the
material of each couch. On the first and last days of the week they
were to approach the altar for the communion in the holy mysteries,
and were then to unloose their girdles and throw off their robes of
skin. They were to pray twelve times every day and as often during the
evening, and were to offer up the same number of prayers during the
night. At the ninth hour they were to pray thrice, and when about to
partake of food they were to sing a psalm before each prayer. The
whole community was to be divided into twenty-four classes, each of
which was to be distinguished by one of the letters of the Greek
alphabet, and so that each might have a cognomen fitting to the grade
of its conduct and habit. Thus the name of Iota was given to the more
simple, and that of Zeta or of Xi to the crooked, and the names of the
other letters were chosen according as the purpose of the order most
fittingly answered the form of the letter.
These were the laws [1257] by which Pachomius ruled his own disciples.
He was a man who loved men and was beloved of God, so that he could
foreknow future events, and was frequently admitted to intercourse
with the holy angels. He resided at Tabenna, in Thebaïs, and hence the
name Tabennesians, which still continues. By adopting these rules for
their government, they became very renowned, and in process of time
increased so vastly, that they reached to the number of seven thousand
men. But the community on the island of Tabenna with which Pachomius
lived, consisted of about thirteen hundred; the others resided in the
Thebaïs and the rest of Egypt. They all observed one and the same rule
of life, and possessed everything in common. They regarded the
community established in the island of Tabenna as their mother, and
the rulers of it as their fathers and their princes.
About the same period, Apollonius became celebrated by his profession
of monastic philosophy. It is said that from the age of fifteen he
devoted himself to philosophy in the deserts, and that when he
attained the age of forty, he went according to a Divine command he
then received, to dwell in regions inhabited by men. He had likewise a
community in the Thebaïs. He was greatly beloved of God, and was
endowed with the power of performing miraculous cures and notable
works. He was exact in the observance of duty, and instructed others
in philosophy with great goodness and kindness. He was acceptable to
such a degree in his prayers, that nothing of what he asked from God
was denied him, but he was so wise that he always proffered prudent
requests and such as the Divine Being is ever ready to grant.
I believe that Anuph the divine, lived about this period. I have been
informed that from the time of the persecution, when he first avowed
his attachment to Christianity, he never uttered a falsehood, nor
desired the things of earth. All his prayers and supplications to God
were duly answered, and he was instructed by a holy angel in every
virtue. Let, however, what we have said of the Egyptian monks suffice.
The same species of philosophy was about this time cultivated in
Palestine, after being learned in Egypt, and Hilarion the divine then
acquired great celebrity. He was a native of Thabatha, [1258] a
village situated near the town of Gaza, towards the south, and hard by
a torrent which falls into the sea, and received the same name as the
village, from the people of that country. When he was studying grammar
at Alexandria, he went out into the desert to see the monk Antony the
Great, and in his company he learned to adopt a like philosophy. After
spending a short time there, he returned to his own country, because
he was not allowed to be as quiet as he wished, on account of the
multitudes who flocked around Antony. On finding his parents dead, he
distributed his patrimony among his brethren and the poor, and without
reserving anything whatever for himself, he went to dwell in a desert
situated near the sea, and about twenty stadia from his native
village. His cell residence was a very little house, and was
constructed of bricks, chips and broken tiles, and was of such a
breadth, height, and length that no one could stand in it without
bending the head, or lie down in it without drawing up the feet; for
in everything he strove to accustom himself to hardship and to the
subjugation of luxurious ease. To none of those we have known did he
yield in the high reach of his unboastful and approved temperance. He
contended against hunger and thirst, cold and heat, and other
afflictions of the body and of the soul. He was earnest in conduct,
grave in discourse, and with a good memory and accurate attainment in
Sacred Writ. He was so beloved by God, that even now many afflicted
and possessed people are healed at his tomb. It is remarkable that he
was first interred in the island of Cyprus, but that his remains are
now deposited in Palestine; for it so happened, that he died during
his residence in Cyprus, and was buried by the inhabitants with great
honor and respect. But Hesychas, one of the most renowned of his
disciples, stole the body, conveyed it to Palestine, and interred it
in his own monastery. From that period, the inhabitants conducted a
public and brilliant festival yearly; for it is the custom in
Palestine to bestow this honor on those among them, who have attained
renown by their goodness, such as Aurelius, Anthedonius, Alexion, a
native of Bethagathon, and Alaphion, a native of Asalea, who, during
the reign of Constantius, lived religiously and courageously in the
practice of philosophy, and by their personal virtues they caused a
considerable increase to the faith among the cities and villages that
were still under the pagan superstition.
About the same period, Julian practiced philosophy near Edessa; he
attempted a very severe and incorporeal method of life so that he
seemed to consist of bones and skin without flesh. The setting forth
of the history is due to Ephraim, the Syrian writer, who wrote the
story of Julian's life. God himself confirmed the high opinion which
men had formed of him; for He bestowed on him the power of expelling
demons and of healing all kinds of diseases, without having recourse
to drugs, but simply by prayer.
