Subscribe
to CF
Be
first to know
Read our AAA review
from Catholic Culture
Our Mission
To
bring Jesus Christ; the Way, the Truth and the Life; to all who will follow,
according to scripture and tradition, per the Magisterium
of the Roman Catholic Church.
While you visit!
Listen
to
Radio
For the Sacred
Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary. |
THE ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY
OF SALAMINIUS HERMIAS SOZOMENUS
BOOK IV
CHAP. I. -- DEATH OF CONSTANS CAESAR. OCCURRENCES WHICH TOOK PLACE IN ROME.
FOUR years after the council of Sardica, (1) Constans was killed in Western
Gaul. (2) Magnentius, who had plotted his murder, reduced the entire government
of Constans under his own sway. In the meantime Vetranio was proclaimed emperor
at Sirmium, by the Illyrian troops. Nepotian, the son of the late emperor's
sister, gathered about him a body of gladiators, and wrangled for the imperial
power, and ancient Rome had the greatest share of these evils. Nepotian, however,
was put to death by the soldiers of Magnentius. (3) Constantius, finding himself
the sole master of the empire, was proclaimed sole ruler, and hastened to depose
the tyrants. In the meantime, Athanasius, having arrived in Alexandria, prepared
to convene a Synod of the Egyptian bishops, and had the enactments confirmed
which had been passed at Sardica, and in Palestine, in his favor.
CHAP. II. -- CONSTANTIUS AGAIN EJECTS ATHANASIUS, AND BANISHES THOSE WHO REPRESENTED
THE HOMOOUSIAN DOCTRINE. DEATH OF PAUL, BISHOP OF CONSTANTINOPLE. MACEDONIUS:
HIS SECOND USURPATION OF THE SEE, AND HIS EVIL DEEDS.
THE emperor, (4) deceived by the calumnies of the heterodox, changed his mind,
and, in opposition to the decrees of the council of Sardica, exiled the bishops
whom he had previously restored. Marcellus was again deposed, and Basil re-acquired
possession of the bishopric of Ancyra. Lucius was thrown into prison, and died
there. Paul was condemned to perpetual banishment, and was conveyed to Cucusum,
in Armenia, where he died. I have never, however, been able to ascertain whether
or not he died a natural death. It is still reported, that he was strangled
by the adherents of Macedonius. (5) As soon as he was sent into exile, Macedonius
seized the government of his church; and, being aided by several orders of
monks whom he had incorporated at Constantinople, and by alliances with many
of the neighboring bishops, he commenced, it is said, a persecution against
those who held the sentiments of Paul. He ejected them, in the first place,
from the church, and then compelled them to enter into communion with himself.
Many perished from wounds received in the struggle; some were deprived of their
possessions; some, of the rights of citizenship; and others were branded on
the forehead with an iron instrument, in order that they might be stamped as
infamous. The emperor was displeased when he heard of these transactions, and
imputed the blame of them to Macedonius and his adherents.
CHAP. III. -- MARTYRDOM OF THE HOLY NOTARIES.
THE persecution increased in violence, (6) and led to deeds of blood. Martyrius
and Marcian were among those who were slain. They had lived in Paul's house,
(7) and were delivered up by Macedonius to the governor, as having been guilty
of the murder of Hermogenes, and of exciting the former sedition against him.
Martyrius was a sub-deacon, and Marcian a singer and a reader of Holy Scripture.
Their tomb is famous, and is situated before the walls of Constantinople, as
a memorial of the martyrs; it is placed in a house of prayer, which was commenced
by John and completed by Sisinnius; these both afterwards presided over the
church of Constantinople. For they who had been unworthily adjudged to have
no part in the honors of martyrdom, were honored by God, because the very place
where those conducted to death had been decapitated, and which previously was
not approached on account of ghosts, was now purified, and those who were under
the influence of demons were released from the disease, and many other notable
miracles were wrought at the tomb. These are the particulars which should be
stated concerning Martyrius and Marcian. If what I have related appears to
be scarcely credible, it is easy to apply for further information to those
who are more accurately acquainted with the circumstances; and perhaps far
more wonderful things are related concerning them than those which I have detailed.
CHAP. IV. -- CAMPAIGN OF CONSTANTIUS IN SIRMIUM, AND DETAILS CONCERNING VETRANIO
AND MAGNENTIUS. GALLUS RECEIVES THE TITLE OF CAESAR, AND IS SENT TO THE EAST.
ON the expulsion of Athanasius, which took place about this period, George
persecuted (1) all those throughout Egypt who refused to conform to his sentiments.
The emperor marched into Illyria, and entered Sirmium, whither Vetranio had
repaired by appointment. The soldiers who had proclaimed him emperor suddenly
changed their mind, and saluted Constantius as sole sovereign, and as Augustus,
for both the emperor and his supporters, strove for this very action. Vetranio
perceived that he was betrayed, and threw himself as a suppliant at the feet
of Constantius. Constantius pitied him indeed, but stripped him of the imperial
ornaments and purple, obliged him to return to private life, liberally provided
for his wants out of the public treasury, and told him that it was more seemly
to an old man to abstain from the cares of empire and to live in quietude.
After terminating these arrangements in favor of Vetranio, Constantius sent
a large army into Italy against Magnentius. He then conferred the title of
Caesar on his cousin Gallus, and sent him into Syria to defend the provinces
of the East.
CHAP. V. -- CYRIL DIRECTS THE SACERDOTAL OFFICE AFTER MAXIMUS, AND THE LARGEST
FORM OF THE CROSS, SURPASSING THE SUN IN SPLENDOR, AGAIN APPEARS IN THE HEAVENS,
AND IS VISIBLE DURING SEVERAL DAYS.
AT the time that Cyril administered the church of Jerusalem after Maximus,
the sign of the cross appeared in the heavens. It shone brilliantly, not with
divergent rays like a comet, but with the concentration of a great deal of
light, apparently dense and yet transparent. Its length was about fifteen stadia
from Calvary to the Mount of Olives, and its breadth was in proportion to its
length. So extraordinary a phenomenon excited universal terror. Men, women,
and children left their houses, the market-place, or their respective employments,
and ran to the church, where they sang hymns to Christ together, and voluntarily
confessed their belief in God. The intelligence disturbed in no little measure
our entire dominions, and this happened rapidly; for, as the custom was, there
were travelers from every part of the world, so to speak, who were dwelling
at Jerusalem for prayer, or to visit its places of interest, these were spectators
of the sign, and divulged the facts to their friends at home. The emperor was
made acquainted with the occurrence, partly by numerous reports concerning
it which were then current, and partly by a letter from Cyril (2) the bishop.
It was said that this prodigy was a fulfillment of an ancient prophecy contained
in the Holy Scriptures. It was the means of the conversion of many pagans and
Jews to Christianity.
CHAP. VI. -- PHOTINUS, BISHOP OF SIRMIUM. HIS HERESY, AND THE COUNCIL CONVENED
AT SIRMIUM IN OPPOSITION THERETO. THE THREE FORMULARIES OF FAITH. THIS AGITATOR
OF EMPTY IDEAS WAS REFUTED BY BASIL OF ANCYRA. AFTER HIS DEPOSITION PHOTINUS,
ALTHOUGH SOLICITED, DECLINED RECONCILIATION.
ABOUT this time, (3) Photinus, who administered the church of Sirmium, laid
before the emperor, who was then staying at that city, a heresy which he had
originated some time previously. His natural ease of utterance and powers of
persuasion enabled him to lead many into his own way of thinking. He acknowledged
that there was one God Almighty, by whose own word all things were created,
but would not admit that the generation and existence of the Son was before
all ages; on the contrary, he alleged that Christ derived His existence from
Mary. As soon as this opinion was divulged, it excited the indignation of the
Western and of the Eastern bishops, and they considered it in common as an
innovation of each one's particular belief, for it was equally opposed by those
who maintained the doctrines of the Nicaean council, and by those who favored
the tenets of Arius. The emperor also regarded the heresy with aversion, and
convened a council at Sirmium, where he was then residing. Of the Eastern bishops,
George, who governed the church of Alexandria, Basil, bishop of Ancyra, and
Mark, bishop of Arethusa, were present at this council; and among the Western
bishops were Valens, bishop of Mursa, and Hosius the Confessor. This latter,
who had at-tended the council of Nicaea, was unwillingly a participant of this;
he had not long previously been condemned to banishment through the machinations
of the Arians; he was summoned to the council of Sirmium by the command of
the emperor extorted by the Arians, who believed that their party would be
strengthened, if they could gain over, either by persuasion or force, a man
held in universal admiration and esteem, as was Hosius. The period at which
the council was convened at Sirmium, was the year after the expiration of the
consulate of Sergius and Nigrinian; and during this year there were no consuls
either in the East or the West, owing to the insurrections excited by the tyrants.
Photinus was deposed by this council, because he was accused of countenancing
the errors of Sabellius and Paul of Samosata. The council then proceeded to
draw up three formularies of faith in addition to the previous confessions,
of which one was written in Greek, and the others in Latin. But they did not
agree with one another, nor with any other of the former expositions of doctrine,
either in word or import. It is not said in the Greek formulary, (1) that the
Son is consubstantial, or of like substance, with the Father, but it is there
declared, that those who maintain that the Son had no commencement, or that
He proceeded from an expansion of the substance of the Father, or that He is
united to the Father without being subject to Him, are excommunicated. In one
of the Roman formularies, (2) it is forbidden to say, of the essence of the
Godhead which the Romans call substance, that the Son is either consubstantial,
or of like substance with the Father, as such statements do not occur in the
Holy Scriptures, and are beyond the reach of the understanding and knowledge
of men. It is said, that the Father must be recognized as superior to the Son
in honor, in dignity, in divinity, and in the relationship suggested by His
name of Father; and that it must be confessed that the Son, like all created
beings, is subject to the Father, that the Father had no commencement, and
that the generation of the Son is unknown to all save the Father. It is related,
that when this formulary was completed, the bishops became aware of the errors
it contained, and endeavored to withdraw it from the public, and to correct
it; and that the emperor threatened to punish those who should retain or conceal
any of the copies that had been made of it. But having been once published,
no efforts were adequate to suppress it altogether.
The third
formulary (3) is of the same import as the others. It prohibits the use of
the term "substance" on account of the terms used in Latin,
while the Greek term having been used with too much simplicity by the Fathers,
and having been a cause of offense to many of the unlearned multitude, because
it was not to be found in the Scriptures, "we have deemed it right totally
to reject the use of it: and we would enjoin the omission of all mention of
the term in allusion to the Godhead, for it is nowhere said in the Holy Scriptures,
that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are of the same substance, where the word
person is written. But we say, in conformity with the Holy Scriptures, that
the Son is like unto the Father."
