A HISTORY

OF THE

HOLY EASTERN CHURCH.

W)t |3atrtan$ate oi glejran&rta.

PREPARING FOR PUBLICATION,
AN INTRODUCTION TO THE HISTORY OF THE HOLY
EASTERN CHURCH.
IN THREE BOOKS.

Book I. — Its Geography.
„ II. — Its Liturgies and Ecclesiology.
,, III. — Its Controversies on the Filioque, Azymes, and
Transubstantiation.

A HISTOEY

HOLY EASTERN CHURCH,

mt ^atriarr&ate of Sttejran&rfeu-

REY. JOHN MASON l^EALE, M.A.,
SaatBcn of Sacfcuille College, CEast ffirfastrtJ.

YOLUME I.

LONDON :
JOSEPH MASTERS, ALDERSGATE STREET.
OXFORO : J. H. PARKER.
CAMBRIDGE: MACMILLAN AND CO.
MDCCCXLVII.

LONDON :
PRINTED BT JOSEPH MASTERS,
ALDERBOATE STREET.

TO HIS HOLINESS
A R T E M I U S,
BY DIVINE MERCY
POPE AND PATRIARCH OF ALEXANDRIA,
LIBYA, PENTAPOLIS, AND ALL THE PREACHING OF S. MARK,
\
AND (ECUMENICAL JUDGE, )
Cfjfe f^tstorg of tf)e ffifiuwf) of &. gUfcanajstus
IS, WITH ALL HUMILITY,
INSCRIBED.

PREFACE

1. The sources whence a History of the Church of Alexan- sources of
dria is to be derivedj are so many and so various, and some of History.
them so little known, that it will be perhaps useful to particular
ize them. They naturally divide themselves into two branches ;
those which treat of the whole, and those which only embrace a
portion, of Alexandrian History.
2. There are four works which relate the Annals of the Historians
Egyptian Church from the preaching of S. Mark to the time at treated™
which their respective authors lived; those of Le Quien, Renau- tt.ew °
dot, Sollerius, and Wansleb.
3. The treatise De Patriarchatu Alexandrino of the learned Le Quien.
Dominican Father, Michael Le Quien, is contained in the
Second Volume of his Oriens Christianus, pp. 329 — 368. The
plan of this work is well known. It commences with a general
sketch of the rise, progress, rights, privileges, and character of
the Church of Alexandria : of the heresies by which it has been
infested, and the duties which were claimed from it by the
Church Cathohc. It proceeds to a list of the Patriarchs, both
heretical and Melchite ; giving, under each, a slight and brief
review of his actions. It concludes with a catalogue of all the Sees
which are known to have been its suffragans; and a list under each,

VU1 PREFACE.
of all the Prelates who are recorded as having filled that par
ticular See. The patient industry, accuracy, fairness, and
moderation of this work are above praise : it did not, however,
receive the last touches of its author ; and occasionally self-
contradictions may be discovered in it. It is evident also from
many accidental hints that the writer was not acquainted with
Arabic; a circumstance which must considerably detract from
the worth of such a history. Nevertheless, it is very valuable as an
outline which may be filled up from other sources ; and it is the
only complete history which we possess of the Catholic Church
of Alexandria,
4. Very different is the character of the next work I have to
mention ; the " History of the Jacobite Patriarchs of Alexan
dria," written by the learned Eusebe Renaudot. It extends
from the time of S. Mark to the year 1703; but, after the great
schism, leaving the Catholic succession of Patriarchs, it confines
itself to the heretical successors of Dioscorus. It is extracted
principally from the " Patriarchal History ;" that is to say, the
history of the Jacobite Patriarchs commenced by Severus, Bishop
of Aschumin, and carried on by Michael of Tanis, Mauhoub the
son of Mansour, Mark the son of Zaraa, and others, as far as the
conclusion of the Patriarchate of Cyril the son of Laklak ; that
is to say, down to the year 1243. The immense learning of
Renaudot, his acquaintance with nearly thirty languages, his
devotion to Eastern literature, and the advantage which he en
joyed in being able to consult the unrivalled collection of Manu
scripts in the King's Library at Paris, have rendered his work,
so far as it goes, more complete than probably any other scholar
could have made it. Besides his translations from the historians
whom I have just mentioned, and whose works yet remain
manuscript, he has enriched his history from other writers, both
such had been already printed in his time, as Eutychius and
Elmacinus, and those which have been given to the world since,
as is the case with Makrizi. His pages also embrace very co
pious accounts of the succession of Caliphs, and of the rise and
fall of the various Mahometan Dynasties ; and occasionally refer
to the doings or sufferings of the Catholic Patriarchs. But with
all these merits, the work has also all the faults of Renaudot • it
is insufferably long, tedious and confused; learning is wasted

PREFACE. IX
in the discussion of points known to all the world; and the
thread of the history broken and taken up again in the most
perplexing manner imaginable. In this place we may also
mention the Discursus of the same author de Patriarcha
Alexandrino, pp. 365 — 466 of his Collection of Oriental
Liturgies. 5. The next work I shall mention is that of Wansleb, a wansieb.
Dominican Missionary in Egypt. It also relates entirely to the
Jacobite succession ; and had the merit of being the first work
in which their history was introduced to Europe. It is divided
into seven parts. The first treats of the constitution of the Jaco
bite Church ; the second of its customs and present state ; the
third of its belief ; the fourth of its ceremonies ; the fifth of its
canons : the sixth gives a catalogue of its Patriarchs ; and the
seventh of its principal writers. The small size of this volume,
its continual inaccuracies, and the scanty information which it
furnishes on any subject, renders it nearly useless, except for
occasional reference. The catalogue of Patriarchs is translated
from the Arabic of Abu'lberkat ; with a continuation by later
hands in the manuscript which Wansleb consulted.
6. The fourth history is the " Chronological Series of SoUerills.
Alexandrian Patriarchs," written by the Jesuit, John Baptist
Sollerius; and prefixed to the fifth volume of June, in the
Bollandist Acts of the Saints. This treatise, which fills a
hundred and sixty closely printed folio pages, is little more
than an amplification of the work of Wansleb. Sollerius,
besides his general acquaintance with Ecclesiastical history, had
little to fit him for the task ; he was not acquainted with the
Eastern languages ; he had access to no manuscripts ; nor had
he any private sources of information, except a communication
from the Jesuit Bernati, then a missionary in Ethiopia. The
consequence is that he relies too much on the comparatively
worthless materials which were in his possession ; he is anxious
to reconcile dates with each other, which are none of them
consistent with truth ; and he endeavours to settle minute
points of chronology in times when an approximation to accuracy
is all that can be hoped for. His treatise does not pretend to
be a history, and, except for its dates, adds little to our know-

PREFACE.

Hierotheus,
late Patri
arch of
Alexandria.

Eutychius.

Elmacinus.

Makrizi.

ledge of the Alexandrian Church. Of the Catholic Patriarchs
this writer takes hardly any notice.
7. Besides the works which I have mentioned, the latest of
which only comes down to the year 1730, I have had two
other sources of information. I applied in the spring of
1844 to His late Holiness, Hierotheus, then Cathohc Patriarch
of Alexandria, for the history of his predecessors since the
beginning of the eighteenth century; and the results of that
inquiry will be found in their proper place. I also obtained,
through the kindness of a Jacobite Priest, a complete list of the
Patriarchs of that sect from Dioscorus to Peter VII., who now
fills that post ; and from the same quarter I also received some
interesting information as to the present state of the Jacobites
in Egypt.
8. I come now to speak of those authors who have treated
of a part of the period which this work embraces. The first of
these is Eutychius. Of his history of the Catholic Patriarchs
of Alexandria I have spoken in treating of his own Patriarch
ate ; and it is needless therefore to say anything further here,
than that I believe that nothing which he relates of interest
down to the time when his annals terminate, namely the year 938,
will be found to have been omitted in this work. Without pro
fessing any very great obligations to him, I may yet observe
that some of the facts which he relates in the eighth, ninth,
and tenth centuries, are mentioned only by himself.
9. The next author whom I shall name is the Jacobite
Elmacinus, as translated and edited by Erpenius. His Saracenic
History only incidentally mentions the Jacobite Patriarchs of
Alexandria ; but his accuracy and truth stand very high : and
when he fixes a date, his testimony is to be received beyond that
of any other author. I have in the history already given his
character ; and need therefore say nothing more of him here.
10. I will next mention the Mahometan Makrizi, who,
while he draws great part of his information from Elmacinus,
nevertheless adds considerably to it, and is highly to be com
mended for his accuracy and fairness. Of his work, which
extends to the year 1327, I have also spoken in the proper
place.

PREFACE. XI
11. The "History of Dynasties," written by Abu'lpharaj, Abu'lpharaj.
better known by his name of Gregory Bar-Hebra3us, and trans
lated and edited by Pococke, is also not without its value as a
contribution to Alexandrian History. We are frequently in
debted to it for some hint as to the actions of the Caliphs,
which may serve to clear up points left in the dark by Elmacinus
or Makrizi.
12. I now come to speak of theEthiopic Church, The charac- Ludoiph.
ter of Ludolph's History, and Commentary on hi3 History, is
too well known to need any observations here. It is only
wonderful that a man possessing an acquaintance with the
Ethiopic language, which has been attained by no other
European before or since his time, should have added so little
to our knowledge of that country. The facts which are to be
gleaned from this vast folio He scattered thinly among the heap
of rubbish with which they are surrounded ; and his ignorance
of everything but the language itself, his absurd confidence in
some worthless Ethiopic compositions, and his blind prejudice,
manifest themselves throughout.
13. The "Church History of Ethiopia" of Dr. Michael Michael
Geddes is one of the most despicable compositions which was
ever inflicted on the public. His only qualification for historian
of that country was his knowledge of Portuguese, and a tolerable
acquaintance with the various works in which the proceedings
of the missionaries in that country are related. His prejudice
against everything connected with Rome is such, that nothing
can be taken upon his testimony : his principal value lies in his
pointing out original sources of information. He had been
Chaplain to the British Factory at Lisbon ; and was under the
patronage of Bishop Burnet.
14. A much fairer work is the " History of Christianity in La Croze.
Ethiopia," written by the celebrated La Croze. It does not
pretend to the same fulness as Geddes, and is derived from nearly
the same sources : but, although a Protestant, the author is
unable, like the English Divine, to see nothing but excellence
in the Ethiopian, or faults in the Roman, Church.
15. The first book of this History extends from the Foundation r^st Book.
of the Church of Alexandria to the rise of the Nestorian heresy.
Besides the ordinary Church historians, such as Eusebius,

Xll PREFACE.