Besides the above, many other ecclesiastical philosophers flourished
in the territories of Edessa and Amida, and about the mountain called
Gaugalius; among these were Daniel and Simeon. But I shall now say
nothing further of the Syrian monks; I shall further on, if God will,
describe them more fully. [1259]
It is said that Eustathius, [1260] who governed the church of Sebaste
in Armenia, founded a society of monks in Armenia, Paphlagonia, and
Pontus, and became the author of a zealous discipline, both as to what
meats were to be partaken of or to be avoided, what garments were to
be worn, and what customs and exact course of conduct were to be
adopted. Some assert that he was the author of the ascetic treatises
commonly attributed to Basil of Cappadocia. It is said that his great
exactness led him into certain extravagances which were altogether
contrary to the laws of the Church. Many persons, however, justify him
from this accusation, and throw the blame upon some of his disciples,
who condemned marriage, refused to pray to God in the houses of
married persons, despised married presbyters, fasted on Lord's days,
held their assemblies in private houses, denounced the rich as
altogether without part in the kingdom of God, contemned those who
partook of animal food. They did not retain the customary tunics and
stoles for their dress, but used a strange and unwonted garb, and made
many other innovations. Many women were deluded by them, and left
their husbands; but, not being able to practice continence, they fell
into adultery. Other women, under the pretext of religion, cut off
their hair, and behaved otherwise than is fitting to a woman, by
arraying themselves in men's apparel. The bishops of the neighborhood
of Gangroe, the metropolis of Paphlagonia, assembled themselves
together, and declared that all those who imbibed these opinions
should be aliens to the Catholic Church, unless, according to the
definitions of the Synod, they would renounce each of the aforesaid
customs. It is said that from that time, Eustathius exchanged his
clothing for the stole, and made his journeys habited like other
priests, thus proving that he had not introduced and practiced these
novelties out of self-will, but for the sake of a godly asceticism. He
was as renowned for his discourses as for the purity of his life. To
confess the truth, he was not eloquent, nor had he ever studied the
art of eloquence; yet he had admirable sense and a high capacity of
persuasion, so that he induced several men and women, who were living
in fornication, to enter upon a temperate and earnest course of life.
It is related that a certain man and woman, who, according to the
custom of the Church, had devoted themselves to a life of virginity,
were accused of cohabiting together. He strove to make them cease from
their intercourse; finding that his remonstrances produced no effect
upon them, he sighed deeply, and said, that a woman who had been
legally married had, on one occasion, heard him discourse on the
advantage of continence, and was thereby so deeply affected that she
voluntarily abstained from legitimate intercourse with her own
husband, and that the weakness of his powers of conviction was, on the
other hand, attested by the fact, that the parties above mentioned
persisted in their illegal course. Such were the men who originated
the practice of monastic discipline in the regions above mentioned.
Although the Thracians, the Illyrians, and the other European nations
were still inexperienced in monastic communities, yet they were not
altogether lacking in men devoted to philosophy. Of these, Martin,
[1261] the descendant of a noble family of Saboria in Pannonia, was
the most illustrious. He was originally a noted warrior, and the
commander of armies; but, accounting the service of God to be a more
honorable profession, he embraced a life of philosophy, and lived, in
the first place, in Illyria. Here he zealously defended the orthodox
doctrines against the attacks of the Arian bishops, and after being
plotted against and frequently beaten by the people, he was driven
from the country. He then went to Milan, and dwelt alone. He was soon,
however, obliged to quit his place of retreat on account of the
machinations of Auxentius, bishop of that region, who did not hold
soundly to the Nicene faith; and he went to an island called
Gallenaria, where he remained for some time, satisfying himself with
roots of plants. Gallenaria is a small and uninhabited island lying in
the Tyrrhenian Sea. Martin was afterwards appointed bishop of the
church of Tarracinæ (Tours). He was so richly endowed with miraculous
gifts that he restored a dead man to life, and performed other signs
as wonderful as those wrought by the apostles. We have heard that
Hilary, a man divine in his life and conversation, lived about the
same time, and in the same country; like Martin, he was obliged to
flee from his place of abode, on account of his zeal in defense of the
faith.
I have now related what I have been able to ascertain concerning the
individuals who practiced philosophy in piety and ecclesiastical
rites. There were many others who were noted in the churches about the
same period on account of their great eloquence, and among these the
most distinguished were, Eusebius, who administered the priestly
office at Emesa; Titus, bishop of Bostra; Serapion, bishop of Thmuis;
Basil, bishop of Ancyra; Eudoxius, bishop of Germanicia; Acacius,
bishop of Cæsarea; and Cyril, who controlled the see of Jerusalem. A
proof of their education is in the books they have written and left
behind, and the many things worthy of record.