Such was the decision arrived at in the presence of the emperor concerning
the faith. Hosius at first refused to assent to it. Compulsion, however, was
resorted to; and being extremely old, he sunk, as it is reported, beneath the
blows that were inflicted on him, and yielded his consent and signature.
After the deposition of Photinus, the Synod thought it expedient to try whether
it were not somehow possible to persuade him to change his views. But when
the bishop urged him, and promised to restore his bishopric if he would renounce
his own dogma, and vote for their formulary, he would not acquiesce, but challenged
them to a discussion. On the day appointed for this purpose, the bishops, therefore,
assembled with the judges who had been appointed by the emperor to preside
at their meetings, and who, in point of eloquence and dignity, held the first
rank in the palace. Basil, bishop of Ancyra, was selected to commence the disputation
against Photinus. The conflict lasted a long time, on account of the numerous
questions started and the answers given by each party, and which were immediately
taken down in short-hand; but finally the victory declared itself in favor
of Basil. Photinus was condemned and banished, but did not cease on that account
from enlarging his own dogma. He wrote and published many works in Greek and
Latin, in which he endeavored to show that all opinions, except his own, were
erroneous. I have now concluded all that I had to say concerning Photinus and
the heresy to which his name was affixed.
CHAP. VII. -- DEATH OF THE TYRANTS MAGNENTIUS AND SILVANUS THE APOSTATE. SEDITION
OF THE JEWS IN PALESTINE. GALLUS CAESAR IS SLAIN, ON SUSPICION OF REVOLUTION.
IN the meantime, (4) Magnentius made himself master of ancient Rome, and put
numbers of the senators, and of the people, to death. Hearing that the troops
of Constantius were approaching, he retired into Gaul; and here the two parties
had frequent encounters, in which sometimes the one and sometimes the other
was victorious. At length, however, Magnentius was defeated, and fled to Mursa,
which is the fortress of this Gaul, and when he saw that his soldiers were
dispirited because they had been defeated, he stood on an elevated spot and
endeavored to revive their courage. But, although the addressed Magnentius
with the acclamations usually paid to emperors, and were ready to shout at
his public appearance, they secretly and without premeditation shouted for
Constantius as emperor in place of Magnentius. Magnentius, concluding from
this circumstance, that he was not destined by God to hold the reins of empire,
endeavored to retreat from the fortress to some distant place. But he was pursued
by the troops of Constantius, and being overtaken at a spot called Mount Seleucus,
he escaped alone from the encounter, and fled to Lugduna. On his arrival there,
he slew his own mother and his brother, whom he had named Caesar; and lastly,
he killed himself. (1) Not long after, Decentius, another of his brothers,
put an end to his own existence. Still the public tumults were not quelled;
for not long after, Silvanus assumed the supreme authority in Gaul; but he
was put to death immediately by the generals of Constantius.
The Jews of Diocaesarea also overran Palestine and the neighboring territories;
they took up arms with the design of shaking off the Roman yoke. (2) On hearing
of their insurrection, Gallus Caesar, who was then at Antioch, sent troops
against them, defeated them, and destroyed Diocaesarea. Gallus, intoxicated
with success, could not bear his prosperity, but aspired to the supreme power,
and he slew Magnus, the quaestor, and Domitian, the prefect of the East, because
they apprised the emperor of his innovations. The anger of Constantius was
excited; and he summoned him to his presence. Gallus did not dare to refuse
obedience, and set out on his journey. When, however, he reached the island
Elavona he was killed by the emperor's order; this event occurred in the third
year of his consulate, and the seventh of Constantius. (3)
CHAP. VIII. -- ARRIVAL OF CONSTANTIUS AT ROME. A COUNCIL HELD IN ITALY. ACCOUNT
OF WHAT HAPPENED TO ATHANASIUS THE GREAT THROUGH THE MACHINATIONS OF THE ARIANS.
ON the death of the tyrants, (4) Constantius anticipated the restoration of
peace and cessation of tumults, and quilted Sirmium in order to return to ancient
Rome, and to enjoy the honor of a triumph after his victory over the tyrants.
He likewise intended to bring the Eastern and the Western bishops, if possible,
to one mind concerning doctrine, by convening a council in Italy. Julius died
about this period, after having governed the church of Rome during twenty-five
years; (5) and Liberius succeeded him. Those who were opposed to the doctrines
of the Nicaean council thought this a favorable opportunity to calumniate the
bishops whom they had deposed, and to procure their ejection from the church
as abettors of false doctrine, and as disturbers of the public peace; and to
accuse them of having sought, during the life of Constans, to excite a misunderstanding
between the emperors; and it was true, as we related above, (6) that Constans
menaced his brother with war unless he would consent to receive the orthodox
bishops. Their efforts were principally directed against Athanasius, towards
whom they entertained so great an aversion that, even when he was protected
by Constans, and enjoyed the friendship of Constantius, they could not conceal
their enmity. Narcissus, bishop of Cilicia, Theodore, bishop of Thrace, Eugenius,
bishop of Nicaea, Patrophilus, bishop of Scythopolis, Menophantes, bishop of
Ephesus, and other bishops, to the number of thirty, assembled themselves in
Antioch, (7) and wrote a letter to all the bishops of every region, in which
they stated that Athanasius had returned to his bishopric in violation of the
rules of the Church, that he had not justified himself in any council, and
that he was only supported by some of his own faction; and they exhorted them
not to hold communion with him, nor to write to him, but to enter into communion
with George, who had been ordained to succeed him. Athanasius only contemned
these proceedings; but he was about to undergo greater trials than any he had
yet experienced. Immediately on the death of Magnentius, and as soon as Constantius
found himself sole master of the Roman Empire, he directed all his efforts
to induce the bishops of the West to admit that the Son is of like substance
with the Father. In carrying out this scheme, however, he did not, in the first
place, resort to compulsion, but endeavored by persuasion to obtain the concurrence
of the other bishops in the decrees of the Eastern bishops against Athanasius;
for he thought that if he could bring them to be of one mind on this point,
it would be easy for him to regulate aright the affairs connected with religion.
CHAP. IX. -- COUNCIL OF MILAN. FLIGHT OF ATHANASIUS.
THE emperor (1) was extremely urgent to convene a council in Milan, yet few
of the Eastern bishops repaired thither; some, it appears, excused themselves
from attendance under the plea of illness; others, on account of the length
and difficulties of the journey. There were, however, upwards of three hundred
of the Western bishops at the council. The Eastern bishops insisted that Athanasius
should be condemned to banishment, and expelled from Alexandria; and the others,
either from fear, fraud, or ignorance, assented to the measure. Dionysius,
bishop of Alba, the metropolis of Italy, Eusebius, bishop of Vercella in Liguria,
Paulinus, bishop of Treves, Rhodanus, (2) and Lucifer, were the only bishops
who protested against this decision; and they declared that Athanasius ought
not to be condemned on such slight pretexts; and that the evil would not cease
with his condemnation; but that those who supported the orthodox doctrines
concerning the Godhead would be forthwith subjected to a plot. They represented
that the whole measure was a scheme concerted by the emperor and the Arians
with the view of suppressing the Nicene faith. Their boldness was punished
by an edict of immediate banishment, and Hilary was exiled with them. The result
too plainly showed for what purpose the council of Milan had been convened.
For the councils which were held shortly after at Ariminum and Seleucia were
evidently designed to change the doctrines established by the Nicaean council,
as I shall directly show.
Athanasius,
being apprised that plots had been formed against him at court, deemed it
prudent not to
repair
to the emperor himself, as he knew that his
life would be thereby endangered, nor did he think that it would be of any
avail. He, however, selected five of the Egyptian bishops, among whom was Serapion,
bishop of Thumis, a prelate distinguished by the wonderful sanctity of his
life and the power of his eloquence, and sent them with three presbyters of
the Church to the emperor, who was then in the West. They were directed to
attempt, if possible, to conciliate the emperor; to reply, if requisite, to
the calumnies of the hostile party; and to take such measures as they deemed
most advisable for the welfare of the Church and himself. Shortly after they
had embarked on their voyage, Athanasius received some letters from the emperor,
summoning him to the palace. Athanasius and all the people of the Church were
greatly troubled at this command; for they considered that no safety could
be enjoyed when acting either in obedience or in disobedience to an emperor
of heterodox sentiments. It was, however, determined that he should remain
at Alexandria, and the bearer of the letters quitted the city without having
effected anything. The following summer, another messenger from the emperor
arrived with the governors of the provinces, and he was charged to urge the
departure of Athanasius from the city, and to act with hostility against the
clergy. When he perceived, however, that the people of the Church were full
of courage, and ready to take up arms, he also departed from the city without
accomplishing his mission. Not long after, troops, called the Roman legions,
which were quartered in Egypt and Libya, marched into Alexandria. As it was
reported that Athanasius was concealed in the church known by the name "Theonas," the
commander of the troops, and Hilary, (3) whom the emperor had again intrusted
with the transaction of this affair, caused the doors of the church to be burst
open, and thus effected their entrance; but they did not find Athanasius within
the walls, although they sought for him everywhere. It is said that he escaped
this and many other perils by the Divine interposition; and that God had disclosed
this previously; directly as he went out, the soldiers took the doors of the
church, and were within a little of seizing him.
CHAP. X. -- DIVERS MACHINATIONS OF THE ARIANS AGAINST ATHANASIUS, AND HIS
ESCAPE FROM VARIOUS DANGERS THROUGH DIVINE INTERPOSITION. EVIL DEEDS PERPETRATED
BY GEORGE IN EGYPT AFTER THE EXPULSION OF ATHANASIUS.
THERE
is no doubt but that Athanasius was beloved of God, and endowed with the
gift of foreseeing
the future. (4)
More wonderful facts than those which
we have related might be adduced to prove his intimate acquaintance with futurity.
It happened that during the life of Constans, the Emperor Constantius was once
determined upon ill-treating this holy man; but Athanasius fled, and concealed
himself with some one of his acquaintances. He lived for a long time in a subterraneous
and sunless dwelling, which had been used as a reservoir for water. No one
knew where he was concealed except a serving-woman, who seemed faithful, and
who waited upon him. As the heterodox, however, were anxiously intent upon
taking Athanasius alive, it appears that, by means of gifts or promises, they
at length succeeded in corrupting the attendant. But Athanasius was forewarned
by God of her treachery, and effected his escape from the place. The servant
was punished for having made a false deposition against her masters, while
they, on their part, fled the country i for it was accounted no venial crime
by the heterodox to receive or to conceal Athanasius, but was, on the contrary,
regarded as an act of disobedience against the express commands of the emperor,
and as a crime against the empire, and was visited as such by the civil tribunals.