Sozomen, and Socrates, the works of S. Athanasius are of
course my chief authority. But I am also bound to express
my obligation to the very able Life of S. Dionysius byByseus
the Bollandist ; to the Propaganda edition of the works of the
same Father; to the ¦ Benedictine Life of S. Athanasius, and
to Tillemont's Annals of that Patriarch. In a less degree,
De la Rue's Life of Origen and Huet's Origeniana have been
of service to these pages.
second 16. The second book comprises the controversy on the In
carnation, from the first outbreak of Nestorius, to the deposition
of Dioscorus. Here, of course, I am principally indebted to
the works of S. Cyril; to Tillemont's Life of that Father; to
Garnier's edition of Marius Mercator ; to the two editions of
S. Leo's works, — the one by Cacciari, the other by the Bal-
lerini : and to the very accurate chronological researches of
Pagi.
Third Book. 17. The third book comprises the history of the Alexandrian
Church, from the commencement of the great schism to the
subjection of both Catholic and Jacobite Communions to the
arms of the Caliphs. Here we begin to derive assistance from
the works of Eutychius, Elmacinus, Makrizi, and Severus :
Liberatus, Evagrius, and the Chronicon of Victor are also our
guides. The Patriarchate of S. John the Almoner is indebted
to the labours of Stilting the Bollandist in the fourth volume of
September in the Acts of the Saints; — and the Epistles of
S. Gregory throw some light on the Alexandrian annals of that
period. To the Life of S. John the Almoner, in the second
volume of the Bollandist January, I am less indebted.
Fourth 18. In the fourth book, which extends from the Conquest of
Amrou to the Vizirate of Saladin, Severus and his continuers
are my chief guides. Of the Catholic Church, when Eutychius
deserts us, we know nothing more than can be picked up by
incidental notices of the Byzantine historians. These are gene
rally few and far between ; with the exception of a tolerably
detailed account of the proceedings of Athanasius II. afforded
in the prolix pages of George Pachymeres. For the Crusades,
so far as they affected Egypt, I have depended principally on
Wilken's Geschichte der Kreuzziige, and the authors alleged by
him. I have also derived, in Jacobite history generally, very

Book

PREFACE. XU1
important assistance from the Chronicle of Gregory Bar-Hebrseus,
as epitomized in the second volume of the Bibliotheca Orientalis
of Asseman.
19. The fifth book embraces the period between the elevation Fifth Book.
of Saladin and the first interference of the Portuguese in
Ethiopia. Here we are worse off for materials than at any other
period. Its most important event is the great confessional con
troversy, — and the remarkable history of Mark the son of
Kunbar. But from a.d. 1243, when the Patriarchal History
ends, to 1490, I am compelled to confess that Alexandrian
annals are hardly more than catalogues of names.
20. The sixth book comprises the remainder of my task, and sixth Book.
divides itself into two distinct portions. The first of these is
the rise, progress, and decline of Roman Influence in Ethiopia.
Here, besides Geddes, La Croze, and Ludolph, we have the ad
vantage of Bruce's very clear Abyssinian history; and the
original authorities are Alvarez, Tellez, and the account of the
Patriarch Joao Bermudez ; which latter is translated in Purchas's
Pilgrimage, and thence retranslated by La Croze. The other
subject is the attempt made, in the seventeenth century, to en
graft Calvinism in the Oriental Church; and as this part of
history is extremely important, and very little known, I have
preferred rather to overstep the bounds I proposed to myself
than to treat it cursorily. My authorities, on the Roman side,
are, principally, the Perpetuite de la Foy, and the Defense de la
Perpetuite; the Creance de l'Eglise Orientate of Simon; the
De Consensu of Leo Allatius ; and the incidental notices of Le
Quien and Renaudot. On the Oriental side, — the Councils of
Constantinople, Jassy, and Bethlehem, as given in Labbe ; the
History of the Russian Church by Mouravieff; the Chronicon
of Philip of Cyprus : to which I may add the "Present State of
the Greek Church" of Ricaut, — a very fair writer. On the Cal-
vinistic side, — Crusius's Turco-Gracia; Claude's Reply to the
Perpetuite, and his Doctrine of the Catholic Church, which is a
Reply to the Defense ; Aymon's Memoirs of the Greek Church ;
Smith's Account of the Greek Church, both in English and
Latin : to which may be added Dr. Covell's account of the same
Church. I also applied to the Public Library at Geneva, for
permission to copy all the hitherto unpubhshed letters of Cyril

XIV PREFACE.
Lucar's preserved in that Library ; and among these the reader
will find a very important and hitherto' unprinted one, to the
Archbishop De Dominis, on the publication of his work De Re-
publicd Christiand. To all these I must add, the Life of
Cyril Lucar from the pen of Dr. Beaven, which appeared in
several numbers of the British Magazine.
21. I had intended to affix an excursus in defence of the
very early chronology adopted in the first Section : want
of space has obliged me to forbear. A vindication of it may,
however, be found in the Bollandist Life of S. Peter under the
29th of June. For the same reason, I have been obliged to
omit the list of Egyptian martyrs in the Tenth Persecution, to
which reference is made at its conclusion.
22. Two remarks connected with orthography may not be
out of place. The first is, that I have adopted the two dif
ferent spellings, Diacese and Diocese, to signify two- different
things. By the former I mean its old sense, the jurisdiction
of an Exarch or Patriarch, as the Dicecese of Ephesus, the
Dicecese of Alexandria : by the latter, that of a Bishop. Fleury,
in like manner, speaks of le and la Diocese. The other is, that
I have followed the Oriental method of spelling names, after
the Mahometan invasion. Thus, Chail is written for Michael ;
Chenouda for Sanutius : Abdel-Messiah for Christodulus. I
have not done so, however, where the name is that of one well
known as an author. Thus, I do not refer to Said Ebn
Batric, but to Eutychius.
23. I have now to express my obligations for the valuable
assistance I have received in this work. I desire gratefully
to commemorate the kindness of His late Holiness, Hierotheus,
to whom I had hoped to inscribe the History of his Church.
My thanks are also especially due to the Rev. Edmund Winder,
British Chaplain at Alexandria, for the indefatigable kindness
with which he has collected and transmitted to me information ;
to Alfred S.Walne, Esq., Her Britannic Majesty's Consul at Cairo,
who was so obliging as to wait on the Patriarch with the queries
I had transmitted to him; and to the Vicar of the Jacobite Pa
triarch at Alexandria, (whose name I regret not to know,) who
famished me with a great deal of valuable information as to
the state of that Communion.

PREFACE. XV
But, in a most especial manner, my warmest thanks are
due to the Rev. W. H. Mill, D.D., late Principal of Bishop's
College, who, with the greatest kindness, gave me the advantage
of his remarks on most of the sheets, as they passed through
the press ; and to whom I am indebted for several corrections,
and for some important references to sources of information
with which I was previously unacquainted. Of him I may well
say, as Davies of Bentley, Quodcunque de istis lucubrationibus
feretur judicium, illius certe rectissimo stant talo ; et ut qua olim
edidit doctiores omnes legunt avidissime, ita qua apud se premit,
expectant cupidissime. I have also to express my obligations
to my friend the Rev. B. Webb, M.A., who finally read through
most of the sheets of this history before they were struck
off; a work of which he only who has tried it can calculate
the trouble or the use.
I am indebted also to D. Jose Xavier Cerveira e Sousa, Bishop
of Funchal and Arguim, for the kindness with which he
furnished me with any book which was contained in his Epis
copal Library : and to Canon Antonio Pestana, Rector of the
Seminary in Funchal, for the obliging manner in which he
put the valuable library of that institution completely at my
disposal. Portuguese libraries are especially valuable to a his
torian of the Alexandrian Church : for the works of Tellez
and Alvarez are not to be procured in England. Lastly, I
would thank M. Chastel, Professor of Ecclesiastical History,
and Librarian of the public library at Geneva, for the great
pains which he took in procuring the transcription of Cyril
Lucar' s letters ; and M. Grivel, for the success with which
he decyphered them. They are written in a mixture of bad
Latin, bad Italian, and (occasionally) bad Greek : and the hand
writing is as bad as the language.
I trust that, whatever judgment may be formed of this his-
tory, while its deficiencies are noted, its difficulties will also be
remembered. If the chronology shall sometimes appear unsatis
factory, it is no shame to fail where Renaudot, Le Quien, and
Sollerius are often egregiously wrong. If I appear sometimes
to compress a century into comparatively few pages, it is a
century to which, as connected with Alexandria, Baronius and
Fleury do not devote one.

XVI PREFACE.
I have reserved, for my Introduction to the study of the
History of the Oriental Church, some remarks which it seems
right to make on the spirit in which such a book should be
written. The historian should write, not as a member of the
Roman, not as a member of the English, .Church ; but, as far
as may be, with Oriental views, feelings, and even, perhaps,
prepossessions. Mouravieff's history is a perfect example in
its kind. It was intended that this Introduction should have
been prefixed to the present volumes. But it swelled to a size
which precluded the possibility of that arrangement ; and has
been also kept back for valuable information which I hope to
receive from Constantinople and Damascus.
Sackville College,
East Grinsted. S. Mark's Day, 1847.

CONTENTS

VOLUME I.

BOOK I.

FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE CHURCH OF ALEXANDRIA TO THE RISE
OF NESTORIANISM. Page.
Section I. The Foundation of the Church . . .3
II. The Foundation of the Church . . 12
III. Origen . . . . .19
IV. The Octapla . . . . . 31
V. The Decian Persecution and its results . . .39
VI. The Millenarian Controversy ... 55
VII. Question of Re-Baptism . . . .58
VIII. Valerian persecutes the Church ... 65
IX. Rise of the Sabellian Heresy . . .69
X. War, Famine, and Plague in Alexandria . . 76
XI. End of S. Dionysius . . . .80
XII. S. Maximus and S. Theonas ... 85
XIII. Persecution of Diocletian . . . .90
XIV. S. Antony and the Rise of Monasticism . . 106
XV. The Arian Heresy . . . .113
XIV. The Great and (Ecumenical Council of Niceea . 137
XVII. Conversion of Ethiopia . . . ,152
XVIII. Athanasius falsely accused concerning Ischyras and A rsenius 157
XIX. First Exile of S. Athanasius . . . 169
XX. Egyptian Monasticism . . . .176
XXI. Second Exile and Return of S. Athanasius . . 180
XXII. Third Exile of S. Athanasius . . .188
XXIII. Fourth and Fifth Exiles of S. Athanasius : his Return and
Death ... . .195
XXIV. Pontificate of Peter . . . . 20 D

xvm contents.
Page.
Sect. XXV. Pontificate of Timothy 208
XXVI. Destruction of the Temple of Serapis: Theophilus at Con
stantinople . . ¦ ¦ .210
XXVII. The Early Pontificate of S. Cyril . . 225
BOOK II.
FROM THE RISE OF THE NESTORIAN HERESY TO THE DEPOSITION OF
DIOSCORUS, AND THE GREAT SCHISM.
Section I. Nestorius preaches and defends his Heresy . . 233
II. The (Ecumenical Council of Ephesus . . 256
III. Reconciliation of Antioch with Alexandria . . 270
IV. The Rise and Progress of Eutychianism . 278
V. The " Robbers' Meeting" at Ephesus . . . 290
VI. The (Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon . . 299

BOOK I.

THE FOUNDATION OF THE CHURCH OF ALEXANDRIA,
Circa A.D. 40,
TO THE DEPOSITION OF DIOSCORUS,
A.D. 451.

IlpuiTov fiev rya.p iravTa SevTepa iroieiaBai tijs aXrjdeias tov avy/paCpea
¦n-poorjicei' eirena he to ho^jpa ttjs kuOoXov 'Efr/cXi/ffias ryvnauoTaTov on
faaXiCTa (fraveiTai, iroWajcts fiev Tats eV(y3oiA,ats tuiv evavTia Bo^a^ovrwv
hoKiixaaOev' ota Be Qco&ev to KpaTeiv Xa^bv, avOis els ttjv oiKeiav e7rave\-
6u)v Bvvafiiv, Ka\ 7raffas jas eiacX'ncnas Kai Ta wXtjOtj 7rpos ttjv ottcetav
aXnOetav iTrurTraod/ievoi'. — TpeTTOfiai <5e ySi) ew'i Trjv aCpTj^/rjatv twv
wpa^jfiaTWV, ovvep^ov Kai "Xeutv tov Qebv eVtKa\e<ra/iei,os.
Sozomen. Prolog.