Footnotes
[1256] This Chapter is made up from a great variety of sources, as
well as personal observation. Prominent among these are Ruf. H. M. and
H. E.; Pall. H. L.; Syrian biographies; Ephraim Syrus, Vita Juliani;
Athan. Vita Antonii; Timotheus' collection of monastic biography,
mentioned in Soz. vi. 29; Hieron. de vir. illust.; Evagrius Ponticus,
Gnosticus; Philippus of Side, Historia Christiana; Sulp. Sev. de Vita
Martini.
[1257] See the Collection of Regulæ and Precepts, as translated by
Hieron. ii. p. 66 sqq.
[1258] According to Hieronymus, Vita Hilaronis, 2, Hilarion was born
in the village of Thabatha, which is about five miles from Gaza;
Thebasa, according to Niceph. ix. 15.
[1259] See below, chap. 16, and vi. 34.
[1260] Soc. ii. 43.
[1261] Sulp. Sev. Vita Martini.
Chapter XV.--Didymus the Blind, and Aëtius the Heretic.
Didymus, [1262] an ecclesiastical writer and president of the school
of sacred learning in Alexandria, flourished about the same period. He
was acquainted with every branch of science, and was conversant with
poetry and rhetoric, with astronomy and geometry, with arithmetic, and
with the various theories of philosophy. He had acquired all this
knowledge by the efforts of his own mind, aided by the sense of
hearing, for he became blind during his first attempt at learning the
rudiments. When he had advanced to youth, he manifested an ardent
desire to acquire speech and training, and for this purpose he
frequented the teachers of these branches, but learned by hearing
only, where he made such rapid progress that he speedily comprehended
the difficult theorems in mathematics. It is said that he learned the
letters of the alphabet by means of tablets in which they were
engraved, and which he felt with his fingers; and that he made himself
acquainted with syllables and words by the force of attention and
memory, and by listening attentively to the sounds. His was a very
extraordinary case, and many persons resorted to Alexandria for the
express purpose of hearing, or, at least, of seeing him. His firmness
in defending the doctrines of the Nicæan council was extremely
displeasing to the Arians. He easily carried conviction to the minds
of his audience by persuasion rather than by power of reasoning, and
he constituted each one a judge of the ambiguous points. He was much
sought after by the members of the Catholic Church, and was praised by
the orders of monks in Egypt, and by Antony the Great.
It is related that when Antony left the desert and repaired to
Alexandria to give his testimony in favor of the doctrines of
Athanasius, he said to Didymus, "It is not a severe thing, nor does it
deserve to be grieved over, O Didymus, that you are deprived of the
organs of sight which are possessed by rats, mice, and the lowest
animals; but it is a great blessing to possess eyes like angels,
whereby you can contemplate keenly the Divine Being, and see
accurately the true knowledge." In Italy and its territories, Eusebius
and Hilary, whom I have already mentioned, were conspicuous for
strength in the use of their native tongue, whose treatises [1263]
concerning the faith and against the heterodox, they say, were
approvingly circulated. Lucifer, as the story goes, was the founder of
a heresy which bears his name, [1264] and flourished at this period.
Aëtius [1265] was likewise held in high estimation among the
heterodox; he was a dialectician, apt in syllogism and proficient in
disputation, and a diligent student of such forms, but without art. He
reasoned so boldly concerning the nature of God, that many persons
gave him the name of "Atheist." It is said that he was originally a
physician of Antioch in Syria, and that, as he frequently attended
meetings of the churches, and thought over the Sacred Scriptures, he
became acquainted with Gallus, who was then Cæsar, and who honored
religion much and cherished its professors. It seems likely that, as
Aëtius obtained the esteem of Cæsar by means of these disputations, he
devoted himself the more assiduously to these pursuits, in order to
progress in the favor of the emperor. It is said that he was versed in
the philosophy of Aristotle, and frequented the schools in which it
was taught at Alexandria.
Besides the individuals above specified, there were many others in the
churches who were capable of instructing the people and of reasoning
concerning the doctrines of the Holy Scriptures. It would be too great
a task to attempt to name them all. Let it not be accounted strange,
if I have bestowed commendations upon the leaders or enthusiasts of
the above-mentioned heresies. I admire their eloquence, and their
impressiveness in discourse. I leave their doctrines to be judged by
those whose right it is. For I have not been set forth to record such
matters, nor is it befitting in history; I have only to give an
account of events as they happened, not supplementing my own
additions. Of those who at that time became most distinguished in
education and discourse and who used the Roman and Greek languages, I
have enumerated in the above narrative as many as I have received an
account of.
Footnotes
[1262] Ruf. H. E. ii. 7; i. 30, 31; Soc. iv. 25; iii. 10; ii. 35;
Hieron. de vir. illust. c. cix.
[1263] He alludes to the treatises of Hilary against the Arians and
Auxentius, and against Constantius.
[1264] That, namely, of the Luciferians. Cf. Soc. iii. 9.
[1265] Cf. Soc. ii. 35; Philost. iii. 15-20; supplementa from Phot.
cod. 40; fragmenta from Suidas, s.v.
Chapter XVI.--Concerning St. Ephraim.