It has come to my hearing that Athanasius was saved on another occasion in
a similar manner. He was again obliged for the same reason to flee for his
life; and he set sail up the Nile (1) with the design of retreating to the
further districts of Egypt, but his enemies received intelligence of his intention,
and pursued him. Being forewarned of God that he would be pursued, he announced
it to his fellow-passengers, and commanded them to return to Alexandria. While
he sailed down the river, his plotters rowed by. He reached Alexandria in safety,
and effectually concealed himself in the midst of its similar and numerous
houses. His success in avoiding these and many other perils led to his being
accused of sorcery by the pagan and the heterodox. It is reported, that once,
as he was passing through the city, a crow was heard to caw, and that a number
of pagans who happened to be on the spot, asked him in derision what the crow
was saying. He replied, smiling, "It utters the sound eras, the meaning
of which in the Latin language is, 'tomorrow'; and it has hereby announced
to you that the morrow will not be propitious to you; for it indicates that
you will be forbidden by the Roman emperor to celebrate your festival tomorrow." Although
this prediction of Athanasius appeared to be absurd, it was fulfilled; for
the following day edicts were transmitted to the governors from the emperor,
by which it was commanded that the pagans were not to be permitted to assemble
in the temples to perform their usual ceremonies, nor to celebrate their festival;
and thus was abolished the most solemn and magnificent feast which the pagans
had retained. What I have said is sufficient to show that this holy man was
endowed with the gift of prophecy. After Athanasius had escaped, in the manner
we have described, from those who sought to arrest him, his clergy and people
remained for some time in possession of the churches; but eventually, the governor
of Egypt and the commander of the army forcibly ejected all those who maintained
the sentiments of Athanasius, in order to deliver up the government of the
churches to those who favored George, whose arrival was then expected. Not
long after he reached the city, and the churches were placed under his authority.
He ruled by force rather than by priestly moderation; and as he strove to strike
terror into the minds of the people, and carried on a cruel persecution against
the followers of Athanasius, and, moreover, imprisoned and maimed many men
and women, he was accounted a tyrant. For these reasons he fell into a universal
hate; the people were so deeply incensed at his conduct, that they rushed into
the church, and would have torn him to pieces; in such an extremity of danger,
he escaped with difficulty, and fled to the emperor. Those who held the sentiments
of Athanasius then took possession of the churches. But they did not long retain
the mastery of them; for the commander of the troops in Egypt came and restored
the churches to the partisans of George. An imperial shorthand writer of the
notary class was afterwards sent to punish the leaders of the sedition, and
he tortured and scourged many of the citizens. When George returned a little
while after, he was more formidable, it appears, than ever, and was regarded
with greater aversion than before, for he instigated the emperor to the perpetration
of many evil deeds; and besides, the monks of Egypt openly declared him to
be perfidious and inflated with arrogance. The opinions of these monks were
always adopted by the people, and their testimony was universally received,
because they were noted for their virtue and the philosophical tenor of their
fives.
CHAP. XI. -- LIBERIUS, BISHOP OF ROME, AND THE CAUSE OF HIS BEING EXILED BY
CONSTANTIUS. FELIX HIS SUCCESSOR.
ALTHOUGH what I have recorded did not occur to Athanasius and the church of
Alexandria, at the same period of time after the death of Constans, yet I deemed
it right, for the sake of greater clearness, to relate all these events collectively.
The council of Milan (2) was dissolved without any business having been transacted,
and the emperor condemned to banishment all those who had opposed the designs
of the enemies of Athanasius. As Constantius wished to establish uniformity
of doctrine throughout the Church, and to unite the priesthood in the maintenance
of the same sentiments, he formed a plan to convene the bishops of every religion
to a council, to be held in the West. He was aware of the difficulty of carrying
this scheme into execution, arising from the vast extent of land and seas which
some of the bishops would have to traverse, yet he did not altogether despair
of success. While this project was occupying his mind, and before he prepared
to make his triumphal entrance into Rome, he sent for Liberius, the bishop
of Rome, and strove to persuade him to conformity of sentiment with the priests
by whom he was attended, amongst whom was Eudoxius. As Liberius, however, refused
compliance, and protested that he would never yield on this point, the emperor
banished him to Beroea, in Thrace. It is alleged, that another pretext for
the banishment of Liberius was, that he would not withdraw from communion with
Athanasius, but manfully opposed the emperor, who insisted that Athanasius
had injured the Church, had occasioned the death of the eider of his two brothers,
(1) and had sown the seeds of enmity between Constans and himself. As the emperor
revived all the decrees which had been enacted against Athanasius by various
councils, and particularly by that of Tyre, Liberius told him that no regard
ought to be paid to edicts which were issued from motives of hatred, of favor,
or of fear. He desired that the bishops of every region should be made to sign
the formulary of faith compiled at Nicaea, and that those bishops who had been
exiled on account of their adherence to it should be recalled. He suggested
that after these matters were righted all the bishops should, at their own
expense, and without being furnished either with public conveyances or money,
so as not to seem burdensome and destructive, proceed to Alexandria, and make
an accurate test of the truth, which could be more easily instituted at that
city than elsewhere, as the injured and those who had inflicted injury as well
as the confuters of the charges dwelt there. He then exhibited the letter written
by Valens and Ursacius to Julius, his predecessor in the Roman see, in which
they solicited his forgiveness, and acknowledged that the depositions brought
against Athanasius, at the Mareotis, were false; and he besought the emperor
not to condemn Athanasius during his absence, nor to give credit to enactments
which were evidently obtained by the machinations of his enemies. With respect
to the alleged injuries which had been inflicted on his two brothers, he entreated
the emperor not to revenge himself by the hands of priests who had been set
apart by God, not for the execution of vengeance, but for sanctification, and
the performance of just and benevolent actions.
The emperor
perceiving that Liberius was not disposed to comply with his mandate, commanded
that
he should be
conveyed to Thrace, unless he would change his
mind within two days. "To me, O emperor," replied Liberius, "there
is no need of deliberation; my resolution has long been formed and decided,
and I am ready to go forth to exile." It is said, that when he was being
conducted to banishment, the emperor sent him five hundred pieces of gold;
he, however, refused to receive them, and said to the messenger who brought
them, "Go, and tell him who sent this gold to give it to the flatterers
and hypocrites (2) who surround him, for their insatiable cupidity plunges
them into a state of perpetual want which can never be relieved. Christ, who
is in all respects, (3) like unto his Father, supplies us with food and with
all good things."
Liberius having for the above reasons been deposed from the Roman church,
his government was transferred to Felix, a deacon of the clergy there. It is
said that Felix always continued in adherence to the Nicene faith; and that,
with respect to his conduct in religious matters he was blameless. The only
thing alleged against him was, that, prior to his ordination, he held communion
with the heterodox. When the emperor entered Rome, the people loudly demanded
Liberius, and besought his return; after consulting with the bishops who were
with him, he replied that he would recall Liberius and restore him to the people,
if he would consent to embrace the same sentiments as those held by the priests
of the court.
CHAP.XlI.
-- AETIUS, THE SYRIAN, AND EUDOXIUS, THE SUCCESSOR OF LEONTIUS IN ANTIOCH.CONCERNING
THE
TERM "CONSUBSTANTIAL."
ABOUT this time, (4) Aetius broached his peculiar opinions concerning the
Godhead. He was then deacon of the church of Antioch, and had been ordained
by Leontius. (5) He maintained, like Arius, that the Son is a created being,
that He was created out of nothing, and that He is dissimilar from the Father.
As he was extremely addicted to contention, very bold in his assertions on
theological subjects, and prone to have recourse to a very subtle mode of argumentation,
he was accounted a heretic, even by those who held the same sentiments as himself.
When he had been, for this reason, excommunicated by the heterodox, he feigned
a refusal to hold communion with them, because, they had unjustly admitted
Arius into communion after he had perjured himself by declaring to the Emperor
Constantine that he maintained the doctrines of the council of Nicaea. Such
is the account given of Aetius.
While
the emperor was in the West, tidings arrived of the death of Leontius, bishop
of Antioch.
Eudoxius requested
permission of the emperor to return to
Syria, that he might superintend the affairs of that church. On permission
being granted, he repaired with all speed to Antioch, and installed himself
as bishop of that city without the sanction of George, bishop of Laodicea;
of Mark, bishop of Arethusa; of the other Syrian bishops; or of any other bishop
to whom the right of ordination pertained. It was reported that he acted with
the concurrence of the emperor, and of the eunuchs belonging to the palace,
who, like Eudoxius, favored the doctrines of Aetius, and believed that the
Son is dissimilar from the Father. When Eudoxius found himself in possession
of the church of Antioch, he ventured to uphold this heresy openly. He assembled
in Antioch all those who held the same opinions as himself, among whom was
Acacius, bishop of Tyre, and rejected the terms, "of like substance," and "consubstantial," under
the pretext that they had been denounced by the Western bishops. For Hosius,
with some of the priests there, had certainly, with the view of arresting the
contention excited by Valens, Ursacius, and Germanius, (1) consented, though
by compulsion, (2) at Sirmium, as it is reported, to refrain from the use of
the terms "consubstantial" and "of like substance," because
such terms do not occur in the Holy Scriptures, and are beyond the understanding
of men. (3) They (4) sent an epistle to the bishops as though these sustained
the writings of Hosius on this point, and conveyed their thanks to Valens,
Ursacius, and Germanius, because they had given the impulse of right views
to the Western bishops.
CHAP. XIII. -- INNOVATIONS OF EUDOXIUS CENSURED IN A LETTER WRITTEN BY GEORGE,
BISHOP OF LAODICEA. DEPUTATION FROM THE COUNCIL OF ANCYRA TO CONSTANTIUS.
AFTER Eudoxius had introduced these new doctrines, many members of the church
of Antioch, who were opposed to them, were excommunicated. (5) George, bishop
of Laodicea, gave them a letter to take to the bishops who had been invited
from the neighboring towns of Ancyra in Galatia by Basil, for the purpose of
consecrating a church which he had erected. This letter was as follows: --
"George,
to his most honored lords Macedonius, Basil, Cecropius, and Eugenius, sends
greeting
in the Lord.
"Nearly the whole city has suffered from the shipwreck of Aetius. The
disciples of this wicked man, whom you contemned, have been encouraged by Eudoxius,
and promoted by him to clerical appointments, and Aetius himself has been raised
to the highest honor. Go, then, to the assistance of this great city, lest
by its shipwreck the whole world should be submerged. Assemble yourselves together,
and solicit the signatures of other bishops, that Aetius may be ejected from
the church of Antioch, and that his disciples who have been manipulated beforehand
into the lists of the clergy by Eudoxius, may be cut off. If Eudoxius persist
in affirming with Aetius, that the Son is dissimilar from the Father, and in
preferring those who uphold this dogma to those who reject it, the city of
Antioch is lost to you." Such was the strain of George's letter.