THE

ftatrtarclmte of &lejrantjua*

SECTION I.
It is the constant and unvarying tradition of both the East1 and The church
OI A ICXB.II-
the West, that S. Mark the Evangelist was the founder of the dria,
Church of Alexandria. The history, however, of his labours
in Libya, Pentapolis, and Egypt, is involved in considerable.
obscurity : a circumstance in which there is nothing to excite
surprise, nor to weaken our belief in the truth of the general
statement. If the rise of the Church in such a city as Rome,
which has always, since primitive times, been under Christian
government, and always retained the same ecclesiastical language,
is, in a great degree, unknown to us, and if the succession of its lariy'hlstory
Bishops is implicated in historical difficulties, much more may we 1S obscure'
expect the case to be so in one which, like Alexandria, has been
for many ages subject to Mahometan tyranny, and where the
change of language has introduced many errors into its historical
records. That, however, S. Mark the Evangehst was not the same with founded by
S. Mark •
Mark, the nephew of S. Barnabas, can hardly, notwithstanding
the ingenious arguments of several learned men, be now doubted :
and by considering the two as distinct personages, we are
1 Eusebius, H. E. ii. 16.
B 2

4 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
enabled to reconcile conflicting statements, the authors of which
appear equally worthy of credit.1
Yet, though antiquity agrees in bestowing on S. Mark the
title of the Apostle of Egypt, we are not compelled to suppose
that the faith had not previously been preached in that country,
even did it appear that his mission were postponed as late
as a.d. 50. There were dwellers "in Egypt, and in the parts
of Libya about Cyrene,"2 who were present at Jerusalem at the
outpouring of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost, some
yet others 0f whom were probably converted by S. Peter's sermon. The
might have x j j
Erea<tbedfore Eunuch of Candace, Queen of the Ethiopians, that is, of the
him ; Abyssinians, must, on his return to his own country, have passed
through Egypt. Simon, who bore the Cross, was a native of
Cyrene, and his sons, Alexander and Rufus, were evidently
persons well known in the Church : and it is remarkable, and
affords an argument in favour of the tradition we have been
narrating, that S. Mark, who, from his connexion with Cyrene,
would have been likely to be acquainted with the principal
persons among its inhabitants, should alone of the Evangelists
have particularized the family of Simon the Cyrenian. Again,
among the prophets and teachers at Antioch whom the Holy
> The question of the identity of if the former were some years in Egypt
S. Mark with the nephew of Barnabas, and the Iatter were in Cyprus &(. ^
has been much and warmly disputed. death of s_ Barnabas,-as his Acts
Its decision will depend, in great part, testify,— in a.d. 51 ; if the former
on the year assigned for the Martyr- suffered in a.d. 62, and the latter
dom of the Evangelist. The learned were with S. Paul at Rome in a.d.
dissertation of Sollerius, prefixed to 62 or 63 (Philemon 24) nay, even
the fifth volume of the Bollandine as iate as AD. 65 were sum^oned
June, seems, notwithstanding the by him (2 Timothy iv. 11) . it
opposite sentiments of Henschenius, follows evidently, that the two must
in the third volume of April, and of be different persons. Stilting how-
Stilting in the seventh volume of ever, has shewn, in opposition to
September, to have proved the correct- Cotelerius, that John Mark is iden.
ness of the chronology of Eusebius, Heal with Mark, the nephew of Bar-
to which we shall presently have nabas. His other arguments appear
occasion to refer : and to have made to us unworthy of his great learning ;
it extremely probable that the Evan- he confines himself principally to re-
gelisfs mission dates from a.d. 37. plying to Tillemont, an easier antago-
If, therefore, S. Mark founded the nist than Sollerius, because he allows
Church of Alexandria about a.d. 40, the Evangelist to have lived until
whereas John Mark was with SS. a.d. 68.
Paul and Barnabas in a.u. 43 or 44 ; a Acts ii. 10.

SECT. I.J THE FOUNDATION OP THE CHURCH. 5
Spirit commanded to lay hands on S. Barnabas and S. Paul,1
we meet with the name of Lucius, of Cyrene. He was probably
one of those men of Cyrene, whom the sacred historian mentions
before, as the first after S. Peter2 to preach the Gospel to the
Gentiles. It is hardly likely that so many natives of Egypt
should, in then- labours for the sake of Christ, have entirely
neglected their own country.
There is a celebrated passage in Philo Judseus, in which he
mentions the Therapeutse, who inhabited the mountain and valley
of Nitria, on the western side of the Nile. It has been much
disputed who these men were : but we may be content to believe
with all the early writers, among whom is Eusebius,3 that they
were Christians. Thus it will appear that the Gospel had already
been proclaimed in more than one province of Egypt, when S.
Mark arrived at Alexandria.
Yet this circumstance by no means forbids us to regard him
as the founder of that Church, nor deprives the city of a title
in which it gloried, The Evangelical See. There were many
Christians both at Antioch and at Rome before S. Peter set foot
in either place; yet antiquity always considered4 him as the
founder of the Churches in each. Again, S. Paul had not only case mother
^ instances
himself dwelt at Ephesus, but had ordained S. Timothy first
Bishop of that See ; and yet that Church acknowledges S. John
the Evangelist as its founder. So that the received belief with
respect to S. Mark does not invalidate another tradition, that
S. Simon the Canaanite was the first to proclaim the Gospel in
Egypt. For some time after the day of Pentecost, the Evangelist5
is said to have preached in Jerusalem and the neighbouring
1 Acts xiii. 1. question, si les Solitaires, appelles
„ . . . ,_ Therapeutes, etoient Chretiens." —
2 Acts xi. 19. „.,„,„Paris, 1712.
3 H. E. ii. 17. Scaliger will have * Le Quien, Oriens Christianus,
it that they were Essenes; Valesius re- ii. 332.
futes this opinion, but denies that 6 In the absence of authentic testi-
they were Christians. It seems now, mony, we have given no account of
however, to be generally agreed that S. Mark's previous life. According
this learned commentator was mis- to the tradition of the Egyptian
taken. A summary of the arguments Church, which confounds the Evan-
on both sides may be seen in Mangey's gelist with S. John Mark, he was a
" Lettres pour et contre sur la fameuse native of Pentapolis. His family was

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[BOOK I.

villages, particularly in Bethany. S. Peter, however, about the
year 37, appears to have sent him into Egypt ; and it would
seem that he entered Alexandria in, or towards, the year 40.1
o°sT Annia- Here his first convert was one Annianus, or Hananias, a shoe
maker by trade ; on whom the Evangelist wrought a miracle,
and who, in consequence, received him into his house. Having
preached the Gospel with great success, and having, in a pro
portionate degree, irritated the idolatrous inhabitants of the city,
than whom no idolaters were more strongly attached to Pagan
s. Mark superstition, S. Mark returned for a season to Jerusalem, first, if
Jerusalem; we may believe Coptic tradition, having ordained Annianus

rich; and his father, Aristobulus, was
brother to S. Barnabas. An expedition
of the Nubians having reduced him to
poverty, he migrated, with his house
hold, to Palestine, and settled in one
of the villages adjacent to Jerusalem.
S. Mark, then known only by the
name of John, had early given proofs
of a pious and reverent disposition ;
and S. Peter, who by marriage had
become a connexion of Aristobulus,
had thus an opportunity of instructing
his son in the Faith. Passing by the
various miracles which the pious belief
of the Alexandrian Church has, with
out any good grounds, attributed to
S. Mark, such as his putting to flight
a lion in the vicinity of Jordan, and
throwing down, by his prayers, a tree
that was the object of superstitious ve
neration near Ashdod, we may remark
that, according to the same tradition,
S. Mark was one of the Seventy. It
is also asserted that he was one of the
servants at the marriage of Cana ; that
he was the man whom the Apostles
met, carrying a pitcher of water, be
fore the Last Supper ; that in his
house it was that our Lord celebrated
that Passover ; in his house, also, that
the Apostles were assembled secretly
for fear of the Jews, whenour Saviour.
appeared to them. — Such, as we said,
is Egyptian tradition ; among other

writers there is the greatest discre
pancy as to his native country and the
time of his conversion. Some will
have it that it was after the Ascension
of our Lord ; (S. Augustin. de Con
sensu Evang. 1 ;) others, that he had
been converted by Christ Himself,
was one of those who were offended
at His declaration concerning His
Flesh and Blood, and was afterwards
recalled by S. Peter. (S. Epiphan.
Haer. 51. (i. 428.) Cornel, a Lapide.
Comm. in Act. 219.)
1 We have in this account followed
Sollerius, whose hypothesis seems the
only method of reconciling Eusebius
with himself. In his Chronicon he
says.under the secondyear of Claudius,
(i. e. a.d. 42 or 43,) " Mark the Evan
gelist preaches Christ in Egypt and
at Alexandria." This implies that he
had been there sometime previously.
But, by a comparison of the 15th and
16th chapters of the second book of
the Ecclesiastial History of Eusebius,
that writer would seem to place the
mission of S. Mark after the writing
of his gospel. The Chronicon Alexan-
drinum, Anastasius, and George Syn-
cellus, are agreed in placing it in a.d.
40. A double mission, the one from
Jerusalem, the other from Rome,
explains the apparent contradiction.

SECT. I.] THE FOUNDATION OF THE CHURCH. 7
Bishop of the new Church, with three Priests and seven Deacons
as his assistants. This seems to have taken place in the
year 44.
From Palestine, S. Mark accompanied S. Peter to Rome, to Rome;
It was here that, under the direction of the Apostle, he wrote
his Gospel, whether, as some will have it, in Latin, or, as it
seems more probable, in Greek; for the Egyptian tradition
which assigns to it a Coptic original is not for a moment to be
received. It matters httle to Alexandrian History whether he
founded the Church at Aquilea, or whether that tradition is to
be rejected as fabulous. We find him mentioned in the first
Epistle of S. Peter, under the affectionate title of " Marcus my
son" : but this is the only certain information that we possess
with respect to the Evangehst, while residing in Rome.1
It was, apparently, towards the year 49, that S. Mark returns to
returned to Egypt ; and there, till the time of his decease, he
laboured with great success. And during this period, the first
church in Alexandria is said to have been built, at a place called
Boucalia, near to the sea shore, and thence called Boucalis, or
Baucalis. The name Boucalia arose, if we may believe Strabo,
from the fact, that in former times the spot had been appropri
ated for the pasturage of cattle.
The Egyptians, indignant2 at the progress made by the
1 Le Quien, ii. 340. Renaudot, of Nero began October 13, a.d. 61 ;
Pat. AI. 3. and, as it is agreed on all hands that
2 The date of S. Mark's Martyrdom S. Mark suffered on the 25th of April,
is a question of almost insuperable it must have been in a.d. 62. To
difficulty. Eutychius makes it to this a difficulty, arising from ancient
have taken place in a.d. 54 ; the traditions, is opposed. The Evange-
Chronicon Orientale, in a.d. 67 ; the list is said, in the most ancient Mar-
Acts of the Evangelist, in a.d. 68. tyrologies, to have departed to his re-
Eusebius, on the contrary, (H. E. ward on the 29th or 30th of the month
ii. 24,) says expressly Nepavos Se 87- Pharmuthi, that is, the 24th or 25th
Soov fcyovTos ttjs fiamtelas eras irpuros of April, and on Easter Day.
litTa m&pKov top °A7r<f<TToAoc ko! 'Ei/ay- Now it is certain that from the year
ye\urri]i' rrjs 4v 'A\elavSpelq. irapoixlas 45 to the end of the first century,
'Ai/navbs rty Keirovpyiav Siaoex*™- Easter Day never fell on the 24th or
S. Jerome (de Scriptoribus Ecclesias- 25th of April. It might be sufficient to
ticis) confirms this : — Mortuus est reply that the uncertainty of the time
autem octavo Neronis anno. To of the celebraHon of Easter, even at
which may be added the common a period much subsequent to this, for-
Martyrologies. Now the eighth year bids us to draw any very definite con-

8

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[book.

Gospel, resolved to be avenged on its first preacher. A feast
in honour of Serapis, held annually on the twenty-fifth of April,
was approaching. Advantage was taken of the circumstance to
excite and organize a riot, on the preceding day, Saturday,
April 24 : the rather, that the Evangelist had denounced the
approaching festivity as idolatrous and impious. Seizing
S. Mark, and tying a rope round his neck, they drew him
through the principal streets of the city, till the blood gushed
from his sides : and, at evening, they threw him into prison,
Martyrdom while consulting with respect to his fate. On the same night
ad!!!.' the sufferer was cheered by the appearance of an Angel, who

elusion from the assertion of the
Martyrologies, even if we admit it to
be true. Yet that the Evangelist
suffered on a Sunday seems, from this
tradition, extremely probable ; and it is
well nigh certain that it was on a great
feast of Serapis, for on this all histo
rians are agreed. Now there was a
Feast of Serapis on the 25th of April;
and since the Dominical letter of
a.d. 62 is C, the 25th of April in
that year fell on a Sunday. Nor is it
difficult to explain how it afterwards
came to be asserted that S. Mark
suffered on Easter Day. The genuine
Acts may have mentioned the fact,
that he was slain on April 25, which
was Sunday, and a great Festival ;
meaning thereby, a great Festival of
Serapis. On which some ignorant
transcriber, supposing a great Chris
tian Festival to be meant, inserted the
word Paschali before Dominica. Or
again, this Sunday may have been
called the Paschal Sunday, because it
fell within the Paschal Hme ; i. e., the
period between Easter and Whitsun
day. Or lastly, the Paschal Festivity
may mean any Sunday, as being the
Feast of the Lord's Resurrection.
And all the MSS. Acts consulted by
Sollerius, say simply, Beatissimamfes-
tivitatem nostram Paschalem, id est,
Dominicum diem. Bonjour has col

lected other examples, where Sunday
is spoken of in a similar manner. (Ap
pend, ad Diss, de nomine Pat. Joseph.
p. 45).
So far the date, Sunday, April 25,
a.d. 62, seems satisfactory. Another
difficulty, however, meets us. It is
expressly affirmed by the Acts, that S.
Mark suffered on the Sunday, but was
not slain till the next day. In the
year 62, therefore, he must have
finished his course on Monday, April
26 ; but this is contrary to all testi
mony. We answer that, though the
Acts assert that the confession of the
Evangelist lasted two days, they also
introduce the Pagans saying, Quod
Serapis, in sua hodie festivitate,
hunc virum voluit invisere. In
this case, the Evangelist must have
been arrested on Saturday, April 24.
If, however, it should be insisted that
the Evangelist was arrested on Sunday,
and slain on the Feast of Serapis,
there is no occasion, with Tillemont
and Bonjour, to postpone his Mar
tyrdom to 68 : — it would be enough,
with Pontac, to place his passion on
Sunday, April 24, being the 3rd Sun
day after Easter, and his death on
Monday, April 25, a.d. 63. We
prefer, however, to rest on the autho
rity of Eusebius, and to attribute a
slight inaccuracy to the Acts.