Ephraim the Syrian [1266] was entitled to the highest honors, and was
the greatest ornament of the Catholic Church. He was a native of
Nisibis, or his family was of the neighboring territory. He devoted
his life to monastic philosophy; and although he received no
instruction, he became, contrary to all expectation, so proficient in
the learning and language of the Syrians, that he comprehended with
ease the most abstruse theorems of philosophy. His style of writing
was so replete with splendid oratory and with richness and
temperateness of thought that he surpassed the most approved writers
of Greece. If the works of these writers were to be translated into
Syriac, or any other language, and divested, as it were, of the
beauties of the Greek language, they would retain little of their
original elegance and value. The productions of Ephraim have not this
disadvantage: they were translated into Greek during his life, and
translations are even now being made, and yet they preserve much of
their original force, so that his works are not less admired when read
in Greek than when read in Syriac. Basil, who was subsequently bishop
of the metropolis of Cappadocia, was a great admirer of Ephraim, and
was astonished at his erudition. The opinion of Basil, who is
universally confessed to have been the most eloquent man of his age,
is a stronger testimony, I think, to the merit of Ephraim, than
anything that could be indited to his praise. It is said that he wrote
three hundred thousand verses, and that he had many disciples who were
zealously attached to his doctrines. The most celebrated of his
disciples were Abbas, Zenobius, Abraham, Maras, and Simeon, in whom
the Syrians and whoever among them pursued accurate learning make a
great boast. Paulanas and Aranad are praised for their finished
speech, although reported to have deviated from sound doctrine.
I am not ignorant that there were some very learned men who formerly
flourished in Osroëne, as, for instance, Bardasanes, who devised a
heresy designated by his name, [1267] and Harmonius, his son. It is
related that this latter was deeply versed in Grecian erudition, and
was the first to subdue his native tongue to meters and musical laws;
these verses he delivered to the choirs, and even now the Syrians
frequently sing, not the precise copies by Harmonius, but the same
melodies. For as Harmonius was not altogether free from the errors of
his father, and entertained various opinions concerning the soul, the
generation and destruction of the body, and the regeneration which are
taught by the Greek philosophers, he introduced some of these
sentiments into the lyrical songs which he composed. When Ephraim
perceived that the Syrians were charmed with the elegance of the
diction and the rhythm of the melody, he became apprehensive, lest
they should imbibe the same opinions; and therefore, although he was
ignorant of Grecian learning, he applied himself to the understanding
of the metres of Harmonius, and composed similar poems in accordance
with the doctrines of the Church, and wrought also in sacred hymns and
in the praises of passionless men. From that period the Syrians sang
the odes of Ephraim according to the law of the ode established by
Harmonius. The execution of this work is alone sufficient to attest
the natural endowments of Ephraim. He was as celebrated for the good
actions he performed as for the rigid course of discipline he pursued.
He was particularly fond of tranquillity. He was so serious and so
careful to avoid giving occasion to calumny, that he refrained from
the very sight of women. It is related that a female of careless life,
who was either desirous of tempting him, or who had been bribed for
the purpose, contrived on one occasion to meet him face to face, and
fixed her eyes intently upon him; he rebuked her, and commanded her to
look down upon the ground, "Wherefore should I obey your injunction,"
replied the woman; "for I was born not of the earth, but of you? It
would be more just if you were to look down upon the earth whence you
sprang, while I look upon you, as I was born of you." Ephraim,
astonished at the little woman, recorded the whole transaction in a
book, which most Syrians regard as one of the best of his productions.
It is also said of him, that, although he was naturally prone to
passion, he never exhibited angry feeling toward any one from the
period of his embracing a monastic life. It once happened that after
he had, according to custom, been fasting several days, his attendant,
in presenting some food to him, let fall the dish on which it was
placed. Ephraim, perceiving that he was overwhelmed with shame and
terror, said to him, "Take courage; we will go to the food as the food
does not come to us" and he immediately seated himself beside the
fragments of the dish, and ate his supper. What I am about to relate
will suffice to show that he was totally exempt from the love of
vainglory. He was appointed bishop of some town, and attempts were
made to convey him away for the purpose of ordaining him. As soon as
he became aware of what was intended, he ran to the market-place, and
showed himself as a madman by stepping in a disorderly way, dragging
his clothes along, and eating in public. Those who had come to carry
him away to be their bishop, on seeing him in this state, believed
that he was out of his mind, and departed; and he, meeting with an
opportunity for effecting his escape, remained in concealment until
another had been ordained in his place. What I have now said
concerning Ephraim must suffice, although his own countrymen relate
many other anecdotes of him. Yet his conduct on one occasion, shortly
before his death, appears to me so worthy of remembrance that I shall