The bishops who were assembled at Ancyra dearly perceived by the enactments
of Eudoxius at Antioch, that he contemplated the introduction of innovations
in doctrine; they apprised the emperor of this fact, and besought him that
the doctrine established at Sardica, at Sirmium, and at other councils, might
be confirmed, and especially the dogma that the Son is of like substance with
the Father. In order to proffer this request to the emperor, they sent to him
a deputation composed of the following bishops: Basil, bishop of Ancyra; Eustathius,
bishop of Sebaste; Eleusius, bishop of Cyzicus; and Leontius, the presbyter
of the imperial bed-chamber. On their arrival at the palace, they found that
Asphalius, a presbyter of Antioch, and a zealot of the Aetian heresy, was on
the point of taking his departure, after having terminated the business for
which he undertook the journey and having obtained a letter from the emperor.
On receiving, however, the intelligence concerning the heresy conveyed by the
deputation from Ancyra, Constantius condemned Eudoxius and his followers, withdrew
the letter he had confided to Asphalius, and wrote the following one: --
CHAP. XIV. -- LETTER OF THE EMPEROR CONSTANTIUS AGAINST EUDOXIUS AND HIS PARTISANS.
"CONSTANTIUS
AUGUSTUS the Conqueror, to the holy church in Antioch. (1) "
Eudoxius
came without our authority; let no one suppose that he had it, for we are
far from regarding
such persons
with favor. If they have recourse to
deceit with others in transactions like this, they give evidence that they
will refine away the truth in still higher things. For from what will they
voluntarily refrain, who, for the sake of power, follow the round of the cities,
leaping from one to another, as a kind of wanderer, prying into every nook,
led by the desire for more? It is reported that there are among these people
certain quacks and sophists, whose very names are scarcely to be tolerated,
and whose deeds are evil and most impious. You all know to what set of people
I allude; for you are all thoroughly acquainted with the doctrines of Aetius
and the heresy which he has cultivated. He and his followers have devoted themselves
exclusively to the task of corrupting the people; and these clever fellows
have had the audacity to publish that we approved of their ordination. Such
is the report they circulate, after the manner of those who talk overmuch;
but it is not true, and, indeed, far removed from the truth. Recall to your
recollection the words of which we made use, when we first made a declaration
of our belief; for we confessed that our Saviour is the Son of God, and of
like substance with the Father. But these people, who have the audacity to
set forth whatever enters their imagination, concerning the Godhead, are not
far removed from atheism; and they strive, moreover, to propagate their opinions
among others. We are convinced that their iniquitous proceedings will fall
back upon their own heads. In the meantime, it is sufficient to eject them
from synods and from ordinary conference; for I will not now allude to the
chastisements which must hereafter overtake them, unless they will desist from
their madness. How great is the evil they perpetrate, when they collect together
the most wicked persons, as if by an edict, and they select the leaders of
heresy for the clergy, thus debasing the reverend order as though they were
allowed to do what they please! Who can bear with people who fill the cities
with impiety, who secrete impurity in the most distant regions, and who delight
in nothing but in injuring the righteous? What an evil-working unity it is,
which limps forward to enthrone itself in the diviner seats! Now is the time
for those who have imbibed the truth to come forward into the light, and whoever
were previously restrained through fear, and now would escape from conventionalism,
let them step into the middle; for the artifices of these evil men have been
thoroughly confuted, and no sort of device can be invented which will deliver
them from acting impiously. It is the duty of good men to retain the faith
of the Fathers, and, so to speak, to augment it, without busying themselves
with other matters. I earnestly exhort those who have escaped, though but recently,
from the precipice of this heresy, to assent to the decrees which the bishops
who are wise in divine learning, have rightly determined for the better."
Thus we see that the heresy usually denominated Anomian was within a little
of becoming predominant at this period.
CHAP. XV. -- THE EMPEROR CONSTANTIUS REPAIRS TO SIRMIUM, RECALLS LIBERIUS,
AND RESTORES HIM TO THE CHURCH OF ROME; HE ALSO COMMANDS FELIX TO ASSIST LIBERIUS
IN THE SACERDOTAL OFFICE.
NOT long
after these events, the emperor returned to Sirmium from Rome; on receiving
a deputation from
the
Western bishops, he recalled Liberius from
Beroea. (2) Constantius urged him, in the presence of the deputies of the Eastern
bishops, and of the other priests who were at the camp, to confess that the
Son is not of the same substance as the Father. He was instigated to this measure
by Basil, Eustathius, and Eusebius, who possessed great influence over him.
They had formed a compilation, in one document, of the decrees against Paul
of Samosata, and Photinus, bishop of Sirmium; to which they subjoined a formulary
of faith drawn up at Antioch at the consecration of the church, as if certain
persons had, under the pretext of the term "consubstantial," attempted
to establish a heresy of their own. Liberius, Athanasius, Alexander, Severianus,
and Crescens, a priest of Africa, were induced to assent to this document,
as were likewise Ursacius, Germanius, bishop of Sirmium, Valens, bishop of
Mursa, and as many of the Eastern bishops as were present. They partially approved
of a confession of faith drawn up by Liberius, in which he declared that those
who affirm that the Son is not like unto the Father in substance and in all
other respects, are excommunicated. For when Eudoxius and his partisans at
Antioch, who favored the heresy of Aetius, received the letter of Hosius, they
circulated the report that Liberius had renounced the term "consubstantial," and
had admitted that the Son is dissimilar from the Father. After these enactments
had been made by the Western bishops, the emperor permitted Liberius to return
to Rome. The bishops who were then convened at Sirmium (1) wrote to Felix,
who governed the Roman church, and to the other bishops, desiring them to receive
Liberius. They directed that both should share the apostolical throne and discharge
the priestly duties in common, with harmony of mind; and that whatever illegalities
might have occurred in the ordination of Felix, or the banishment of Liberius,
might be buried in oblivion. The people of Rome regarded Liberius as a very
excellent man, and esteemed him highly on account of the courage he had evinced
in opposing the emperor, so that they had even excited seditions on his account,
and had gone so far as to shed blood. Felix survived but a short time; and
Liberius found himself in sole possession of the church. This event was, no
doubt, ordained by God, that the seat of Peter might not be dishonored by the
occupancy of two bishops; for such an arrangement is a sign of discord, and
is foreign to ecclesiastical law.
CHAP.XVI. -- THE EMPEROR PURPOSED, ON ACCOUNT OFTHE HERESY OF AETIUS AND THE
INNOVATIONS INANTIOCH, TO CONVENE A COUNCIL AT NICOMEDIA; BUT AS AN EARTHQUAKE
TOOK PLACE IN THAT CITY, AND MANY OTHER AFFAIRS INTERVENED, THE COUNCIL WAS
FIRST CONVENED AT NICAEA, AND AFTERWARDS AT ARIMINUM AND SELEUCIA. ACCOUNT
OF ARSACIUS, THE CONFESSOR.
SUCH were the events which transpired at Sirmium. It seemed at this period
as if, from the fear of displeasing the emperor, the Eastern and Western Churches
had united in the profession of the same doctrine. The emperor had determined
upon convening a council at Nicaea to take into consideration the innovations
introduced at Antioch, and the heresy of Aetius. (2) As Basil, however, and
his party were averse to the council being held in this city, because doctrinal
questions had previously been agitated there, it was determined to hold the
council at Nicomedia in Bithynia; and edicts were issued, summoning the most
intelligent and eloquent bishops of every nation to repair thither punctually
on an appointed day, so that it might be the privilege of all the priests of
the state to share in the Synod and to be present at its decisions. The great
number of these bishops had commenced their journey when the calamity that
had come upon Nicomedia was reported, and that God had shaken the entire city
to its foundations. Since the story of the destruction of the city everywhere
prevailed and grew, the bishops arrested their journey; for as is usual in
such cases, far more was rumored to those at a distance, than had actually
occurred. It was reported that Nicaea, Perinthus, and the neighboring cities,
even Constantinople, had been involved in the same catastrophe. The orthodox
bishops were grieved immoderately at this occurrence; for the enemies of religion
took occasion, on the overthrow of a magnificent church, to represent to the
emperor that a multitude of bishops, men, women, and children fled to the church
in the hope of their finding safety, and that they all perished. This report
was not true. The earthquake occurred at the second hour of the day, at which
time there was no assembly in the church. The only bishops who were killed
were Cecropius, bishop of Nicomedia, and a bishop from the Bosphorus, and they
were outside of the church when the fatal accident happened. The city was shaken
in an instant of time, so that the people had not the power, even if they had
the wish, to seek safety by flight; at the first experience of danger, they
were either preserved, or they perished on the spot where they were standing.
(3)
It is said that this calamity was predicted by Arsacius. (4) He was a Persian,
and a soldier who was employed in tending the emperor's lions; but during the
reign of Licinius he became a noted confessor, and left the army. He then went
to the citadel of Nicomedia, and led the life of a monastic philosopher within
its walls. Here a vision from heaven appeared to him, and he was commanded
to quit the city immediately, that he might be saved from the calamity about
to happen. He ran with the utmost earnestness to the church, and besought the
clergy to offer supplications to God that His anger might be turned away. But,
finding that far from being believed by them, he was regarded with ridicule,
and as disclosing unlooked-for sufferings, he returned to his tower, and prostrated
himself on the ground in prayer. Just at this moment the earthquake occurred,
and many perished. Those who were spared fled into the country and the desert.
And as happens in a prosperous and large city, there were fires in the brasiers
and extinguishers of every house, and in the ovens of the baths, and in the
furnaces of all who use fire in the arts; and when the framework fell in ruin,
the flame was hemmed in by the stuff, and of course there was dry wood commingled,
much of which was oily, -- this served as a contribution to the rapid conflagration,
and nourished the fire without stint; the flame creeping everywhere, and attaching
to itself all circumjacent material, made the entire city, so to speak, one
mass of fire. It being impossible to obtain access to the houses, those who
had been saved from the earthquake rushed to the citadel. Arsacius was found
dead in the unshaken tower, and prostrated on the ground, in the same posture
in which he had begun to pray. It was said that he had supplicated God to permit
him to die, because he preferred death to beholding the destruction of a city
in which he had first known Christ, and practiced monastical philosophy. As
I have been led to speak of this good man, it is well to mention that he was
endowed by God with the power of exorcising demons and of purifying those troubled
by them. A man possessed with a demon once ran through the market-place with
a naked sword in his hand. The people fled from him, and the whole city was
in confusion. Arsacius went out to meet him, and called upon the name of Christ,
and at that name the demon was expelled, and the man restored to sanity. Besides
the above, Arsacius performed many other actions beyond the power and skill
of man. There was a dragon, or some other species of reptile, which had entrenched
itself in a cavity of the roadside, and which destroyed those who passed by,
with its breath. Arsacius went to the spot and engaged in prayer, and the serpent
voluntarily crept forth from its hole, dashed its head against the ground,
and killed itself. All these details I have obtained from persons who heard
them stated by those who had seen Arsacius.