SECT. I.J THE FOUNDATION OF THE CHURCH. 9
comforted him with the assurance that his name was in the
Book of Life; and shortly afterwards by a Vision of the
Saviour Himself, Who, addressing him by the title of Mark
the Evangelist, bade peace be with him. To Whom S. Mark
replied, "I yield Thee thanks, 0 Saviour, that Thou hast
counted me worthy to suffer for Thy Name." On the next day,
the Pagans drew the Evangelist around the city, as before,
until with the words, " Into Thy Hands I commend my spirit,"
he went to his rest. It was by the side of the Martyr's tomb
in the church of Baucalis, that the election of the Patriarchs
took place in after times.
We must not pass over in silence the celebrated account Early con-
x . stitution of
which Eutychius, Patriarch of Alexandria in the tenth century, the Alex-
^ •/ ' andnan
has given, with respect to the custom introduced by S. Mark church,
concerning the election of Bishops in that See. Though this
writer's statement has been repeatedly noticed and confuted,
it still remains a staple argument with Presbyterians, and a
History of the Church of Alexandria were incomplete without
an examination into its truth.
The words of Eutychius are as follows : " S. Mark along |»s Ascribed
with Ananias, ordained twelve Presbyters, to remain with the cMus'
Patriarch ; so that when the Chair should become vacant, they
might elect one out of the twelve, on whose head the other
eleven should lay their hands, give him benediction, and con
stitute him Patriarch ; and should after this choose some other
man, to supply the place of the promoted Presbyter, in such
sort that the Presbytery should always consist of twelve. This
custom continued at Alexandria till the time of the Patriarch
Alexander, one of the Three hundred and eighteen"; (the
writer, of course, means the Fathers of Nicaea;) "who forbade the
Presbyters in future to ordain their Patriarch, but decreed that
on a vacancy of the See thfe neighbouring Bishops should con
vene for the purpose of filling it with a proper Patriarch,
whether elected from those twelve Presbyters, or from any
others." Eutychius adds, that during the time of the first ten
Patriarchs there were no Bishops in Egypt; Demetrius, the
eleventh, having- been the first to consecrate them.
If, then, we are to take this writer's words in their literal sense,
we must believe that the Second See in the Catholic Church was for

10 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
the space of one hundred and fifty years governed by Arch-
Priests ; that these men, during that period, refrained from the
ordination of other Bishops, though presuming to lay hands on
Priests and the inferior orders of the hierarchy : that the eleventh
Patriarch asserted his claim to consecrate Bishops ; and that
six of his successors, for nearly a hundred years, persevered
in this practice without a remonstrance from, and enjoying
communion with, every other branch of the Church.
So monstrous a story at first leads us to regard its author
as grossly misinformed, or a pure fabricator. Yet the authority
of S. Jerome forbids us to do this. That Father, in an epistle
to Evagrius,1 while dwelling on the dignity of the Priesthood,
and s. thus expresses himself : " At Alexandria, from the time of S.
erome' Mark the Evangelist to that of the Bishops Heraclas and
Dionysius," (that is, till the middle of the third century,) " it
was the custom of the Presbyters to nominate one, elected from
among themselves, to the higher dignity of the Bishoprick ;
just as the army makes an emperor, or the Deacons nominate
as Archdeacon any man whom they know to be of active habits
in their own body."
The above quoted passage from Eutychius was first published
by the learned Selden, with a very prolix commentary, as a prop
to the falling cause of Presbyterianism. It was refuted at the
time by Abraham Echellensis, and afterwards by Renaudot and
Le Quien. Two different explanations have been given, either of
which is perfectly satisfactory.
not presby. In the first place, it may well be asserted that the words of
Eutychius refer to the election, not to the consecration, of the
Bishop. It was the custom in the early Church, that not only
Presbyters, but even laics, laid their hands on the head of the
party so chosen ; and this was the case more especially in the
Coptic Church, as writers, both Cathohc and Jacobite, allow.
And Echellensis has clearly proved, that, in many instances at
least, a triple imposition of hands took place; of the people
voting, of the Presbyters electing, of the Bishops consecrating.
Privileges of At the same time, the Presbyters of Alexandria had certain
dr?aifle]tas- privileges which the Presbyters of other Churches did not
what?' enjoy; and these two facts, coming together to the knowledge
1 Opp. i. 1082. [Ed. Vail.]

SECT.

I-J

THE FOUNDATION OF THE CHURCH.

11

of an ignorant writer like Eutychius, may have occasioned the
fable to which the unhappy consequences of the Western
Reformation have given such undue celebrity. S. Jerome's tes
timony is decided against those who bring him forward as a
witness; for, at the very time he is stretching to their very
utmost the privileges of the Priesthood, he asks, "What is
there which a Bishop may do, except ordination, that a
Presbyter may not do Vn Again, as it has been well remarked,
how could the Council of Alexandria, a.d. 339, have decided
against the orders conferred by one Coluthus, himself a Pres
byter, when, within the memory of living men, the Patriarch
had received no other ordination ? Or is it likely that among
the various charges brought in succeeding ages against the
Church of Egypt, this of Presbyterian ordination should never
have been one ?
It may, however, be granted, that the Patriarch was really and whence
ordained by these twelve Presbyters.2 It is, then, certain that arising.
they were an Episcopal College, retaining the name, which in

1 Yet even this passage proves that
S. Jerome is stretching the point to
its very utmost. For in his dialogue
against the Luciferians, (Opp. ii.
181,) he also reserves the power of
confirming to the Bishop alone.
2 This hypothesis, however, is
stoutly denied by Pearson, Abraham
Echellensis, and Sollerius, and they
affirm that Diocesan Bishops existed in
the Alexandrian Patriarchate from the
very first. In confirmation of this view,
they quote the Melchite Martyrology,
the Acts of S. Mark by Severus, Simeon
Metaphrastes, and, above all, the
letter of Hadrian to Servianus, quoted
in the life of Saturninus by Vopiscus,
where he distinctly mentions some,
qui se Christi Episcopos dicunt.
They also observe that Heraclas, had
he increased the number of Bishops,
would in all probability have been
commended for it by his encomiast
Eusebius ; and that in the time of S.
Alexander there were a hundred
Bishops in Egypt, while we find no

hint of a recent addition to the Epis
copal body. At the same time, it must
be confessed that none of these argu
ments can in any respect be considered
decisive, except that adduced from
the letter of Hadrian ; and he might
easily have been mistaken on this
point, as he is in the same letter on
others, regarding the Christians.
It is easy to reconcile the discre
pancy between the two narrations of
the early constitution of the Alexan
drian Church, by imagining that at
first, as we said, it consisted of seven
Deacons and three Priests ; but that
the Evangelist, on his second visit
to Alexandria, found the number
of the Faithful so much increased,
as to call for the establishment of a
Presbyteral (or Episcopal) College.
This whole subject is most ably treated
by Sollerius, Parergon I., Hist.
Chron. Pat. Alex. pp. 9*. 10*, 11* of
the fifth volume of the Bollandine
June ; and by Le Quien, Oriens
Christianus, ii. 342.

12 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
the Primitive Church was used synonymously with Bishops.
That the case is so in the Acts is well known. S. Paul, for
example, having called the Presbyters of the Church of Ephesus
to Miletus, warned them to take heed unto all the flock, over
the which the Holy Ghost had made them Bishops. And
that there was such an Episcopal College at Alexandria appears
likely from two considerations. The one, that the account of
Eutychius as to the absence of any Bishops in Egypt till the
third century thus receives some confirmation, since we may
well suppose that this College governed the country jointly,
and that till the time of Demetrius it was not divided, to use
the word in the modern sense, into Dioceses ; the other, that
we may thus account for the extraordinary privileges retained by
the College when it became really Presbyteral, more especially
that of provincial letters being addressed in its name jointly
with the Patriarch's.
Let the case, however, be as it may, Eutychius' s authority is
httle worth, since, in asserting that till the Nicene Council the
Patriarchs were invariably elected from the order of Presbyters,
he asserts that which is contrary to fact, Demetrius for example
having been a layman till called to the Chair of S. Mark. And
among the many frivolous objections raised against S. Athanasius,
his immediate elevation from the Diaconate to the Patriarchate
does not appear.

SECTION II.
jPoyaeCdeby the It Pleasecl Goj>> that the Church which was afterwards to be
amiria1ilex" exPose(l to sucn fierce persecution from the Pagan power, and
church. to struggle for its very existence with heresy under two forms,
should, in its infancy, be in great measure protected from the
storms which fell upon its sister Churches. Time was thus given
for its establishment and consolidation ; the True Faith took
deep root in the hearts of the people of Alexandria, and, in due
season, brought forth fruit to perfection. During the first two
centuries, Egypt enjoyed unusual quiet ; and httle is known of
its ecclesiastical history beyond the names of its Patriarchs.

SECT. II.J THE FOUNDATION OF THE CHURCH. 13
On the decease of S. Mark, S. Annianus1 succeeded to the succession
7 of S. Annia-
government of the Church. He was a man, says Eusebius,2 °"s> J a<jr-
beloved of God, and admirable in all things. In his time the
number of the Faithful was increased exceedingly.3 His memory
was held in great veneration by the Egyptians, and a church
under his invocation long existed4 at Alexandria. He governed
the See5 twenty-two years : and had for his successor Abilius,6 s. amuus,
. Patr. HI
or Mehanus, who is said to have been the first of the three a.d.'s4. "
Presbyters whom S. Mark, at his first visit to Alexandria, had
ordained. The remark of the Chronicon Orientale, " the Church
during his time was in peace," renders it probable that the case
had been otherwise during the Episcopate of Annianus. And
it is not unlikely that, in the massacre of the Alexandrian Jews
which followed the siege of Jerusalem, some of the Christians
might have suffered. On this subject, however, we have no
certain information. The persecution of Domitian does not
appear to have extended to Egypt. Abilius governed the Church
for nearly fourteen years : and was succeeded by Cerdo,? one of s. Cerdo>
the Presbyters whom S. Mark had ordained. He presided over A^gsT''
his diocese for about nine8 years ; and there is an obscure tra-

1 He is also called Anianus ; and in he was consecrated by S. Luke ; (vii.
the Latin Acts of S. Mark, published 48,) which is contrary to Eastern
by Wolfgang Lazius, Anizanus. Reu- tradition.
terdahl will have the name spelt ,-,..,
„ , . TT . ' Ihe Chronicon Orientale asserts
Ammianus ; Eutychius Hananias.
„ . ' ' , .. „. that the See was vacant for three years

Euseb. H. E. ii. 24.

after the decease of Abilius, and Tille-

3 Severus, ap, Renaud. 2.
„ ' . TT c„ mont follows its authority. But Sol-
* S. Epiphanius, Hser. 69. . . J
„ ,. ,— ,r,\ c -NT lenus (p. 15*) amply disproves this
s So Eusebius, (in. 12,) S. Nice- X j • j j «.
„ , . „ ut i ¦ assertion, and indeed the reason as-
phorus, Eutychius, Severus, Makn- .q ^ Chr „because
zius ; though they do not agree as to ^ ^ ^ ^ degtract;on rf Jeru_
the year of his decease, dating the
' . .. ¦ t a-c salem happened," destroys whatever

authority the statement might other
wise possess.

commencement of his episcopate dif
ferently. 6 Eusebius, both in his History and
and in his Chronicle, with the other 8 There is a discrepancy between
Greek and Latin authors, calls him the Chronicle and History of Euse-
Abilius ; the Coptic writers name bius ; the former gives eleven years to
him Miloi, the Arabs, Melianus. In Cerdo, the latter merely asserts that
Eutychius, by a manifest error, he is he died about the twelfth year of
termed Philetius. The author of the Hadrian. (U. E. iv. 1.) We follow
Apostolic Constitutions asserts that Sollerius.