record it here. The city of Edessa being severely visited by famine,
he quitted the solitary ceil in which he pursued philosophy, and
rebuked the rich for permitting the poor to die around them, instead
of imparting to them of their superfluities; and he represented to
them by his philosophy, that the wealth which they were treasuring up
so carefully would turn to their own condemnation, and to the ruin of
the soul, which is of more value than all riches, and the body itself
and all other values, and he proved that they were putting no estimate
upon their souls, because of their actions. The rich men, revering the
man and his words, replied, "We are not intent upon hoarding our
wealth, but we know of no one to whom we can confide the distribution
of our goods, for all are prone to seek after lucre, and to betray the
trust placed in them." "What think you of me?" asked Ephraim. On their
admitting that they considered him an efficient, excellent, and good
man, and worthy, and that he was exactly what his reputation
confirmed, he offered to undertake the distribution of their alms. As
soon as he received their money, he had about three hundred beds
fitted up in the public porches; and here he tended those who were ill
and suffering from the effects of the famine, whether they were
foreigners or natives of the surrounding country. On the cessation of
the famine he returned to the cell in which he had previously dwelt;
and, after the lapse of a few days, he expired. He attained no higher
clerical degree than that of deacon, although he became no less famous
for his virtue than those who are ordained to the priesthood and are
admired for the conversation of a good life and for learning. I have
now given some account of the virtue of Ephraim. It would require a
more experienced hand than mine, to furnish a full description of his
character and that of the other illustrious men who, about the same
period, had devoted themselves to a life and career of philosophy; and
for some things, it would require such a writer as he himself was. The
attempt is beyond my powers by reason of weakness of language, and
ignorance of the men themselves and their exploits. Some of them
concealed themselves in the deserts. Others, who lived in the
intercourse of cities, strove to preserve a mean appearance, and to
seem as if they differed in no respect from the multitude, working out
their virtue, concealing a true estimate of themselves, that they
might avoid the praises of others. For as they were intent upon the
exchange of future benefits, they made God alone the witness of their
thoughts, and had no concern for outward glory.
Footnotes
[1266] See below, vi. 34. This Chapter is independent. Theod. iv. 29
has Soz. before him, and possibly also the same original. Cf. Hieron.
de vir. illust. cxv.
[1267] Cf. Euseb. H. E. iv. 30.
Chapter XVII.--Transactions of that Period, and Progress of Christian
Doctrine through the Joint Efforts of Emperors and Arch-Priests.
Those who presided over the churches at this period were noted for
personal conduct, and, as might be expected, the people whom they
governed were earnestly attached to the worship of Christ. [1268]
Religion daily progressed, by the zeal, virtue, and wonderful works of
the priests, and of the ecclesiastical philosophers, who attracted the
attention of the pagans, and led them to renounce their superstitions.
The emperors who then occupied the throne were as zealous as was their
father in protecting the churches, and they granted honors and tax
exemptions to the clergy, their children, and their slaves. They
confirmed the laws enacted by their father, and enforced new ones
prohibiting the offering of sacrifice, the worship of images, or any
other pagan observance. They commanded that all temples, whether in
cities or in the country, should be closed. Some of these temples were
presented to the churches, when either the ground they stood on or the
materials for building were required. The greatest possible care was
bestowed upon the houses of prayer, those which had been defaced by
time were repaired, and others were erected from the foundations in a
style of extraordinary magnificence. The church of Emesa is one most
worthy to see and famous for its beauty. The Jews were strictly
forbidden to purchase a slave belonging to any other heresy than their
own. If they transgressed this law, the slave was confiscated [1269]
to the public; but if they administered to him the Jewish rite of
circumcision, the penalties were death and total confiscation of
property. For, as the emperors were desirous of promoting by every
means the spread of Christianity, they deemed it necessary to prevent
the Jews from proselyting those whose ancestors were of another
religion, and those who were holding the hope of professing
Christianity were carefully reserved for the Church; for it was from
the pagan multitudes that the Christian religion increased.
Footnotes
[1268] This Chapter is an independent view, and also groups the laws
under Constantius. Cf. Cod. Theod.
[1269] demosion oiketen einai. The early interpreters understood these
words as referring to the Jewish offender, and not to the slave. But
the law itself is extant in Cod. Theod. xvi. 91, 2, and is entitled Ne
Christianum Mancipium Judæus habeat. The second law begins: Si aliquis
Judæorum, mancipium sectæ alterius seu nationis crediderit
comparandum, mancipium fisco protenus vindicetur.
.
Chapter XVIII.--Concerning the Doctrines held by the Sons of
Constantine. Distinction between the Terms "Homoousios" and
"Homoiousios." Whence it came that Constantius quickly abandoned the
Correct Faith.
The emperors [1270] had, from the beginning, preserved their father's
view about doctrine; for they both favored the Nicene form of belief.