As the
bishops were deterred from continuing their journey by the intelligence of
the calamity which had
occurred
at Nicomedia, some awaited the further commands
of the emperor, and others declared their opinions concerning the faith in
letters which they wrote on the subject. The emperor hesitates as to what measures
ought to be adopted, and writes to consult Basil as to whether a council ought
to be convened. In his reply, it appears, Basil commended his piety, and tried
to console him for the destruction of Nicomedia by examples drawn from the
Holy Scriptures; he exhorted him, for the sake of religion, to hasten the Synod;
and not to drop such a proof of his zeal for religion, and not to dismiss the
priests who had been gathered together for this purpose, and had already set
forth and were on their way, until some business had been transacted. He also
suggested that the council might be held at Nicaea instead of Nicomedia, so
that the disputed points might be finally decided on the very spot where they
had been first called in question. Basil, in writing to this effect, believed
that the emperor would be pleased with this proposition, as he had himself
originally suggested the propriety of holding the council at Nicaea. On receiving
this epistle from Basil, the emperor commanded that, at the commencement of
summer, the bishops should assemble together at Nicaea, with the exception
of those who were laboring under bodily infirmity; and these latter were to
depute presbyters and deacons to make known their sentiments and to consult
together on contested points of doctrine, and arrive at the same decision concerning
all points at issue. He ordained that ten delegates should be selected from
the Western churches, and as many from the Eastern, to take cognizance of the
enactments that might be issued, and to decide whether they were in accordance
with the Holy Scriptures, and also to exercise a general superintendence over
the transactions of the council. After further consultation the emperor enacted
that the bishops should remain where they might be residing, or in their own
churches, until it had been decided where the council was to be held, and until
they received notice to repair thither. He then writes to Basil, and directs
him to inquire by letter of the Eastern bishops, where they would advise the
council to be held, so that a public announcement might be made at the commencement
of spring; for the emperor was of opinion that it was not advisable to convene
the council at Nicaea, on account of the earthquake which had recently occurred
in the province. Basil wrote to the bishops of every province, urging them
to deliberate together, and to decide quickly upon the locality in which it
would be most expedient to hold the council, and he prefixed a copy of the
emperor's letter to his epistle. As is frequently the case in similar circumstances,
the bishops were divided in opinion on the subject, and Basil repaired to the
emperor, who was then at Sirmium. He found several bishops at that city who
had gone thither on their own private affairs, and among them were Mark, bishop
of Arethusa, and George, who had been appointed to preside over the church
of Alexandria. When at length it was decided that the council should be held
in Seleucia, a city of Isauria, by Valens and his adherents, for Valens was
then sojourning in Sirmium; since they favored the heresy of the Anomians,
they urged the bishops who were present at the military court, to subscribe
to a formulary of the faith which had been prepared, and in which there was
no mention of the term "substance." But while preparations were being
zealously made for convening the council, Eudoxius and Acacius, Ursacius and
Valens, with their followers, reflected that, while many of the bishops were
attached to the Nicene faith, and others favored the formulary drawn up at
the consecration of the church of Antioch, yet that both parties retained the
use of the term "substance," and maintained that the Son was, in
every respect, like unto the Father; and being aware that if both parties assembled
together in one place they would readily condemn the doctrines of Aetius, as
being contrary to their respective creeds, they so contrived matters that the
bishops of the West were convened at Ariminum, and those of the East at Seleucia,
a city of Isauria. As it is easier to convince a few than a great many individuals,
they conceived that they might possibly lead both parties to favor their sentiments
by dealing with them separately, or that they might, at any rate, succeed with
one, so that their heresy might not incur universal condemnation. They accomplished
this through Eusebius, a eunuch who was superintendent of the imperial house:
he was on terms of friendship with Eudoxius, and upheld the same doctrines,
and many of those in power were seeking to conciliate this very Eusebius.
CHAP. XVII. -- PROCEEDINGS OF THE COUNCIL OF ARIMINUM.
THE emperor (1) was persuaded that it would not be desirable for the public,
on account of the expense, nor advantageous to the bishops, on account of the
length of the journey, to convene them all to the same place for the purpose
of holding a council. He therefore writes to the bishops who were then at Ariminum,
as well as to those who were then at Seleucia, and directed them to enter upon
an investigation of contested points concerning the faith, and then to turn
their attention to the complaints of Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, and of other
bishops who had remonstrated against the injustice of the decrees of deposition
and banishment which had been issued against them, and to examine the legality
of various sentences which had been enacted against other bishops. There were,
in fact, several accusations pending against different bishops. George was
accused by the Egyptians of rapine and violence. Finally, the emperor commanded
that ten deputies should be sent to him from each council, to inform him of
their respective proceedings.
In accordance with this edict, the bishops assembled at the appointed cities.
The Synod at Ariminum first commenced proceedings; (2) it consisted of about
four hundred members. Those who regarded Athanasius with the greatest enmity,
were of opinion that there was nothing further to be decreed against him. When
they had entered upon the investigation of doctrinal questions, Valens and
Ursacius, supported by Germenius, Auxentius, Caius, and Demophilus, advanced
into the middle of the assembly, and demanded that all the formularies of the
faith which had been previously compiled should be suppressed, and that the
formulary which they had but a short time previously set forth in the Latin
language at Sirmium should be alone retained.
In this
formulary it was taught, according to Scripture, that the Son is like unto
the Father; but
no mention
was made of the substance of God. They declared
that this formulary had been approved by the emperor, and that it was incumbent
upon the council to adopt it, instead of consulting too scrupulously the individual
opinions of every member of the council, so that disputes and divisions might
not spring up, were the terms to be delivered up to debate and accurate proof.
They added that it would better enable those who were more ignorant of the
art of discourse to have a right conception of God, than were they to introduce
novelties in terms, so akin to disputatious jugglery. By these representations,
they designed to denounce the use of the term "consubstantial," because
they said it was not found in the Holy Scriptures, and was obscure to the multitude;
and, instead of this term, they wished to substitute the expression that "the
Son is like unto the Father in all things," which is borne out by the
Holy Scriptures. After they had read their formulary containing the above representations,
many of the bishops told them that no new formulary of the faith ought to be
set forth, that those which had been previously compiled were quite sufficient
for all purposes, and that they were met together for the express purpose of
preventing all innovations. These bishops then urged those who had compiled
and read the formulary to declare publicly their condemnation of the Arian
doctrine, as the cause of all the troubles which had agitated the churches
of every region. Ursacius and Valens, Germenius and Auxentius, Demophilus and
Caius, having protested against this protestation, the council commanded that
the expositions of the other heresies should be read, and likewise that set
forth at Nicaea; so that those formularies which favored divers heresies might
be condemned, and those which were in accordance with the Nicene doctrines
might be approved; in order that there might be no further ground for dispute,
and no future necessity for councils, but that an efficient decision might
be formed. (3) They remarked that it was absurd to compose so many formularies,
as if they had but just commenced to become acquainted with the faith, and
as if they wished to slight the ancient traditions of the Church, by which
the churches had been governed by themselves, and by their predecessors, many
of whom had witnessed a good! confession, and had received the crown of martyrdom.
Such were the arguments adduced by these bishops, to prove that no innovations
ought to be attempted. As Valens and Ursacius and their partisans refused to
be convinced by these arguments, but persisted in advocating the adoption of
their own formulary, they were deposed, and it was decided that their formulary
should be rejected. It was remarked that the declaration at the commencement
of this formulary, of its having been compiled at Sirmium, in the presence
of Constantius, "the eternal Augustus," and during the consulate
of Eusebius and Hypatius, was an absurdity. Athanasius made the same remark,
in a letter addressed to one of his friends, (1) and said that it was ridiculous
to term Constantius the eternal emperor, and yet to shrink from acknowledging
the Son of God to be eternal; he also ridiculed the date affixed to the formulary,
as though condemnation were meant to be thrown on the faith of former ages,
as well as on those who had, before that period, been initiated into the faith.
After these events had transpired at Ariminum, Valens and Ursacius, together
with their adherents, irritated at their deposition, repaired with all haste
to the emperor.
CHAP. XVIII.--LETTER FROM THE COUNCIL AT ARIMINUM TO THE EMPEROR CONSTANTIUS.
THE Synod selected twenty bishops, (2) and sent them on an embassy to the
emperor, with the following letter, which has been translated from Latin into
Greek:-- (3)
"We
believe that it is by the command of God, as well as by the arrangement of
your piety,
that we
have been led from all the cities of the West, to assemble
at Ariminum, for the purpose of declaring the faith of the Catholic Church,
and of detecting those who have set forth heresies in opposition to it. After
a protracted investigation, we have come to the conclusion that it is best
to preserve that faith which has been continuous from antiquity, and which
was preached by the prophets, the evangelists, the apostles of our Lord Jesus
Christ, the Guardian of your empire, and Protector of your strength, by holding
on thereto and guarding it to the end. It would have been absurd, as well as
illegal, to have introduced any change in the doctrines which were so rightly
and so justly propounded by the bishops at Nicaea, with the concurrence of
the most illustrious Constantine, the emperor and your father, whose teaching
and thought has gone forth and been preached in the universal hearing and reflection
of men; and it is the antagonist and destroyer of the Arian heresy; through
whose agency not only that deflection from the faith, but all others have been
destroyed. There is great danger in adding to, or in taking away from, these
doctrines; nor can the slightest alteration be made in any one of them, without
giving an opportunity to the adversaries to do what they list. Ursacius and
Valens, after having been suspected of participating in and advising about
the Arian doctrine, were cut off from communion with us. In the hope of being
restored to communion, they confessed their error, and obtained forgiveness,
as their own writings testify, through which they were spared and received
a pardon from the charges. The occasion on which the edict of forgiveness was
conceded, was at the council of Milan, when the presbyters of the Roman church
were also present.