14 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
PaS'v' dition that he suffered Martyrdom under Trajan. Primus,1 who
a.d. 107. is a]s0 called Ephraim, next ascended the Evangehcal Throne. He
was a layman, and was advanced for his angelical purity of life.2
His Episcopate was in all probability a season of trouble. The
Jews3 of Egypt and Cyrene, as if possessed by an evil spirit, fell
a.d. 115. on the Pagans among whom they dwelt, massacred them without
mercy, carried every thing before them, and compelled their ene
mies to retire within the walls of Alexandria, where they revenged
themselves by enslaving or murdering such of the Jews as were
dwelling in that city. Nor was it till Marcius Turbo, into whose
hands Trajan committed the conduct of the war, had defeated
the rebels in several battles, and had slaughtered many thou
sands of them, that peace was restored to the country. Primus,
after an Episcopate of twelve years, was succeeded by Justus ;4
o. Justus, _ _ .
patr. vi., a man who was good and wise,5 and beloved6 of God. He is
A.D. 119. . 1-11
said to have been baptised by the Evangelist •? and, doubtless,
the Egyptian Church would delight in honouring such, more
especially at a time when few who had personally known S.
I'atr "vnius' Mark could be yet surviving. To Justus succeeded Eumenius ;8
a.d. 130. and ft jg remarkable that history is still silent as to the suffer
ings, which there almost certainly must have been, of the
Alexandrian Church,9 during the time that Hadrian was in
Egypt, where he restored the pillar of Pompey, and attended
the apotheosis of his favourite Antinous. And in the great
and last insurrection of the Jews, led on by the impostor
Barcochebas, the Egyptian Christians10 suffered severely from
1 He is called Primus by Eusebius 6 Chronicon Orientale. Sollerius,7*.
(H. E. iv. 4) and other Greek and i Such is the tradition of the Ethi-
Latin writers. See Dodwell's Sup- opic Church. Renaudot, p. 17.
plement to Pearson's Dissertation, p. s Eusebius (H. E. iv. 11) calls him
58. But by Eastern writers he is Eumenes ; but in his Chronicle,
termed Abrimius or Aprimius ; and Hymenseus.
Papebrochius supposes his real name 9 The only author who mentions
to have been Ephrem. (Conf. Soller. that Alexandria suffered in the per-
p- 16*). secution of Hadrian, is Macrizius ;
3 Severus, ap. Renaudot, p. 16. and he refers it to the Episcopate of
' Eusebius, H.E. iv. 2. This rebel- Primus, when, indeed, that persecution
lion is also mentioned by Orosius, might have commenced in Egypt;
Dion, and Spartianus. though it did not attain its utmost
4 Eusebius, H. E. iv. 4. He is fury till after the succession of Justus.
called Justinus by Nicephorus. *> Eusebius, H. E. iv. 8. Sollerius,
5 Severus, ap. Renaudot, p. 16. 18*.

SECT. II.] THE FOUNDATION OF THE CHURCH.

15

the fury of the rebels, who would have had them join in their
revolt. At the same time Alexandria was infected by the
fanatic teaching of Basileides1 and Carpocrates, both natives of
that city. To enter into an exposition of the Gnostic heresy
would lead us too far from our immediate subject : inasmuch as
it does not appear that the Alexandrian Church was peculiarly
interested in its rise, or opposed to its progress.
Marcian2 was the successor of Eumenius, of whom nothing
whatever is known : and Marcian was followed by Celadion.3
Of this Bishop nothing is related except the love that his flock
bore to him ; and that he was succeeded by Agrippinus.4 He,
in his turn, left the Patriarchal Throne to Julian.5
A barren list of names is all that history has left us with
respect to these early Bishops of Alexandria; all of whom,
however, with the exception perhaps of Primus, are reckoned
among the Saints. "With the successor of Julian we leave
uncertain traditions, and uninteresting catalogues, and enter on
the real History of the Church of Alexandria.

S. Marcian,
Patr. VIII.,
A.D. 143.

S. Celadion,
Patr. IX.,
A.D. 153.

S. Agrippi
nus, Patr.
X., A.D. 167.

S. Julian,
Patr. XI.,
A.D. 179.

1 Eusebius, H. E. iv. 7. On the dif
ferent tenets of the stricter followers of
Basileides, and the Carpocratians, the
reader cannot do better than consult
Fuldner, DritteDenkschrift,&c. , p. 1 80.
2 Eusebius, H. E. iv. 6, terms him
Mark ; and it is probable, as Sollerius
has observed, that this was his real
name, but was altered by the Egyptians
out of reverence to the Evangelist ; just
as in the Roman Church no Pope has
ever been named Peter. No Alex
andrian Patriarch bore the name of
Mark till the beginning of the ninth
century. 3 So he is called by Eusebius, Nice-
phorus, George Syncellus; Celasdia-
nus in the Coptic Index ; Claudian by
Severus, Eutychius, the Chronicon
Orientale, Elmacinus, Makrizi.
Abu'lberkat also names him Beladion ;
our Jacobite Catalogue I .1 ..Ml^

4 Eusebius, H. E. iv. 19. Abu'l
berkat calls him Agrippius or Agrippa.
The chronology of his Patriarchate,
which is involved in some obscurity by
an apparent self-contradiction on the
part of Eusebius, is ably expounded
by Sollerius.
3 Eusebius, H. E. v. 9. Severus
has a strange observation, connected
with this Prelate ; after his time, says
he, no Bishop remained at Alexandria.
The most intelligible explanation of
this assertion, which is also confirmed
by the authority of the Chronicon
Orientale,is that the increasing severity
of persecution rendered the succeeding
Bishops, at one time or other, fugi
tives from their See ; which till then
they had not been compelled to
leave. In the chronology we have
followed Sollerius, though we have not
considered it necessary to swell our
pages with an exposition of his argu
ments.

16 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.

SECTION III.
Demetrius, While the Patriarch Julian — so runs the Egyptian legend, —
tr a\.lt * _A.li, j
a.d. 189. was on his death bed, he was informed by an Angel, that
the man who should, on the succeeding day, bring him a
present of grapes, x was designed as his successor. On the
morrow, a countryman, who could neither read nor write, and
who was married, made his appearance in the predicted man-
how elected, j^ and Julian acknowledged him as the future Patriarch.
Demetrius was so unwilling to receive the proffered dignity,
that he was ordained by main force ; and, from the time of his
consecration, he became another man. He immediately applied
himself with success to the study of the Scriptui'es, and became
one of the most learned prelates of his time. His being a
married man rendered his flock, if we may trust Severus,
unwilling at first to receive him as Patriarch, as it happened
that, from S. Mark downward, none such had been promoted to
the See. This indisposition, however, was shortly removed,
probably by the exemplary character of the new Prelate ; for the
miracle which, according to Coptic tradition, established his
continence, is unworthy of relation, and far more so of behef.
Demetrius had presided over his Church fourteen years, when
the terrible persecution of Severus, reckoned as the sixth, broke
conversion over the Church. 2Philip was at the time Prefect of Egypt :
one of the most honourable posts which.it was in the power of
1 This tale is related or referred to He displayed, this day, the power of
by Severus, the Chronicon Orientale, virginity by the Grace of Christ :
and Elmacinus. Renaudot, pp. 20, He covered fire in a basket, and the
21. The Copts, on the twelfth of vest of his wife,
Bermaha, (= March 8) commemo- says the Ethiopic poet. See Ludolf,
rate the miracle by which Demetrius Comm. ad Hist. Ethiop. p. 448.
proved his continence.
U«~C : X^T : nVlM.<. : <DA-fl>» 1*1/1* : nftXvJ, :
2 Baron. Ann. 204, vi.

of Philip.

SECT. IH.J THE DEATH OF PHILIP. 17
the emperors to bestow, and known above others by the name
of the Augustal Prefecture. Philip, however, with his wife
Claudia, and daughter Eugenia, embraced the Christian Faith ;
and though he made no secret of his conversion, he was per
mitted to retain his dignity for some time after it had taken
place. Severus having, at length, become acquainted with the
fact, wrote to the Prefect, upbraiding him with the ill return he
had made for the kindness shewn him ; he had been honoured,
he said, rather as a king than as a prefect, and while he retained
the faith of his forefathers, he was worthy of the dignity. He
must at once either renounce the superstition to which he had
attached himself, or submit to be deprived of the office which
he had so long held. On receiving these commands, Philip
feigned illness, and availed himself of the relaxation thus ob
tained from public business, to convert all his possessions into
money, which he bestowed on the poor. Having done this, he
returned a firm answer to Severus, who superseded him in his
government by Terentius Lsetus. The new Prefect had express
orders to destroy Philip. This, however, was not so easy to be
accomplished : the populace still loved and respected the deposed
governor, and it was necessary to have recourse to stratagem. A
hired band of ruffians were easily engaged : having dispatched ||onJnartyr"
Philip in his own house, they were, to save appearances, thrown
into prison ; from whence they were speedily liberated. Severus
himself paid a visit to Egypt ; and, as a popular measure,
permitted that in future a senator should be made prefect.
Hitherto that honour had, by the institution of Augustus, been
conferred on men of equestrian rank only.
The persecution, on the approach of Severus to Alexandria, Persecution
.- _-._-. _of Severus .
began to be so severe in Egypt, that many believed the days of
Antichrist to be at hand. Alexandria itself was the scene of
many martyrdoms,1 because the Christians, arrested in the
various parts of the province, were sent thither for trial and
execution. The most celebrated among its victims was S.
Leonidas,2 the father of the more famous Origen. He had
1 Eusebius, H. E. vi. 1. S. Jerome, preserved in the Vatican.
2 He has been sometimes called a But that he was so is, to say the least,
Bishop ; by Suidas, for example, and very uncertain.
by two MSS. copies of the catalogue of C

18 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
Birth of carefully educated his son, till the seventeenth year of his age,
not only in the Scriptures, but also in the usual studies of the
ws educa- time. Every day, before entering on the latter, it was his habit
tion at J J' o i ¦ 1
home ; to require the repetition of some portion ol the tormer, wmcn
he then explained and enforced. The quick mind of Origen
was not satisfied with the literal signification; he eagerly
inquired after the mystical meaning, which he considered to
possess the deeper interest, and more richly to repay the study.
S. Leonidas considered it right to check these demonstrations of
that fertility of genius for which Origen became afterwards so
remarkable ; he advised him to confine his inquiries to subjects
more suitable to his age, and not to enter on topics which
were only fitting for the ripe theologian. Yet, in private, he
would bless God for the talents which He had bestowed on his
son ; and often, while the latter slept, he would steal to his bed
side, and kiss that breast which he looked on as a special shrine
of the Holy Ghost. Besides Origen, Leonidas had six other
sons : the name of their mother is unknown.
and in the The Catechetical School of Alexandria possessed at this time
Catechetical *
school; a high reputation in the Church. It had its origin1 in the first
history of century ; but its earliest master with whom we are acquainted
that school. wag Athenagoras. — He had been an Athenian philosopher, and
on his conversion, wrote an apology for Christianity, unknown
to Eusebius and S. Jerome, but cited by S. Epiphanius. We
Athena- have also another work of his, in defence of the probability of a
E ' Resurrection. To Athenagoras succeeded the more celebrated
s.pantaenus: Father of the Church, Pantenus. An Hebrew by nation, a
Sicilian by birth,2 he was in philosophy an Eclectic ;3 and drew
his principal dogmas from the Stoic and Pythagorean sects.
"'A Marco Evangelista semper (Biblioth. Eccles.i. 232, not. a, Ed. 2)
Ecclesiastici fuere doctores," is S. deny that he was a Jew.
Jerome's statement, when writing of 3 Eusebius, (H. E. v. 10) asserts
S. Pantenus, in his Catalogue. him to have been a Stoic ;— Philippus
3 Thus Le Moine (Var. Sac. ii. 207) Sidetes, a Pythagorean. The latter
reconciles the two accounts of Clemens, author makes Pantaenus, by mistake,
—in one of which he calls Pantaenus to have been the pupil of Clemens ;
a Sicilian bee,-in the other he seems perhaps by a distortion of the fact
to mention him as a Jew. Valesius, that he did, in a certain sense, succeed
in his note on Eusebius v. 1 1 (vol. ii. him on his return from India.
p. 64, n. 6, ed. Heinichen) and Dupin,

SECT. III.] THE CATECHETICAL SCHOOL.