Constans maintained these opinions till his death; Constantius held a
similar view for some time; he, however, renounced his former
sentiments when the term "consubstantial" was calumniated, yet he did
not altogether refrain from confessing that the Son is of like
substance with the Father. The followers of Eusebius, and other
bishops of the East, who were admired for their speech and life, made
a distinction, as we know, between the term "consubstantial"
(homoousios) and the expression "of like substance," which latter they
designated by the term, "homoiousios." They say that the term
"consubstantial" (homoousios) properly belongs to corporeal beings,
such as men and other animals, trees and plants, whose participation
and origin is in like things; but that the term "homoiousios"
appertains exclusively to incorporeal beings, such as God and the
angels, of each one of whom a conception is formed according to his
own peculiar substance. The Emperor Constantius was deceived by this
distinction; and although I am certain that he retained the same
doctrines as those held by his father and brother, yet he adopted a
change of phraseology, and, instead of using the term "homoousios,"
made use of the term "homoiousios." The teachers to whom we have
alluded maintained that it was necessary to be thus precise in the use
of terms, and that otherwise we should be in danger of conceiving that
to be a body which is incorporeal. Many, however, regard this
distinction as an absurdity, "for," say they, "the things which are
conceived by the mind can be designated only by names derived from
things which are seen; and there is no danger in the use of words,
provided that there be no error about the idea.
Footnotes
[1270] An independent survey of the imperial and clerical views.
Chapter XIX.--Further Particulars concerning the Term
"Consubstantial." Council of Ariminum, the Manner, Source, and Reason
of its Convention.
It is not surprising that the Emperor Constantius was induced to adopt
the use of the term "homoiousios," for it was admitted by many priests
who conformed to the doctrines of the Nicæan council. [1271] Many use
the two words indifferently, to convey the same meaning. Hence, it
appears to me, that the Arians departed greatly from the truth when
they affirmed that, after the council of Nicæa, many of the priests,
among whom were Eusebius and Theognis, refused to admit that the Son
is consubstantial with the Father, and that Constantine was in
consequence so indignant, that he condemned them to banishment. They
say that it was afterwards revealed to his sister by a dream or a
vision from God, that these bishops held orthodox doctrines and had
suffered unjustly; and that the emperor thereupon recalled them, and
demanded of them wherefore they had departed from the Nicene
doctrines, since they had been participants in the document concerning
the faith which had been there framed; and that they urged in reply
that they had not assented to those doctrines from conviction, but
from the fear that, if the disputes then existing were prolonged, the
emperor, who was then just beginning to embrace Christianity, and who
was yet unbaptized, might be impelled to return to Paganism, as seemed
likely, and to persecute the Church. They assert that Constantine was
pleased with this defense, and determined upon convening another
council; but that, being prevented by death from carrying his scheme
into execution, the task devolved upon his eldest son, Constantius, to
whom he represented that it would avail him nothing to be possessed of
imperial power, unless he could establish uniformity of worship
throughout his empire; and Constantius they say, at the instigation of
his father, convened a council at Ariminum. [1272] This story is
easily seen to be a gross fabrication, for the council was convened
during the consulate of Hypatius and Eusebius, and twenty-two years
after Constantius had, on the death of his father, succeeded to the
empire. Now, during this interval of twenty-two years, many councils
were held, in which debates were carried on concerning the terms
"homoousios" and "homoiousios." No one, it appears, ventured to deny
that the Son is of like substance [1273] with the Father, until
Aëtius, by starting a contrary opinion, so offended the emperor that,
in order to arrest the course of the heresy, he commanded the priests
to assemble themselves together at Ariminum and at Seleucia. Thus the
true cause of this council being convened was not the command of
Constantine, [1274] but the question agitated by Aëtius. And this will
become still more apparent by what we shall hereafter relate.
Footnotes
[1271] An independent Chapter on the true cause of division and the
origin of the council of Ariminum. Cf. Athan. Ep. de Synodis.
[1272] Cf. Soc. ii. 37.
[1273] kat' ousian anomoion is the right correction of Valesius.
[1274] A mistake for Constantius.
Chapter XX.--Athanasius again reinstated by the Letter of Constantius,
and receives his See. The Arch-Priests of Antioch. Question put by
Constantius to Athanasius. The Praise of God in Hymns.
When Constans was apprised of what had been enacted at Sardica, he
wrote [1275] to his brother to request him to restore the followers of
Athanasius and Paul to their own churches. As Constantius seemed to
hesitate, he wrote again, and threatened him with war, unless he would
consent to receive the bishops. Constantius, after conferring on the
subject with the bishops of the East, judged that it would be foolish
to excite on this account the horrors of civil war. He therefore
recalled Athanasius from Italy, and sent public carriages to convey
him on his return homewards, and wrote several letters requesting his
speedy return. Athanasius, who was then residing at Aquilea, on
receiving the letters of Constantius, repaired to Rome to take leave
of Julius and his friends. Julius parted from him with great
demonstrations of friendship, and gave him a letter addressed to the
clergy and people of Alexandria, in which he spoke of him as a
wonderful man, deserving of renown by the numerous trials he had
undergone, and congratulated the church of Alexandria on the return of
so good a priest, and exhorted them to follow his doctrines.