"Since
we know that the formulary of the faith set forth at Nicaea was compiled
with the greatest
care and
accuracy, in the presence of Constantine,
of worthy memory, who maintained it throughout his life, and at his baptism,
and when he departed to enjoy the merited peace of heaven, we judge that it
would be absurd to attempt any alteration in it, and to overlook so many holy
confessors and martyrs, and the writers and authors of this dogma, who have
bestowed much thought upon it, and have perpetuated the ancient decree of the
Catholic Church. God has transmitted the knowledge of their faith to the time
in which you live, through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom you reign and rule
the world. Again have these wretched men, who are lamentable, to our way of
thinking, announced themselves as heralds of an impious view with unlawful
rashness, and have attempted to overturn the entire system of truth. For according
to your injunction, the Synod was convened, and these men laid bare the view
of their own deceit; for they attempted an innovation which they introduced
with knavery and disturbance, and they found some companions whom the), captured
for this nefarious transaction; viz. Germanius, Auxentius, and Caius, who caused
contention and discord. The teaching of these men, although it was uniform,
exceeded the entire range of blasphemies. As they perceived that they were
after all not of the same heresy, and that they did not think alike in any
of the points of their evil suggestions, they went over to our symbol, so that
it might appear as some other document. The time was indeed brief, but it was
sufficient to refute their opinions. In order that the affairs of the Church
might not be wrecked by them and that the disturbance and tumult which tossed
everything to and fro might be restrained, it appeared the safe thing to preserve
the ancient and immovable definitions, and to eject the aforesaid persons from
communion with us. We have, for this reason, sent our re-instructed deputies
to your Clemency, and have furnished them with letters, declaratory of the
sentiments of the council. These deputies have been especially charged by us
to maintain the truths which were defined rightly by the founders, and to instruct
your Holiness as to the falsity of the assertion of Valens and Ursacius, that
a few changes in righteous truths would produce peace in the Church. For how
can peace be reproduced by those who destroy peace? They would be more likely
to introduce contention and disturbance into the other cities and into the
Church of Rome. We therefore entreat your Clemency to consider our deputies
with gentle audience and mild look, and not to allow the dead to be dishonored
by any novel changes. We pray you to permit us to remain in the definitions
and decrees which we received from our ancestors, who, we would affirm, did
their work with ready minds, with prudence, and with the Holy Spirit. For these
innovations not only lead believers to infidelity, but also delude unbelievers
to immaturity. We likewise entreat you to command that the bishops who are
now absent from their churches, and of whom some are laboring under the infirmities
of old age, and others under the privations of poverty, may be furnished with
the means of returning to their own homes, in order that the churches may not
be longer deprived of their ministry.
"Again,
we beseech you that nothing be taken away from the former decisions, or added
to them;
let all
remain unchanged, even as it has been preserved from
the piety of your father to the present time; so that we may not in future
be fatigued, and be compelled to become strangers to our own parishes, but
that bishops and people may dwell together in peace, and be able to devote
themselves to prayer and supplication for your own personal salvation and empire
and peace, which may the Deity graciously vouchsafe to you uninterruptedly.
"Our
deputies will show you the signatures and the names of the bishops, and some
of them will
offer
instruction to your Holiness out of the Sacred
Scriptures."
CHAP. XIX. CONCERNING THE DEPUTIES OF THE COUNCIL AND THE EMPEROR'S LETTER;
AGREEMENT OF THE ADHERENTS OF URSACIUS AND VALENS AFTERWARDS WITH THE LETTER
PUT FORTH; EXILE OF THE ARCHBISHOPS. CONCERNING THE SYNOD AT NICAEA, AND THE
REASON WHY THE SYNOD WAS HELD IN ARIMINUM.
WE have
now transcribed the letter of the council of Ariminum. Ursacius and Valens,
with their adherents,
anticipating
the arrival of the deputies of the
council, showed to the emperor the document which they had read, and calumniated
the council. (1) The emperor was displeased at the rejection of this formulary,
as it had been composed in his presence at Sirmium, and he therefore treated
Ursacius and Va-lens with honor; while, on the other hand, he manifested great
contempt towards the deputies, and even delayed granting them an audience.
At length, however, he wrote to the Synod, and informed them that an expedition
which he was compelled to undertake against the barbarians prevented him from
conferring with the deputies; and that he had, therefore, commanded them to
remain at Adrianople until his return, in order that, when public business
had been dismissed, his mind might be at liberty to hear and test the representations
of the deputies; "for it is right," he said, "to bring to the
investigation of Divine subjects, a mind unfettered by other cares." Such
was the strain of his letter. (2)
The bishops replied that they could never depart from the decision they had
formed, as they had before declared in writing, and had charged their deputies
to declare; and they besought him to regard them with favor, and to give audience
to their deputies, and to read their letter. They told him that it must appear
grievous to him that so mary churches should be deprived of their bishops;
and that, if agreeable to him, they would return to their churches before the
winter. After writing this letter, which was full of supplications and entreaties,
the bishops waited for a time for a reply; but as no answer was granted them,
they afterwards returned to their own cities.
What I
have above stated clearly proves that the bishops who were convened at Ariminum
confirmed the
decrees
which had of old been set forth at Nicaea.
Let us now consider how it was that they eventually assented to the formulary
of faith compiled by Valens and Ursacius and their followers. Various accounts
have been given me of this transaction. Some say that the emperor was offended
at the bishops having departed from Ariminum without his permission, and allowed
Valens and his partisans to govern the churches of the West according to their
own will, to set forth their own formulary, to eject those who refused to sign
it from the churches, and to ordain others in their place. They say that, taking
advantage of this power, Valens compelled some of the bishops to sign the formulary,
and that he drove many who refused compliance, from their churches, and first
of all Liberius, bishop of Rome. It is further asserted that when Valens and
his adherents had acted in this manner in Italy, they resolved to handle the
Eastern churches in the same way. As these persecutors were passing through
Thrace, they stopped, it is said, at Nicaea, a city of that province. They
there convened a council, and read the formulary of Ariminum, which they had
translated into the Greek language, and by representing that it had been approved
by a general council, they obtained its adoption at Nicaea; they then cunningly
denominated it the Nicaean formulary of faith, in order, by the resemblance
of names, to deceive the simple, and cause it to be mistaken for the ancient
formulary set forth by the Nicaean council. Such is the account given by some
parties. Others say that the bishops who were convened at the council of Ariminum
were wearied by their detention in that city, as the emperor neither honored
them with a reply to their letter, nor granted them permission to return to
their own churches; and that, at this juncture, those who had espoused the
opposite heresy represented to them that it was not right that divisions should
exist between the priests of the whole world for the sake of one word, and
that it was only requisite to admit that the Son is like unto the Father in
order to put an end to all disputes; for that the bishops of the East would
never rest until the term "substance" was rejected. By these representations,
it is said, the members of the council were at length persuaded to assent to
the formulary which Ursacius had so sedulously pressed upon them. Ursacius
and his partisans, being apprehensive lest the deputies sent by the council
to the emperor should declare what firmness was in the first place evinced
by the Western bishops, and should expose the true cause of the rejection of
the term "consubstantial," detained these deputies at Nicaea in Thrace
throughout the winter, under the pretext that no public conveyance could be
then obtained, and that the roads were in a bad state for traveling; and they
then induced them, it is said, to translate the formulary they had accepted
from Latin into Greek, and to send it to the Eastern bishops. By this means,
they anticipated that the formulary would produce the impression they intended
without the fraud being detected; for there was no one to testify that the
members of the council of Ariminum had not voluntarily rejected the term" substance" from
deference to the Eastern bishops, who were averse to the use of that word.
But this was evidently a false account; for all the members of the council,
with the exception of a few, maintained strenuously that the Son is like unto
the Father in substance, and the only differences of opinion existing between
them were that some said that the Son is of the same substance as the Father,
while others asserted that he is of like substance with the Father. Some state
this matter in one form, others in a different one.
CHAP.
XX.--EVENTS WHICH TOOK PLACE IN THE EASTERN CHURCHES: MARATHONIUS, ELEUSIUS
OF CYZICUS, AND
MACEDONIUS
EXPEL THOSE WHO MAINTAIN THE TERM "CONSUBSTANTIAL." CONCERNING
THE CHURCHES OF THE NOVATIANS; HOW ONE CHURCH WAS TRANSPORTED; THE NOVATIANS
ENTER INTO COMMUNION WITH THE ORTHODOX.
WHILE the events I have above related were taking place in Italy, the East,
even before the council of Seleucia had been constituted, was the theatre of
great disturbances. (1) The adherents of Acacius and Patrophilus, having ejected
Maximus, turned over the church of Jerusalem to Cyril. Macedonius harassed
Constantinople and the neighboring cities; he was abetted by Eleusius and Marathonius.
This latter was originally a deacon in his own church, and was a zealous superintendent
of the poor of the monastical dwellings inhabited by men and women, and Macedonius
raised him to the bishopric of Nicomedia. Eleusius, who, not without distinction,
was formerly attached to tile military service of the palace, had been ordained
bishop of Cyzicus. It is said that Eleusius and Marathonius were both good
men in their conduct, but that they were zealous in persecuting those who maintained
that the Son is of the same substance as the Father, although they were not
so distinctly cruel as Macedonius, who not only expelled those who refused
to hold communion with him, but imprisoned some, and dragged others before
the tribunals. In many cases he compelled the unwilling to communion. He seized
children and women who had not been initiated and initiated them, and destroyed
many churches in different places, under the pretext that the emperor had commanded
the demolition of all houses of prayer in which the Son was recognized to be
of the same substance as the Father.
Under this pretext the church of the Novatians at Constantinople, situated
in that part of the city called Pelargus, was destroyed. It is related that
these heretics performed a courageous action with the aid of the members of
the Catholic Church, with whom they made common cause. When those who were
employed to destroy this church were about to commence the work of demolition,
the Novatians assembled themselves together; some tore down the materials,
and others conveyed them to a suburb of the city called Sycae. They quickly
achieved this task; for men, women, and children participated in it, and by
offering their labor to God they were extraordinarily inspirited. By the exercise
of this zeal the church was soon renewed, and, from this circumstance, received
the name of Anastasia. After the death of Constantius, Julian, his successor,
granted to the Novatians the ground which they had previously possessed, and
permitted them to rebuild their church. The people spiritedly took advantage
of this permission, and transported the identical materials of the former edifice
from Sycae. But this happened at a later period of time than that which we
are now reviewing. At this period a union was nearly effected between the Novatian
and Catholic churches; for as they held the same opinions concerning the Godhead,
and were subjected to a common persecution, the members of both churches assembled
and prayed together. The Catholics then possessed no houses of prayer, for
the Arians had wrested them from them. It appears, too, that from the frequent
intercourse between the members of each church, they reasoned that the differences
between them were vain, and they resolved to commune with one another. A reconciliation
would certainly have been effected, I think, had not the desire of the multitude
been frustrated by the slander of a few individuals, who asserted that there
was an ancient law prohibiting the union of the churches.
CHAP. XXI.--PROCEEDINGS OF MACEDONIUS IN MANTINIUM. HIS REMOVAL FROM HIS SEE
WHEN HE ATTEMPTED TO REMOVE THE COFFIN OF CONSTANTINE THE GREAT. JULIAN WAS
PRONOUNCED CAESAR.