19

While he presided over the Alexandrian school, the Indians sent
to Demetrius, requesting him to dispatch some teacher of the
Faith to that country, who should be recommended no less
by his learning than by his character. Pantenus accepted
the office with joy,— and left the government of his school in
the hands of his celebrated disciple, Clemens. clement
In the Catechetical School, therefore, Origen1 was placed ;
and under Clemens, (whom we shall have occasion to mention
more at length hereafter,) made rapid progress not only in
sacred, but also in profane literature. Here,2 in all probability,
he formed that friendship with Alexander, afterwards Bishop of
Jerusalem, which was at a later period so important to his
welfare. He also attended the lectures of Ammonius,3 from
whom he drank deeply of that Platonic philosophy which
more or less tinged his writings.
On the breaking out of the persecution, such was Origen's
desire for martyrdom, that he was scarcely to be prevented,
by the tears and entreaties of his mother, from denouncing
himself at the tribunal of the governor. And on the apprehen
sion of his father, he was restrained by little short of main
force. Happy had it been for him had he thus early and
gloriously ended his life! happy, had he not been spared to
leave a doctrine that divided the Church for centuries, and a
reputation of so doubtful a nature that the salvation of Origen
was one of the most famous questions of antiquity ! He at
length contented himself with encouraging S. Leonidas to en
dure to the end, neither regarding his own sufferings, nor the
destitute condition of his wife, and her seven sons, of whom „ .
' ' Origen's
Origen, young as he was, was the eldest. S. Leonidas4 was poverty;
beheaded, and his family reduced to the deepest poverty, the
possessions of the Martyr being confiscated. Origen himself
was, for some time, an inmate in the house of a rich Christian
lady ; but as she also entertained Paul of Antioch, a determined
1 Euseb. H. E. vi. 6. Suidas, Eusebius, and Nicephorus
2 This seems to follow from Euseb. put the fact beyond doubt. Huet.,
H. E. vi. 14, as De la Rue well Origeniana, i. 6.
observes. 4 He is commemorated by the
3 This is denied by Baronius, s. a. Roman Martyrology on the 22nd of
234, but the testimonies of Porphyry, April.
c 2

20

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[book

heretic, whom she had adopted as her heir, he was at length
compelled, through hatred of the false doctrine with which
he was thus continually brought in contact, to seek an asylum
elsewhere. He then undertook to teach the science of grammar,
and in this manner obtained a precarious subsistence.
Pantaenus, on his return from India, — where he had found
some traces of the labours of S. Bartholomew, and had dis
covered, it is said, a Gospel of S. Matthew, written in
Hebrew,1 — reassumed his place in the Alexandrian School,
assisted by Clemens : Origen heard and reverenced both.2 On
the death of his master, Clemens succeeded to the entire manage
ment of the school. But the fury of the persecution increasing, he
was tempted to relinquish his charge, and to retire into Cappa
docia. On this, Origen, then but eighteen years old, but whose
learning was already famous, by degrees, and, as it would seem,
at first of his own accord, undertook the conduct3 of the first
head of the Christian school in the world. Some time having elapsed, and
Alexandrian . .
school: there appearing no hope that the persecution would cease, or
that Clemens would return, Demetrius confirmed Origen in his
charge, and entrusted to him the care of the Catechumens.
Origen's first resolution on assuming his new office was,
to apply himself entirely to the study of theology.4 With this
view, he sold all his grammatical and philosophical books, for
an annuity of four oboli a day: and his frugality and abstemious
ness enabled him to support life on this small sum. His meals
were so scanty, that he seriously impaired his health ; he never
tasted wine ; he had but one garment ; in the severest winters
it was his custom to go barefoot ;. his fasts were frequent and
rigorous, and he had no other couch but the bare floor. His
reputation for learning and ability soon extended itself widely.
His disciples were numerous ; they attended him not only from
the commoner class of Christians, but from those of higher

his ascetic
life:

1 Euseb. H. E. v. 16.
2 Huet cannot understand how
Origen could have been (Euseb. vi. 14)
a disciple of Pantaenus : Tillemont
explains the difficulty.
3 Thus De la Rue reconciles Euseb.
(H. E. vi. 1) with S. Jerome, (Catalog.
Script. Eccles. 54,) ; and his account

is far more probable than the usual
history deduced by Huet and others,
from the words of Eusebius. See
note a, Huet. Origen. p. 83, as
appended to the fourth volume of
De la Rue's Edition of Origen.
4 Euseb. H. E. vi. 3.

SECT. III. ORIGEN'S DISCIPLES. 21
attainments in philosophy; nay, there were Pagans who scrupled
not to be his auditors. In the meantime, the persecution be
came still more violent under Aquila,1 the successor of Laetus ;
and many of Origen's disciples laid down their lives for the martyrdom ,
truth. The first of these was Plutarch, his earhest hearer ; "[J™ disci-
Origen accompanied him to the place of suffering, and consoled
him in his last moments. The friends of Plutarch, however,
regarding him as the cause of the disgrace and death of their
relation, attempted his life ; and he narrowly escaped their
designs. Six others of his disciples fell in the same persecution.
Serenus was burnt; Heracleides, a catechumen, and Heron,
who had but recently received baptism, were beheaded ; another
Serenus was honoured by Martyrdom, but in what manner is
unknown ; and Herais,2 also a catechumen, received, says the
historian, a baptism of fire. But of all the pupils of Origen,
Basileides was the most celebrated.
A Christian slave, named Potamiaena, having refused to comply of s Pota_
with the unholy suggestions of her master, was accused by him miiena:
to Aquila, and condemned, after being stripped, to be plunged
into a caldron of boihng pitch. She requested that she might
be allowed to retain her garments, and voluntarily offered to
be lowered by slow degrees into it. Her offer was accepted, and
Basileides was appointed to preside at the execution. He
treated her with as much kindness as circumstances enabled
him to bestow, and in assuring him of her gratitude, she also
promised not to forget him in the state on which she was about
to enter. A short time afterwards, his comrades, for some
unrecorded reason, endeavoured to oblige him to swear by the
gods. He refused, alleging that he was a Christian. They at
first treated the declaration as made in jest ; but, on discovering
that Basileides spoke seriously, they hurried him before the
1 Baronius, (a.ii.205, vi.) thinks that 2 Valesius, (in H. E. vi. 4) dis-
at the beginning of the persecution of tinguishes three martyrs of this name,
Aquila he left Alexandria, and took respectively commemorated on the 5th
refuge at Caesarea in Cappadocia, of March, and the 5th and 23rd of
where he remained two years. He September. They are not mentioned
rests for his authority on a statement in the Coptic Calendar, perhaps
of Palladius (c. 147). But the account because they were pupils of Origen,
hardly agrees with Origen's great de
sire of martyrdom.

22 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
i>efideBasi" Prefect> an(l thence to prison. The Christians were no less
astonished at his confession than the Pagans ; not having any
previous reason to imagine him a convert. In answer to their
inquiries as to the method in which the event was brought
about, he informed them that his conversion was wrought by a
vision, in which S. Potamiaena had appeared, and holding forth
a crown promised it to him. He was baptised in the prison,
and beheaded the next day.
Undismayed by the sufferings of his friends and disciples,
Origen let no opportunity pass of shewing his sympathy with
the sufferers in the cause of Christ. He visited them in prison, he
was at then side when before the tribunal, he accompanied them
to the place of punishment ; he conversed with them, he prayed
with them, he encouraged them, he supported them, he gave
them the kiss of peace. He exposed himself in every possible
origen's ar- manner to the fury of the heathens, from whom, on several
occasions, he very narrowly escaped; he was more than once
arrested, and his life seemed preserved by the special inter
position of Providence.
Demetrius1 heard with feelings of respect and admiration the
hardy actions of the young Christian philosopher ; and encou
raged him to persevere in the path he had chosen, assuring him
that it could not fail of obtaining a glorious reward. But, after
a while, rumours of a less pleasing character reached the ears of
the Bishop. It was said that Origen had interpreted too literally
and mis- the saying of our Saviour with respect to those eunuchs who
had made themselves so for the kingdom of Heaven's sake, and
had indeed acted on that misinterpretation. Demetrius inter
rogated him on the subject, and obtained ,a confirmation of the
fact from his own lips : he pleaded in extenuation, that the situ
ations into which he was thrown as " Catechist," when attended
by women as well as by men, presented sometimes considerable
temptation, the occurrence of which he thought it better to
prevent. Demetrius heard his defence with more of surprise
than anger ; indeed, considering the harsh manner in which he
afterwards treated Origen, he hardly appears to have, in the
outset, dealt fairly with him. It is but just to add, that at a
1 Euseb. H. E. vi. 8.

SECT. III.] ORIGEN'S LABOURS. 23
later period of life, Origen himself condemned his own mis
interpretation of the passage in question.1
About the same time, Origen published his first commentary
on the Canticles, which, at a later period of his life, after a careful
revisal, he again2 presented to the public, thus ingenuously con
fessing, that to attempt the exposition of Holy Scripture at so
immature an age, was both presumptuous and dangerous.
The death of the Emperor Severus put a stop to the perse- a.c. an.
cution; for Caracalla, whether from motives of policy or humanity,
commanded that it should not be carried on. Origen profited
by the calm to visit Rome,3 where his stay was of no long con- He goes to
tinuance. Demetrius was so sensible of the value of his labours,
that he urged him to resume them without loss of time , so
httle culpability did he at this period attach to the hasty act
we have before related. Origen, however, feehng himself
physically unequal to the whole responsibility of the Christian
school, divided it into two portions ; the one containing the
students of inferior ability or learning ; the other, those whose
parts and apphcation were more remarkable. The former
division he entrusted to the care of Heraclas,4 his friend and associates
pupil, brother of S. Plutarch the Martyr, and the successor of wfthMm.
both Origen and Demetrius; of the more advanced class he
took charge himself. He undertook the study of the Hebrew
language, in wliich he acquired considerable proficiency by com
paring the original with the versions of Aquila, Symmachus,
and the Seventy. His lectures on philosophy and the subjects
connected with it, were attended by many of the heathen
students; his name was mentioned by the philosophers with
respect, and their writings were dedicated to him. Nor had he
less reputation among heretics. One of these, a Valentinian,
1 For example: on S. Matthew xix. ney of Origen's to Rome in the reign
12, he says, XpViM0" els airoTpoirfiv of Heliogabalus, whereas Eusebius
Ssp/iav pieti ttj iriffTei vearepcuv, oh (vi. 14,) expressly places it in that of
6p.oKoyitii XPV MTt tlparra aoxppoaivris Caracalla. The Cardinal imagines
eXotKrip, a\\' oil /car' iir'vyvuiaiv, k.t.A. him also to have undertaken a second
where he is evidently referring to his journey thither in 248, a.d., from a
own case. (Ed. De la Rue, iii. misunderstanding of Porphyry. Vale-
654, E.) sius corrects both these errors.
2 S. Hieron. Prarf. in Abd. vi. 361 . " Euseb. H. E. vi. 15.
3 Baronius; ii. 459, fixes this jour-

24 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
named Ambrose, of great reputation in the city both for his
riches and ability, was converted by him to the Catholic Faith ;
and this success was the means of establishing still more firmly
his reputation. Many other heretics and many Pagans were
brought to a knowledge of the truth by the profound reasonings
and eloquence of the Christian philosopher. Of the heathen
who did not embrace the Faith, many openly professed them
selves admirers of its teacher : and the testimony of Porphyry,
the bitter enemy of Christianity, as preserved by Eusebius,
shews in what general estimation Origen was held. It would
appear that in these occupations several years passed away :
nor was Origen's career of usefulness interrupted till a go
vernor of Arabia, having heard much of the prodigy of learning
that had arisen at Alexandria, dispatched a pressing request
visit8 to the Bishop and to the Prefect, that they would send him
without loss of time into that country. Origen went, and
having satisfied his entertainers on some points of science,
returned again into Egypt. But his tranquillity was disturbed,
a.d. 2i5, and his life endangered, by civil commotions.
Alexandria had made herself " drunk with the blood of the
martyrs," and her time for punishment had come. Caracalla, who
professed to form his habits on those of Alexander the Great,
affected a particular love for the city of which that Conqueror was
the founder. The inhabitants by no means reciprocated this
friendly feeling, and made the Emperor the subject of their
raillery, to which the whole course of his life laid him open,
but especially the murder of his brother ; and raillery was an
offence which he could not forgive. Under pretence of a solemn
festival he assembled the youth of the city ; and at a given
mass'acre'of slgnalj a Part 0I" ^ls troops fell upon them, while another part
caracalla commenced a massacre in the town, which lasted many days.
The number of the dead was never known ; " nor did it mat
ter," observed Caracalla, in writing to the Senate, " how many
had actually suffered, since all deserved to do so."
retires into From these scenes Origen withdrew into Palestine, and took
es me' up his abode at Caesarea. And hence we may date the rise
of his troubles. He was not yet in Priest's orders ; but the
different Bishops of Palestine, out of respect to his learning
and character, invited him to explain the Scriptui'es in their