He then proceeded to Antioch in Syria, where the emperor was then
residing. Leontius presided over the churches of that region; for
after the flight of Eustathius, those who held heretical sentiments
had seized the see of Antioch. The first bishop they appointed was
Euphronius; to him succeeded Placetus; and afterwards Stephen. This
latter was deposed as being unworthy of the dignity, and Leontius
obtained the bishopric. Athanasius avoided him as a heretic, and
communed with those who were called Eustathians, who assembled in a
private house. Since he found that Constantius was well disposed, and
agreeable, and it looked as if the emperor would restore his own
church to him, Constantius, at the instigation of the leaders of the
opposing heresy, replied as follows: "I am ready to perform all that I
promised when I recalled you; but it is just that you should in return
grant me a favor, and that is, that you yield one of the numerous
churches which are under your sway to those who are averse to holding
communion with you." Athanasius replied: "O emperor, it is exceedingly
just and necessary to obey your commands, and I will not gainsay, but
as in the city of Antioch there are many who eschew communion between
the heterodox and ourselves, I seek a like favor that one church may
be conceded to us, and that we may assemble there in safety." As the
request of Athanasius appeared reasonable to the emperor, the
heterodox deemed it more politic to keep quiet; for they reflected
that their peculiar opinions could never gain any ground in
Alexandria, on account of Athanasius, who was able both to retain
those who held the same sentiments as himself, and lead those of
contrary opinions; and that, moreover if they gave up one of the
churches of Antioch, the Eustathians, who were very numerous, would
assemble together, and then probably attempt innovations, since it
would be possible for them without risk to retain those whom they
held. Besides, the heterodox perceived that, although the government
of the churches was in their hands, all the clergy and people did not
conform to their doctrines. [1276] When they sang hymns to God, they
were, according to custom, divided into choirs, and, at the end of the
odes, each one declared what were his own peculiar sentiments. Some
offered praise to "the Father and the Son," regarding them as co-equal
in glory; others glorified "The Father by the Son," to denote by the
insertion of the preposition that they considered the Son to be
inferior to the Father. While these occurrences took place, Leontius,
the bishop of the opposite faction, who then presided over the see of
Antioch, did not dare to prohibit the singing of hymns to God which
were in accordance with the tradition of the Nicæan Synod, for he
feared to excite an insurrection of the people. It is related,
however, that he once raised his hand to his head, the hairs of which
were quite white, and said, "When this snow is dissolved, there will
be plenty of mud." By this he intended to signify that, after his
death, the different modes of singing hymns would give rise to great
seditions, and that his successors would not show the same
consideration to the people which he had manifested.
Footnotes
[1275] Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 51-56; Hist. Arian. 15, 16; Ruf. i.
19; Soc. ii. 22, 23, who gives texts from Athanasius of the second
letter of Constans (in part); those of Constantius to Athanasius; and
Julius to the Alexandrians. Philost. iii. 13.
[1276] Here he uses Athan. Historia Arian. 28; Apol. de fuga sua, 26.
Theodoret, too, in his sketch of Leontius, H. E. ii. 24, quotes
briefly from Athan. Cf. Philost. iii. 13.
Chapter XXI.--Letter of Constantius to the Egyptians in behalf of
Athanasius. Synod of Jerusalem.
The emperor, on sending back [1277] Athanasius to Egypt, wrote in his
favor to the bishops and presbyters of that country, and to the people
of the church of Alexandria; he testified to the integrity of his
conduct and the virtue of his manners, and exhorted them to be of one
mind, and to unite in prayer and service to God under his guidance. He
added that, if any evil-disposed persons should excite disturbances,
they should receive the punishment awarded by the laws for such
offenses. He also commanded that the former decrees he had enacted
against Athanasius, and those who were in communion with him, should
be effaced from the public registers, and that his clergy should be
admitted to the same exemptions they had previously enjoyed; and
edicts to this effect were dispatched to the governors of Egypt and
Libya.
Immediately on his arrival in Egypt, Athanasius displaced those whom
he knew to be attached to Arianism, and placed the government of the
Church and the confession of the Nicæan council in the hands of those
whom he approved, and he exhorted them to hold to this with
earnestness. It was said at that time, that, when he was traveling
through other countries, he effected the same change, if he happened
to visit churches which were under the Arians. He was certainly
accused of having dared to perform the ceremony of ordination in
cities where he had no right to do so. But because he had effected his
return, although his enemies were unwilling, and it did not seem that
he could be easily cast under suspicion, in that he was honored with
the friendship of the Emperor Constans, he was regarded with greater
consideration than before. Many bishops, who had previously been at
enmity with him, received him into communion, particularly those of
Palestine. When he at that time visited these latter, they received
him kindly. They held a Synod at Jerusalem, and Maximus and the others
wrote the following letter in his favor.
Footnotes
[1277] Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 54-56; Hist. Arian. 23; these are
given in Soc. ii. 23; and for the Synod of Jerusalem, ii. 24; Ruf. i.
19.
Chapter XXII.--Epistle written by the Synod of Jerusalem in Favor of
Athanasius.