ABOUT the same time Eleusius wholly demolished the church of the Novatians
in Cyzicus. (1) The inhabitants of other parts of Paphlagonia, and particularly
of Mantinium, were subjected to similar persecutions. Macedonius, having been
apprised that the majority of these people were followers of Novatus, and that
the ecclesiastical power was not of itself sufficiently strong to expel them,
persuaded the emperor to send four cohorts against them. For he imagined that
men who are unaccustomed to arms would, on the first appearance of soldiers,
be seized with terror, and conform to his sentiments. But it happened otherwise,
for the people of Mantinium armed themselves with sickles and axes and whatever
other weapons chanced to be at hand, and marched against the military. A severe
conflict ensued, and many of the Paphlagonians fell, but nearly all the soldiers
were slain. Many of the friends of Macedonius blamed him for having occasioned
so great a disaster, and the emperor was displeased, and regarded him with
less favor than before. Inimical feelings were engendered still more strongly
by another occurrence. Macedonius contemplated the removal of the coffin of
the Emperor Constantine, as the structure in which it had been concealed was
falling into ruin. The people were divided in opinion on this subject: some
concurred in the design, and others opposed it, deeming it impious and similar
to digging up a grave. Those who maintained the Nicene doctrines were of the
latter sentiment, and insisted that no indignity should be offered to the body
of Constantine, as that emperor had held the same doctrines as themselves.
They were besides, I can readily imagine, eager to oppose the projects of Macedonius.
However, without further delay, Macedonius caused the coffin to be conveyed
to the same church in which the tomb of Acacius the martyr is placed. The people,
divided into two factions, the one approving, the other condemning the deed,
rushed upon each other in the same church, and so much carnage ensued that
the house of prayer and the adjoining place were filled with blood and slaughtered
bodies. The emperor, who was then in the West, was deeply incensed on hearing
of this occurrence; and he blamed Macedonius as the cause of the indignity
offered to his father, and of the slaughter of the people.
The emperor had determined to visit the East, and held on his way; he conferred
the title of Caesar on his cousin Julian, and sent him to Western Gaul.
CHAP. XXII.--COUNCIL OF SELEUCIA.
ABOUT
the same period the Eastern bishops assembled,(2) to the number of about
one hundred and
sixty, in Seleucia,
a city of Isauria. This was during the
consultate of Eusebius and Hypatius. Leonas, who held a brilliant military
office at the palace, repaired to this council at the command of Constantius,
so that the doctrinal confession might be conducted in his presence. Lauricius,
the military governor of the province, was present to prepare whatever might
be necessary; for the letter of the emperor had commanded him to render this
service. At the first session of this council, several of the bishops were
absent, and among others, Patrophilus, bishop of Scythopolis; Macedonius, bishop
of Constantinople; and Basil, bishop of Ancyra. They resorted to divers pretexts
in justification of their non-attendance. Patrophilus alleged in excuse a complaint
in the eyes, and Macedonius pleaded indisposition; but it was suspected they
had absented themselves from the fear that various accusations would be brought
against them. As the other bishops refused to enter upon the investigation
of disputed points during their absence, Leonas commanded them to proceed at
once to the examination of the questions that had been agitated. Thus some
were others maintained that inquiries ought first to be instituted into the
conduct of those among them against whom accusations had been laid, as had
been the case with Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, Eustathius, bishop of Sebaste,
and others. The ambiguity of the emperor's letters, which sometimes prescribed
one course and sometimes another, gave rise to this dispute. The contention
arising from this source became so fierce, that all union was destroyed between
them, and they became divided into two parties. However, the advice of those
who wished to commence with the examination of doctrine, prevailed. When they
proceeded to the investigation of terms, some desired to reject the use of
the term "substance," and appealed to the authority of the formulary
of faith which had not long previously been compiled by Mark (1) at Sirmium,
and had been received by the bishops who were at the court, among whom was
Basil, (2) bishop of Ancyra. Many others were anxious for the adoption of the
formulary of faith drawn up at the dedication of the church of Antioch. To
the first of these parties belonged Eudoxius, Acacius, Patrophilus, George,
bishop of Alexandria, Uranius, bishop of Tyre, and thirty-two other bishops.
The latter party was supported by George, bishop of Laodicea, in Syria; by
Eleusius, bishop of Cyzicus; by Sophronius, bishop of Pompeiopolis, in Paphlagonia;
with these the majority agreed. It was suspected, and with reason, that Acacius
and his partisans absented themselves on account of the difference between
their sentiments and those of the aforesaid bishops, and also because they
desired to evade the investigation of certain accusations which had been brought
against them; for, although they had previously acknowledged in writing to
Macedonius, bishop of Constantinople, that the Son is in all respects like
unto the Father, and of the same substance, now they fought entirely shy of
their former professions. After prolonged disputations and contention, Silvanus,
bishop of Tarsus, declared, in a loud and peremptory tone, that no new formulary
of faith ought to be introduced but that which had been approved at Antioch,
and this alone ought to prevail. As this proposition was repugnant to the followers
of Acacius, they withdrew, and the other bishops read the formulary of Antioch.
The following day these bishops assembled in the church, closed the doors,
and privately confirmed this formulary. Acacius condemned this proceeding,
and laid the formulary which he advocated before Leonas and Lauricius privately.
Three days afterwards the same bishops reassembled, and were joined by Macedonius
and Basil, who had been previously absent. Acacius and his partisans declared
that they would take no part in the proceedings of the council until those
who had been deposed and accused had quilted the assembly. His demand was complied
with; for the bishops of the opposite party were determined that he should
have no pretext for dissolving the council, which was evidently his object,
in order to prevent the impending examination of the heresy of Aetius, and
of the accusations which had been brought against himself and his partisans.
When all the members were assembled, Leonas stated that he held a document
which had been handed to him by the partisans of Acacius; it was their formulary
of faith, with introductory remarks. None of the other bishops knew anything
about it; for Leonas, who was of the same sentiment as Acacius, had willingly
kept the whole matter a secret. When this document (3) was read, the whole
assembly was filled with tumult; for some of the statements it contained were
to the effect that, though the emperor had prohibited the introduction of any
term into the formularies of filth which was not found in the Sacred Scriptures,
yet that bishops who had been deposed, having been brought from various provinces
to the assembly, with others who had been illegally ordained, the council had
been thrown into confusion, and that some of the members had been insulted,
and others prevented from speaking. It was added that Acacius and his partisans
did not reject the formulary which had been compiled at Antioch, although those
who had assembled in that city had drawn it up for the express purpose of meeting
the difficulty which had just then arisen; but that, as the terms "consubstantial" and "of
similar substance" had grieved some individuals, and that; as it had been
recently asserted that the Son is dissimilar from the Father, it was necessary,
on this account, to reject the terms "consubstantial" and a "similar
substance," which do not occur in Scripture, to condemn the term "dissimilar," and
to confess clearly that the Son is like unto the Father; for He is, as the
Apostle Paul somewhere says, "the image of the invisible God." These
prefatory observations were followed by a formulary, which was neither conformable
with that of Nicaea, nor with that of Antioch, and which was so artfully worded
that the followers of Arius and of Aetius would not appear to be in error if
they should thus state their faith. In this formulary, the words used by those
who had convened at Nicaea, in condemnation of the Arian doctrine, were omitted,
and the declarations of the council of Antioch, concerning the immutability
of the Deity of the Son, and concerning His being the unchangeable image of
the substance, the counsel, and the power, and the glory of the Father, were
passed over in silence, and belief was simply expressed in the Father, in the
Son, and in the Holy Ghost; and after bestowing some vulgar epithets on a few
individuals who had never entered into any doctrinal contention on one side
or the other, all those who entertained any other opinions than those set forth
in this formulary were declared to be aliens to the Catholic Church. Such were
the contents of the document presented by Leonas, and which had been signed
by Acacius, and by those who had adopted his sentiments. After it had been
read, Sophronius, a bishop of Paphlagonia, exclaimed, "If we daily receive
the opinions of individuals as a statement of the faith, we shall fail in attaining
precision of the truth." Acacius having retorted that it was not forbidden
to compile new formularies, as that of Nicaea had been once and frequently
altered, Eleusius replied as follows: "But the council has not now met
for the purpose of learning what is already known, or of accepting any other
formulary than that which has been already approved by those who assembled
at Antioch; and, moreover, living and dying, we will adhere to this formulary." The
dispute having taken this turn, they entered upon another inquiry, and asked
the partisans of Acacius, in what they considered the Son to be like unto the
Father. They replied that the Son is similar in will only, but not in substance,
and the others thereupon insisted that He is similar in substance, and convicted
Acacius, by a work which he had formerly written, that he had once been of
their opinion. Acacius replied that he ought not to be judged from his own
writings; and the dispute had continued with heat for some time, when Eleusius,
bishop of Cyzicus, spoke as follows: "It matters little to the council
whether Mark or Basil has transgressed in any way, whether they or the adherents
of Acacius have any accusation to bring against each other; neither does the
trouble devolve upon the council of examining whether their formulary be commendable
or otherwise; it is enough to maintain the formulary which has been already
confirmed at Antioch by ninety-seven priests; and if any one desire to introduce
any doctrine which is not contained therein, he ought to be held as an alien
to religion and the Church." Those who were of his sentiments applauded
his speech; and the assembly then arose and separated. The following day, the
partisans of Acacius and of George refused to attend the council; and Leonas,
who had now openly declared himself to be of their sentiments, likewise refused,
in spite of all entreaties, to repair thither. Those who were deputed to request
his attendance found the partisans of Acacius in his house; and he declined
their invitation, under the plea that too much discord prevailed in the council,
and that he had only been commanded by the emperor to attend the council in
case of unanimity among the members. Much time was consumed in this way; and
the partisans of Acacius were frequently solicited by the other bishops to
attend the assemblies; but they sometimes demanded a special conference in
the house of Leonas, and sometimes alleged that they had been commissioned
by the emperor to judge those who had been accused; for they would not receive
the creed adopted by the other bishops, nor clear themselves of the crimes
of which they had been accused; neither would they examine the case of Cyril,
whom they had deposed; and there was no one to compel them to do so. The council,
however, eventually deposed George, bishop of Alexandria; Acacius, bishop of
Caesarea; Uranius, bishop of Tyre; Patrophilus, bishop of Scythopolis; and
Eudoxius, bishop of Antioch; and several other prelates. Many persons were
likewise put out of communion until they could purge themselves of the crimes
imputed to them. The transactions were conveyed in writing to the parish of
each of the clergy. Adrian, (1) a presbyter of Antioch, was ordained bishop
over that church, in room of Eudoxius; but the partisans of Acacius arrested
him and delivered him over to Leonas and Lauricius. They committed him into
the custody of the soldiers, but afterwards sent him into exile.
We have now given a brief account of the termination of the council of Seleucia.
Those who desire more detailed information must seek it in the acts of the
council, (2) which have been transcribed by attendant shorthand miters.
CHAP. XXIII.--ACACIUS AND AETIUS; AND HOW THE DEPUTIES OF THE TWO COUNCILS
OF ARIMINUM AND OF SELEUCIA WERE LED BY THE EMPEROR TO ACCEPT THE SAME DOCTRINES.
IMMEDIATELY after the above transactions, the adherents of Acacius repaired
to the emperor; (1) but the other bishops returned to their respective homes.