SECT. III.] ORIGEN IN PALESTINE. 25
respective churches. Demetrius, on receiving the news of this
proceeding, wrote a remonstrance ; the thing, he said, was un-
canonical and irregular ; none but a Priest could speak in the
presence of his Bishop ; and that even a Priest should do so,
had been, and was, in many places counted improper ; Origen,
on the contrary, had not yet arrived at that dignity, and took
upon himself this office out of his own Diocese. Alexander of
Jerusalem and Theoctistus1 of Caesarea urged, in reply, that they
were not the first who had thus authorised laics ; that it had
been the practice of Bishops, who possessed the most eminent
reputation for sanctity, such as Neon at Laranda,2 Atticus at
Synnada, and Celsus at Iconium ; that if any person, not in Holy
Orders, was capable of throwing any light on the Scripture, his His "" "

assistance should be accepted with thankfulness, not stigmatised ™th °' "'

derstanding
with
trius.
as an intrusion, and forbidden as an irregularity. This answer
did not satisfy Demetrius ; and it must be confessed, that al
though jealousy of Origen's attainments might have in some
degree influenced his conduct, his objections had much force,
and scarcely any violation of the Canons might not be justified
on gx-ounds similar to those adopted by the Bishops of Palestine.
The Prelate not only wrote to Origen, but sent some of his
deacons to command his instant return, and the order was
obeyed. Origen was now engaged, at the request of his friend Hj»
Ambrose, in the composition of those Commentaries on Holy
Scripture, some of which have descended to our own time.
His friend's zeal scarcely allowed the philosopher the necessary
time for food and repose, and well earned for him the title of
Adamantius. In correcting and polishing his works, Origen
owns3 how much he was indebted to the kindness and liberality
of Ambrose. Grateful for the benefit which he had received
from Origen, he provided him with seven amanuenses : the
genius and fluency of the philosopher being able to keep so
1 Photius calls him Theotechnus. 3 Epist. ad Afric. ad fin. (i. 29, f.)
2 Euseb. H. E. vi. 19. — Laranda was Upoaayopeiet as 6 o-vvayuviaa.p.zi'os
a see of Lycaonia, near Derbe. Its Tjf imayopeiaei tt\s 4maTo\ris, «ol
Prelates sign in the first and fourth iraparvxii" ¦ni.ar] afar), 4v oh fiefioiKTrrai
(Ecumenical Councils. Synnada or Ziop6maaii,evos, xipids pov ital a,Se\(pbs
Synnas was the metropolis of Phrygia Upbs Afi0p6aios, k.t.\.
Salutaris, and had Bishops as late, at
least, as 1450.

26

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[BOOK I.

his friend
ship with

.217.

A.D. A.D. 218—
222.

he visits
Mammxa,

many employed. But, as it is well remarked by Baronius,
" An inheritance may be gotten hastily in the beginning, but
the end thereof shall not be blessed." If S. Jerome1 and
S. Ambrose were incapable of supplying sufficient work for one
notary, the rapidity of Origen's conceptions must be allowed to
have been full of danger : and the event proves that it was fraught
with mischief. Ambrose provided the whole expenses which
were necessary to enable Origen to carry on his studies : they
were inseparable companions ;2 their meals were always improved
by the reading of some grave work. Ambrose boldly confessed3
the faith of Christ ; at what time is not ascertained : but
incurred reproach after his death for not having in his will
remembered Origen, whose poverty he must have well known.
Towards the end of the reign of Caracalla, Titus Flavius
Clemens, commonly known as S. Clement of Alexandria,
(though in truth he has no claim to the honour of canonization,4)
rested from his labours. As a writer, we are hardly concerned
with him, further than to observe that the errors and follies
which, under Origen's name, distracted the Church, seem to
have been to some extent a developement of Clement's teaching.
Had we his Hypotyposes, we should be able to speak with more
decision on this point. According to Photius, his doctrine m
this work was heterodox in an almost incredible degree.
The murder of Caracalla in Mesopotamia, and the rapid
succession of Macrinus and Heliogabalus, gave the Church
another interval of peace. Alexander, who was next elevated to
the purple, was still more favourably disposed to the Christians,
having, it is said, in his private oratory, among other images,
those of Abraham and of the Saviour.
Shortly after the succession of Heliogabalus, Mammaea, the
mother of Alexander, (whom Eusebius5 characterises as a most
devout woman, if any ever deserved the title,) being at Antioch,

1 S. Jerome, Comm. Galat. iii.
Proem. 7, 485, 6. He graphically
describes the inconvenience which
was the result of the employment
of an amanuensis.
2 S. Hieron. Ep. ad Marc. i. 192.
3 S. Hieron. Catal. 57. (ii. 897.)
4 See this point discussed in the

learned Brief of Benedict XIV. pre
fixed to his Edition of the Roman Mar-
tyrology. 5 Euseb. H. E. vi. 21. So also
S. Jerome speaks of her. — Catalog. 54.
The question whether Mammaea was
a Christian, is involved in great diffi
culties. — See Scluockh. C. K. G. iv. 6.

SECT. III.] ORIGEN ORDAINED. 27
and having heard of Origen's great reputation, was desirous of
conversing with him. She accordingly sent for him, and,
accompanied by a guard of honour, he went to Antioch. He
there discoursed at large on the verities of the Christian Faith,
and, after some time, returned to Alexandria.
But in this season of tranquillity, heresy was busy : Tertullian
had joined the Montanists, and his powerful eloquence was a
loss to the Catholics not easily to be replaced. Greece, in
particular, swarmed with heretics ; and the assistance of Origen
was requested in exposing and refuting their statements. Illyria, goes into
the Dicecese of which Greece was a part, was then in the
Patriarchate of Rome, though afterwards transferred to that of
Constantinople ; so that Origen's fame must have extended1 far
and wide, or an unordained member of a totally different
Patriarchate would scarcely have been summoned. He requested
leave from Demetrius, who not only consented, but gave him
recommendatory letters, with which he passed into Palestine.
In relating the difference which followed, a most undeserved
imputation has been attached by ecclesiastical historians to the
character of the Bishop of .Alexandria. No sooner had Origen
reached Caesarea, than Theoctistus and Alexander, whom we AD- 228<
have mentioned before, ordained him Priest. Demetrius was ordained
naturally indignant ; and if it had been kinder still to con- Pnest-
ceal Origen's early fault, we cannot wonder that the uncanonical
nature of his ordination induced the Bishop to publish it, by way
of proving it altogether irregular, and contrary to ecclesiastical
discipline. For by the Apostolical Constitutions2 it was for
bidden to ordain such as Origen; and the prohibition was
repeated in the Council of Nicaea. Alexander, in reply, stated
that his ground for ordaining Origen was the letter of recom
mendation which Demetrius himself had furnished. We are
not informed of the rejoinder of the latter, but he might well
have urged that his letters were given for the purpose of pro- Demetri»»
curing a friendly reception for Origen, not to be used as passports strates.s
to the Priesthood ; and that, although the Bishops of Palestine
might not be aware of the canonical incapacity for ordination of
him on whom they had laid their hands, Origen himself was,
1 Rufinus.Vers.H.E. Euseb. vi. 23. ¦ App. Constt. Cann. 21, 22.

he banishes

28 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
and had therefore incurred the triple fault of deceiving them,
and acting contrary, in two particulars, to the Canon.
In the meantime, the cause of this dispute proceeded on his
mission,1 and having accomplished his work in Greece, returned
by Ephesus2 to Alexandria, hoping perhaps to find Demetrius
more favourably disposed, and trusting to the influence of time
in softening down his anger. If such were his hopes, they
were fallacious. The Bishop retained an undiminished sense
of his fault, and determined to take public notice of it. He
assembled a Council, and laid before them not only the
irregularity of Origen's Ordination, but a series of errors
extracted from his writings. The latter must have presented a
formidable appearance, as the works which he composed during
his residence at Alexandria comprised his four books on Prin
ciples, known to us almost entirely through the translation of
Rufinus, who has softened down some of the most obnoxious
expressions; five books of his Commentary on S. John; eight
of that on Genesis ; an exposition of the first twenty-five
Psalms, and of the Lamentations of Jeremiah; two books on
the Resurrection, and ten of Stromateis, in imitation of those
of his master Clement.3 The Council having examined the
extracts submitted to it from the works of Origen,4 unani
mously condemned them, and Demetrius not only forbade their
author to teach, but even to reside, in Alexandria. Origen,
leaving his school to the care of his disciple Heraclas, retired to
Caesarea. Demetrius shortly afterwards assembled another
Council, in which, with the consent of the Bishops, he pro-

1 S. Epiphanius, Hares. 64, (i. 524) bius, instead of relating it at length,
relates the sufferings which Origen refers us to the second book of his
endured at Athens for the sake of the Apology for that writer. All that we
Truth, but immediatelyafter invalidates know is contained in the Bibliotheca
his own testimony, by saying, that he of Photius, and in a fragment of the
was in that city for the sake of ad- defence of Origen by Pamphilus.
vancing himself in philosophy. As Eusebius contradicts himself as to the
Origen was now more than forty, the time of Origen's flight from Alexan-
latter assertion is impossible. dria ; and Baronius, in noticing the
2 So Huet, at least, very probably discrepancy between his chronicle and
conjectures.— Origeniana i.ll,p.89.D. his history, falls into the mistake of
3 Euseb. H. E. vi. 24. supposing that he was excommunicated
4 This part of Origen's history is before his departure.— See the able
unfortunately obscure, because Euse- note of Valesius ; Euseb. H. E. vi. 26.

SECT. III.] ORIGEN CONDEMNED. 29
ceeded to the length of deposing and excommunicating Origen ; ™? deposes
Heraclas was present, and subscribed the sentence.
It is not wonderful that in later ages the traditions of the
Alexandrine Church, as well Catholic as Jacobite, should have
branded Origen with the title of magician. The Cathohc
writers of that country, not possessing his works, nor having
been aware of the really great and excellent points in his
character, knowing that S. Cyril, whose memory is deservedly
precious among both the Orthodox and Monophysites, was a
bitter enemy of both Origen and his followers, considering also
the edict of Justinian, in which the latter were condemned, as
possessing the same weight as the decree of an (Ecumenical
Council, have naturally loaded with every kind of calumny the
memory ol one whom they were thus from their births taught
to hate, while Demetrius, his opponent, is reckoned among
the Saints.
The days of this Prelate were now drawing to a close ; and ^tween
his last moments were embittered by the knowledge that his and"Sex™
sentence of deposition and excommunication was disregarded anrtria-
by the Bishops of Palestine. By them Origen was, as before,
invited to preach ; his disciples were numerous : the most
illustrious among them were Theodorus, afterwards known by
the name of S. Gregory1 the Wonderworker, from his astonish
ing miracles, and Tryphon2 the philosopher.
Alexandrian writers affirm3 Demetrius to have been, in a
supernatural degree, possessed of the power of knowing the
hearts of those who came to the Holy Communion; and
assert that an extraordinary degree bf purity in his Church
was the result. What is more certain is, that he wrote to
the other Patriarchs on the Paschal computation ; and,
from his time, as some think,4 it became the office as the
Nicene Council made it the duty of the Bishop of Alex
andria, to give notice every year on what day Easter would
fall. He is also said to have invented the system of Epacts.
Having governed his Church for more than forty-two years Death of s.
and1 a half, a longer period than the Chair of S. Mark was ever
1 S. Greg. Nyss. in vita S. Greg. 3 Renaudot p. 20.
Thaum. 4 Eutychius i. 362.
2 S. Hieron. de Vir. 111. 57, (ii. 297.)

30

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[BOOK I.

filled by one Prelate with the exception of S. Athanasius,1 he
was taken away from the evil to come, dying three years and a
half before the commencement of the cruel persecution under
Maximin.