"The holy Synod assembled at Jerusalem, to the presbyters, deacons,
and people of Egypt, Libya, and Alexandria, our beloved and most
cherished brethren, greeting in the Lord. [1278]
"We can never, O beloved, return adequate thanks to God, the Creator
of all things, for the wonderful works he has now accomplished,
particularly for the blessings He has conferred on your churches by
the restoration of Athanasius, your shepherd and lord, and our
fellow-minister. Who could have hoped to have ever seen this with his
eyes, which now you are realizing in deed? But truly your prayers have
been heard by the God of the universe who is concerned for His Church,
and who has regarded your tears and complaint, and on this account has
heard your requests. For you were scattered abroad and rent like sheep
without a pastor. Therefore, the true Shepherd, who from heaven
watched over you, and who is concerned for His own sheep, has restored
to you him whom you desired. Behold, we do all things for the peace of
the Church, and are influenced by love like yours. Therefore we
received and embraced your pastor, and, having held communion with you
through him, we dispatch this address and our eucharistic prayers that
you may know how we are united by the bond of love to him and you. It
is right that you should pray for the piety of the emperors most
beloved of God, who having recognized your desire about him and his
purity determined to restore him to you with every honor. Receive him,
then, with uplifted hands, and be zealous to send aloft the requisite
eucharistic prayers in his behalf to the God who has conferred these
benefits upon you; and may you ever rejoice with God, and glorify the
Lord in Christ Jesus our Lord, by whom be glory to the Father
throughout all ages. Amen."
Footnotes
[1278] From Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 57, where also the names of the
subscribers are given.
Chapter XXIII.--Valens and Ursacius, who belonged to the Arian
Faction, confess to the Bishop of Rome that they had made False
Charges against Athanasius.
Such was the letter written by the Synod convened in Palestine. Some
time after Athanasius had the satisfaction of seeing the injustice of
the sentence enacted against him by the council of Tyre publicly
recognized. [1279] Valens and Ursacius, who had been sent with
Theognis and his followers to obtain information in Mareotis, as we
before mentioned, concerning the holy cup which Ischyrion had accused
Athanasius of having broken, wrote the following retraction to Julius,
bishop of Rome:--
"Ursacius and Valens, to the most blessed Lord Pope Julius.
"Since we previously, as is well known, made many various charges
against Athanasius, the bishop, by our letters, and although we have
been urged persistently by the epistles of your excellency in this
matter which we publicly alleged and have not been able to give a
reason for our accusation, therefore, we now confess to your
excellency in the presence of all the presbyters, our brethren, that
all that you have heard concerning the aforesaid Athanasius is utterly
false and fictitious, and in every way foreign to his nature. For this
reason, we joyfully enter into communion with him, particularly as
your piety in accordance with your implanted love of goodness has
granted forgiveness to us for our error. Moreover, we declare unto you
that if the bishops of the East, or even Athanasius himself, should at
any time malignantly summon us to judgment, we would not sever
ourselves from your judgment and disposition about the case. We now
and ever shall anathematize, as we formerly did in the memorial which
we presented at Milan, the heretic Arius and his followers, who say
that there was a time, in which the Son existed not, and that Christ
is from that which had no existence, and who deny that Christ was God
and the Son of God before all ages. We again protest, in our own
handwriting, that we shall ever condemn the aforesaid Arian heresy,
and its originators.
"I, Ursacius, sign this confession with my own signature. In like
manner also Valens."
This was the confession which they sent to Julius. It is also
necessary to append to it their letter to Athanasius: it is as
follows:--
Footnotes
[1279] From Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 58; Soc. ii. 24, only an
allusion; Hil. Fragm. ii. 20; Sulp. Sev. H. S. ii. 36.
Chapter XXIV.--Letter of Conciliation from Valens and Ursacius to the
Great Athanasius. Restoration of the Other Eastern Bishops to their
own Sees. Ejection of Macedonius again; and Accession of Paul to the
See.
"The bishops, Ursacius and Valens, to Athanasius, our brother in the
Lord. [1280]
"We take the opportunity of the departure of Museus, our brother and
fellow-presbyter, who is going to your esteemed self, O beloved
brother, to send you amplest greeting from Aquileia through him, and
hope that our letter will find you in good health. You will afford us
great encouragement if you will write us a reply to this letter. Know
that we are at peace and in ecclesiastical communion with you."
Athanasius therefore returned under such circumstances from the West
to Egypt. Paul, Marcellus, Asclepas, and Lucius, whom the edict of the
emperor had returned from exile, received their own sees. Immediately
on the return of Paul to Constantinople Macedonius retired, and held
church in private. There was a great tumult at Ancyra on the
deposition of Basil from the church there, and the reinstallation of
Marcellus. The other bishops were reinstated in their churches without
difficulty. [1281]
Footnotes
[1280] Athan. Apol. cont. Arian. 58; Hil. Fragm. ii. 20.
[1281] Soc. ii. 23.
Also, see links to 3500 other Manuscripts:
/believe/txv/earlychv.htm
E-mail to: BELIEVE
The main BELIEVE web-page (and the index to subjects) is at:
BELIEVE Religious Information Source - By Alphabet
http://mb-soft.com/believe/indexaz.html