The ten bishops who had been unanimously chosen as deputies to the emperor,
met, on their arrival at the court, the ten deputies (2) of the council of
Ariminum, and likewise the partisans of Acacius. These latter had gained over
to their cause the chief men attached to the palace, and, through their influence,
had secured the favor of the emperor. It was reported that some of these proselytes
had espoused the sentiments of Acacius at some previous period; that some were
bribed by means of the wealth belonging to the churches; and that others were
seduced by the subtilty of the arguments presented to them, and by the dignity
of the persuader. Acacius was, in fact, no common character; by nature he was
gifted with great powers of intellect and eloquence, and he exhibited no want
of skill or of address in the accomplishment of his schemes. He was the president
of an illustrious church, and could boast of Eusebius Pamphilus as his teacher,
whom he succeeded in the episcopate, and was more honorably known than any
other man by the reputation and succession of his books. Endowed with all these
advantages, he succeeded with ease in whatever he undertook.
As there
were at this period at Constantinople all together twenty deputies, ten from
each council,
besides
many other bishops, who, from various motives,
had repaired to the city, Honoratus, (3) whom the emperor, before his departure
to the West, had constituted chief governor of Constantinople, received directions
to examine, in the presence of the exarchs of the great council, the reports
circulated concerning Aetius and his heresy. Constantius, with some of the
rulers, eventually undertook the investigation of this case; and as it was
proved that Aetius had introduced dogmas essentially opposed to the faith,
the emperor and the other judges were offended at his blasphemous statements.
It is said that the partisans of Acacius at first reigned ignorance of this
heresy, for the purpose of inducing the emperor and those around him to take
cognizance of it; for they imagined that the eloquence of Aetius would be irresistible;
that he would infallibly succeed in convincing his auditory; and that his heresy
would conquer the unwilling. When, however, the result proved the futility
of their expectations, they demanded that the formulary of faith accepted by
the council of Ariminum should receive the sanction of the deputies from the
council of Seleucia. As these latter protested that they would never renounce
the use of the term "substance," the Acacians declared to them upon
oath that they did not hold the Son to be, in substance, dissimilar from the
Father; but that, on the contrary, they were ready to denounce this opinion
as heresy. They added that they esteemed the formulary compiled by the Western
bishops at Ariminum the more highly, because the word "substance" had
been unexpectedly expunged from it; because, they said, if this formulary were
to be received, there would be no further mention, either of the word "substance" or
of the term "consubstantial," to which many of the Western priests
were, from their reverence for the Nicaean council, peculiarly attached.
It was
for these reasons that the emperor ap-proved of the formulary; and when he
recalled to mind
the great
number of bishops who had been convened
at Ariminum, and reflected that there is no error in saying either that "the
Son is like unto the Father" or "of the same substance as the Father";
and when he further considered that no difference in signification would ensue,
if, for terms which do not occur in Scripture, other equivalent and uncontrovertible
expressions were to be substituted (such, for instance, as the word "similar"),
he determined upon giving his sanction to the formulary. Such being his own
sentiments, he commanded the bishops to accept the formulary. The next day
preparations were made for the pompous ceremony of proclaiming him consul,
which, according to the Roman custom, took place in the beginning of the month
of January, and the whole of that day and part of the ensuing night the emperor
spent with the bishops, and at length succeeded in persuading the deputies
of the council of Seleucia to receive the formulary transmitted from Ariminum.
CHAP. XXIV. -- FORMULARY OF THE COUNCIL OF ARIMINUM APPROVED BY THE ACACIANS.
LIST OF THE DEPOSED CHIEF-PRIESTS, AND THE CAUSES OF THEIR CONDEMNATION.
THE partisans
of Acacius (4) remained some time at Constantinople, and invited thither
several bishops
of Bithynia,
among whom were Maris, bishop of Chalcedon,
and Ulfilas, bishop of the Goths. These prelates having assembled together,
in number about fifty, they confirmed the formulary read at the council of
Ariminum, adding this provision, that the terms "substance" and "hypostasis" should
never again be used in reference to God. They also declared that all other
formularies set forth in times past, as likewise those that might be compiled
at any future period, should be condemned. They then deposed Aetius from his
office of deacon, because he had written works full of contention and of a
species of vain knowledge opposed to the ecclesiastical vocation; because he
had used in writing and in disputation several impious expressions; and because
he had been the occasion of troubles and seditions in the Church. It was alleged
by many that they did not depose him willingly, but merely because they wished
to remove all suspicion from the mind of the emperor which be had with regard
to them, for they had been accused of holding Aetian views. Those who held
these sentiments took advantage of the resentment with which, for reasons above
mentioned, the emperor regarded Macedonius, and they accordingly deposed him,
and likewise Eleusius, bishop of Cyzicus; Basil, bishop of Ancyra; Heortasius,
bishop of Sardis; and Dracontius, bishop of Pergamus. Although they differed
about doctrine from those bishops, yet in deposing them, no blame was thrown
upon their faith, but charges were alleged against them in common with all,
that they had disturbed the peace and violated the laws of the Church. They
specified, in particular, that when the presbyter Diogenes was traveling from
Alexandria to Ancyra, Basil seized his papers, and struck him; they also deposed
that Basil had, without trial, delivered over many of the clergy from Antioch,
from the banks of the Euphrates, and from Cilicia, Galatia, and Asia, to the
rulers of the provinces, to be exiled and subjected to cruel punishments, so
that many had been loaded with chains, and had been compelled to bribe the
soldiers, who were conducting them away, not to ill-use them. They added that,
on one occasion, when the emperor had commanded Aetius and some of his followers
to be led before Cecropius, that they might answer to him for various accusations
laid to their charge, Basil recommended the person who was intrusted with the
execution of this edict, to act according to the dictates of his own judgment.
They said that he wrote directions to Hermogenes, (1) the prefect and governor
of Syria, stating who were to be banished, and whither they were to be sent;
and that, when the exiles were recalled by the emperor, he would not consent
to their return, but opposed himself to the wishes of the rulers and of the
priests. They further deposed that Basil had excited the clergy of Sirimium
against Germanius; and that, although he stated in writing that he had admitted
Germanius, Valens, and Ursacius into communion, he had placed them as criminals
before the tribunal of the African bishops; and that, when taxed with this
deed, he had denied it, and perjured himself; and that, when he was afterwards
convicted, he strove to justify his perjury by sophistical reasoning. They
added, that he had been the cause of contention and of sedition in Illyria,
Italy, Africa, and in the Roman church; that he had thrown a servant into prison
to compel her to bear false witness against her mistress; hat he had baptized
a man of loose life, who lived in illicit intercourse with a woman, and had
promoted him to be a deacon; that he had neglected to excommunicate a quack-doctor
who had occasioned the death of several persons; and that he and some of the
clergy had bound themselves by oath before the holy table, not to bring accusations
against each other. This, they said, was an artifice adopted by the president
of the clergy to shield himself from the accusations of his plaintiffs. In
short, such were the reasons they specified for the deposition of Basil. Eustathius,
they said, was deposed because, when a presbyter, he had been condemned, and
put away from the communion of prayers by Eulalius, his own father, who was
bishop of the church of Caesarea, in Cappadocia; and also because he had been
excommunicated by a council held at Neocaesarea, a city of Pontus, and deposed
by Eusebius, bishop of Constantinople, for unfaithfulness in the discharge
of certain duties that had devolved upon him. He had also been deprived of
his bishopric by those who were convened in Gangroe, on account of his having
taught, acted, and thought contrary to sound doctrine. He had been convicted
of perjury by the council of Antioch. He had likewise endeavored to reverse
the decrees of those convened at Melitina; and, although he was guilty of many
crimes, he had the assurance to aspire to be judge over the others, and to
stigmatize them as heretics. They deposed Eleusius because he had raised inconsiderately
one Heraclius, a native of Tyre, to be a deacon; this man had been a priest
of Hercules at Tyre, had been accused of and tried for sorcery, and, therefore,
had retired to Cyzicus and feigned conversion to Christianity; and moreover,
Eleusius, after having been apprised of these circumstances, had not driven
him from the Church. He had also, without inquiry, ordained certain individuals,
who had come to Cyzicus, after they had been condemned by Maris, bishop of
Chalcedonia, who participated in this council. Heortasius was deposed because
he had been ordained bishop of Sardis without the sanction of the bishops of
Lydia. They deposed Dracontius, bishop of Pergamus, because he had previously
held another bishopric in Galatia, and because, they stated, he had on both
occasions been unlawfully ordained. After these transactions, a second assembly
of the council was held, and Silvanus, bishop of Tarsus, So-phronius, bishop
of Pompeiopolis in Paphlagonia, Elpidius, bishop of Satala, and Neonas, bishop
of Seleucia in Isauria, were deposed. The reason they assigned for the deposition
of Silvanus was, that he had constituted himself the leader of a foolish party
in Seleucia and Constantinople; he had, besides, constituted Theophilus as
president of the church of Castabala, who had been previously ordained bishop
of Eleutheropolis by the bishops of Palestine, and who had promised upon oath
that he would never accept any other bishopric without their permission. Sophronius
was deposed on account of his avarice, and on account of his having sold some
of the offerings presented to the church, for his own profit; besides, after
he had received a first and second summons to appear before the council, he
could, at last, be scarcely induced to make his appearance, and then, instead
of replying to the accusations brought against him, he appealed to other judges.
Neonas was deposed for having resorted to violence in his endeavors to procure
the ordination in his own church, of Annianus, who had been appointed bishop
of Antioch, (1) and for having ordained as bishops certain individuals who
had previously been engaged in politics, and who were utterly ignorant of the
Holy Scriptures and of ecclesiastical canons, and who, after their ordination,
preferred the enjoyment of their property to that of the priestly dignity,
and declared in writing that they would rather take charge of their own possessions
than to discharge the episcopal functions without them. Elpidius was deposed
because he had participated in the malpractices of Basil, and had occasioned
great disorders; and because he had, contrary to the decrees of the council
of Melitina, restored to his former rank in the presbytery a man named Eusebius,
who had been deposed for having created Nectaria a deaconess, after she had
been excommunicated on account of violating agreements and oaths; and to confer
this honor upon her was clearly contrary to the laws of the Church.
CHAP. XXV. -- CAUSES OF THE DEPOSITION OF CYRIL, BISHOP OF JERUSALEM. MUTUAL
DISSENSIONS AMONG THE BISHOPS. MELITIUS IS ORDAINED BY THE ARIANS, AND SUPPLANTS
EUSTATHIUS IN THE BISHOPRIC OF SEBASTE.
BESIDES the prelates above mentioned, Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, was deposed
(2) because he had admitted Eustathius and Elpidius into communion, after they
had opposed the decrees enacted by those convened at Melitina, among whom was
Cyril himself; and because he had also rece