SECTION IV.

Heraclas,
Patr. XIII.
A.D. 231.*

renews the
sentence
against Origen.

Heraclas,2 the former friend,3 and subsequent condemner of
Origen, succeeded to the vacant chair. He appears to have
been far advanced in years, and on that account transferred, not
only the Christian school, but also the greater part of his Epis
copal labours, to Dionysius, his successor.4 He renewed the
sentence5 of excommunication against Origen ; and in his Canons
on Penance, inveighed severely against the intercourse which the
Faithful carried on with proscribed heretics ; among whom
probably the Origenians were uppermost in his mind. Whe
ther it were either wise or justifiable to pursue the system of
Demetrius, and thus to hazard a schism between the Sees of
Cassarea and Alexandria, appears very questionable ; the rather
that Origen was now, by the testimony of all, exerting himself
greatly for the faith. Besides carrying on his Commentaries
on the Old Testament, he was labouring at his parallel
arrangements of Greek versions with the Hebrew text. In

1 Among the Jacobite Patriarchs,
John XVII., surnamed El Touki,
enjoyed that dignity for forty-three
years and two months, namely, from
1675 till 1718. And Politian, the
thirty-ninth Catholic Patriarch, is said
by Eutychius, though probably by
mistake, to have held it forty-six
years. — See Book iii. sect. 6.
2 Euseb. H. E. vi. 26.
3 Severus names this Patriarch,
Hierocla ; Eutychius, Hercol ; Makri
zi, Theoclas: — our Coptic Catalogue,
Barchelas. 4 Baronius asserts (ii. 558,) that
Heraclas was well disposed towards
Origen. The contrary is shewn to
have been the case by Pagi, in the
same place, and Huet. Origen. i. 2, 15,

from the testimony of Gennadius, and
the author of the Life of S. Pachomius.
Indeed Baronius himself confesses as
much, in quoting the constitution of
the Emperor Justinian against Origen,
addressed to Menas, ix. 585.
6 So Justinian : (Conf.Labbe's Coun
cils : torn. v. 660. — 'O /cut' ixeivo
fiaKaplrrjs 'HpaKKas . . Xk fx4aov tov
KOXOV fflTOU TOVTOV QeTlKtV, WS TOU
vonTipov fifai/(ou ocxa a\7)Qas. — And
in the Life of S. Pachomius : (Acta
Bolland. Mai. torn. iii. ad finem.)
"tirb 'HpaK\q toO ttjs AKi^aySpeias
apxienio-Ko'nov ttjs $KK\riaias lfyl<pri.
* The date of this event is attended
with great difficulties. — See Le Quien,
ii. 391,2; Baron, ii. 519,1; Pagi,ibid;
Scherius, p. 20.

SECT. IV.] THE OCTAPLA. 31
his Octapla were eight columns, arranged thus : — the Hebrew The octapia.
in Hebrew characters ; the same in Greek characters ; the
version of Aquila ; that of Symmachus ; that of the Seventy ;
that of Theodotion; and finally two other versions discovered
by Origen himself, called the Fifth and Sixth, because their
authors were unknown. The Hexapla omitted the Fifth and
Sixth versions ; the Tetrapla, also the two Hebrew texts.
On this work the compiler was engaged twenty-eight years.
He also was the means of crushing in its infancy the heresy of
of Beryllus, Bishop of Bostra in Arabia, and of bringing back
its author to the True Faith. He taught that our Saviour
had not existed as a separate1 and self-existent Person before
the Incarnation.
But Heraclas was soon called upon to set an example to a.d. 235.
his flock of courage and resolution. Alexander having been
murdered in his tent by the gigantic and brutal Maximin,
was succeeded by him. This Goth,2 having discovered a con
spiracy formed against him by the servants of the late emperor,
among whom were several Christians, took thence occasion to
Commence a general persecution, which is reckoned as the Seventh ; „
° r 3 ' Persecution
it was, however, not so sanguinary as many. It was principally of Maximin:
directed against the Bishops and Priests ; and it appears that
Heraclas,3 to avoid its fury, retired from Alexandria. Several
inhabitants, however, both of that city, and of other parts of
Egypt, glorified God by their sufferings in it. On its cessation,
Heraclas returned to the city. Whether it were now, or at an
earlier period, that the fame of his learning induced the Ecclesias
tical writer, Julius Africanus,4 to visit Alexandria, is not certain ;
1 Fleury says (vi. 12,) " et qu'il assertion, that our Lord had not pre-
n'avoit point d'autre divinite que celle existed, kot' iSiuV obaias wtpiypa<pi\v,
du Pere Qui habitoit en Lui.' ' This or, as it would have been expressed at
is, thus stated, (and it is a fair trans- a later period, kot' ISlav viroo-Taacus
lation of the words of Eusebius, Trepiypatpfy , where irepiypa<pii is, as
ifnroX\.Teoop.ivr\v AIt§ ii6vi)v t))v Valesius proves, to be taken in the
naTpudiy) a Catholic verity ; and to logical sense of differentia, he is
maintain the opposite doctrine is undoubtedly heretical.
Tritheism. But, if Beryllus were 2 By his mother's side he was of the
heretical on this point, it was by Alan nation, which was of the Slavonic
teaching that the Son was not family.
properly, but only appellatively and 3 Ruinart, Act. Sine. 41.
participatively God. In his other 4 Euseb. H. E. vi. 31.

32 patriarchate of Alexandria. [book i.
whenever the event took place, it is a strong testimony to the
merits of Heraclas, because Africanus was the friend of Origen.
Alexandria was fortunately no sufferer in the civil commotions
which followed; the Gordians appeared as claimants of the
purple in Africa, and lost their lives in the attempt ; Puppienus
and Balbinus assumed it, with brighter auspices, at Rome, and
the head of Maximin was sent by his soldiers, engaged in the
siege of Aquileia, as an acceptable present to the Senate. But
the Capitoline games put an end to the fives and reigns of
emperors in whose election the army had had no voice ; and
the young Gordian, a mere child, who had been previously made
Caesar to gratify the people, succeeded. In an expedition
Emperor, against the Persians, Philip, Prefect of the Praetorians, excited
the soldiery against him, and in spite of his earnest entreaties
for a share in the empire, — for the title of Caesar, — for the
Prefecture of the Praetorians, — for the government of a Province,
— and lastly for life, caused him to be murdered, and assumed
the purple.
Heraclas did not long survive this event; he was removed
from his labours after having governed the See of Alexandria
more than fifteen years.1 The Egyptian writers, having nothing
authentic to tell of him, are reduced to put forth fables ; as that
he was the first Bishop of Alexandria to whom the title of Pope
was given; whereas the mere student of Ecclesiastical History
knows it to have been in use long before the time of Heraclas ;
and, originally, to have applied even to Priests, — and to have
been of common use as regards Bishops.2 Again, it is affirmed
1 Euseb. H. E. vi. 35, says sixteen: Ethiopian; so also the Syrians term
but he must be understood to mean the Jacobite Patriarch of Antioch,
part of sixteen, or fifteen complete : and the Catholic or Mafrian of
in the same way as where he mentions Assyria. Eutychius's account of the
forty-three years as the period of the origin of the name at Alexandria is as
Episcopate of Demetrius, he must be follows (i. 332) :— One of the twenty
understood to mean more than forty- Bishops whom Heraclas created, named
two.  Le Quien, ii. 393. Ammonius, having in some manner
2 Tertullian's testimony (de Pudicit. transgressed the Canons, the Patriarch
cap. xiii.) is clear : so are the su- visited his Diocese, to restore order.

perscriptions of many letters to S. The people heard their
Cyprian : even by the confession of address him as Abba, father, and
Pamelius and Rigaltius. To this day, reasoned thus : If we call the Bishop
the Alexandrian Church, both Coptic Father, and he calls Heraclas Father,
and Catholic, uses it ; so does the then the Patriarch must be our grand-

SECT. IV.] OPINIONS OF ORIGEN. 33
that he created twenty new sees, a thing most unlikely, since
it is hardly probable that in his short patriarchate he should
even have consecrated that number of Bishops. Of his peni
tential Canons, once, particularly those on conversation with
heretics, of considerable reputation, nothing remains at this
day. As Origen will scarcely again appear in our pages, and as
his teaching and his influence operated, both for good and for
evil, on the Alexandrian Church long after his decease, it will
not be out of place to touch a little on his doctrine and opinions,
the rather because disputes to which they gave rise will hereafter
occupy our attention. He is to be judged not by his earlier
writings, nor by his famihar communications to friends ; not
by the interpretation of his enemies, nor as an author, the whole
of whose teaching we possess : but by the works of his matured origen's
° x \ ^ # writings :
judgment, and which he himself intended for publication. ?°7*J.be
Again, writing before the Council of Nicaea, he is not to be
hastily condemned, should some of his statements appear to
differ verbally from the Confession of the Three Hundred and
Eighteen : provided it shall appear that, allowing his words that
fair latitude of expression which will be conceded to them by
all unprejudiced readers, they are not opposed to its meaning.
How successfully Bishop Bull has vindicated the memory of
Origen from the imputation of heresy, so far as regards the
Divinity of the Son of God, the English scholar needs not to
be told. He might, perhaps, have rendered his apology still
more triumphant, (though not more convincing,) had he con
fined himself less entirely to the Reply to Celsus, allowedly
the most satisfactory of Origen's remaining works.
His express and formal statements on the Mystery of the
Adorable Trinity are not to be set aside by expressions of a
more ambiguous character, and phrases which, in themselves,
might receive a heterodox interpretation. That Joshua, in pass-
father, Baba ; whence Papa. Makrizi that Balsamon, so strenuous a defender
(65, 66,) repeats the tale with of Oriental rights, should affirm {Jus.
variations. This is at least equal in Gr. Lat. lib. vii.) that this title was
probability to the hypothesis of bestowed by the Roman See on S.
those who derive the Roman name Cyril, when acting as its Legate
Papa from jPater Patrice, or from in the Council of Ephesus.
Paulus and Petrus. It is singular I)

34

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[BOOK

his clear
statementsof the
Divinity of
the Son of
God :

ing the Jordan, was a type of the very God1; that the rulers,
on account of the Divinity2 of Jesus, offered their supplications
to Him ; that the same Christ That spake with the woman3
by the well, was the God of the humble; that it was the
Son of God That said, No man shall see My Face, and live4;
that His also are the words to be considered, If I am a,
Master, where is My fear ?5 — words which the prophet ascribes
to none other than Jehovah ; — that Christ is God, the Son
of God,6 the Very Word, the Very Wisdom, the Very Verity ;
that he who shall say, There was a time when the Word
was not,7 says in effect, There was a time when Wisdom was
not, Truth was not, Life was not ; that if the Son of God
were not Eternal,8 neither could the Father be Eternal;
that the Magi brought gifts to Him9 That was composed of
God and mortal man; that God appeared in a human body
for the benefit of our race10; that God, Who is above all created
things,11 was made man; that the Father and the Son are
One12 in identity of Will ; that all things that are in the

1 Horn. de Engastrimytho (ii.497, E.)
ITpo tt}? tou Kvpiov fJLOV 'lf)(70V XptCTTOV
4iriSrjfj.ias aSiiyaToy tfv Ttva trape\9e?y
K.T.\. &tTTT€p TOP '\opb*d.VT]V OVK t\v
ovSevbs &5oTroi7Jo'ai 7) 'Itjctov' (tov
a\Ti6ivov 0eoO tvttos ?jv 4Ke7yos 'I-rjaovs.)
K.T.X. 2 In S. Joan. torn. xiii. 58 (iv. 274.
A.) Twp a.px6vTatv Ttvas, KaTaTreirXriy&Tas
TJV 86yap.LV Avrov, Kai t^v QeoTTJTa,
irpo(TTTe<pevy4val AvTq,
3 In S. Joan. torn. xiii. 28, (iv. 238,
A.B.) The passage is too long for
quotation. * In S. Matt. torn. xii. 43, (iii. 565,
C.) Tby 'Tthv tou ©eou KexPVaa-TlKeyai
MwaeT, Kai Avtup eTyat Tby 4ipi}K6Ta'
Ou yap ctyeTcu ti.v6p(airos. k.t.K.
" In S. Joan, torn. i. 31 (iv. 33, B.)
El K6pi6s elpu'Ey&i, troo, k.t.X. AovKoi
Tvyxdyovai Kupiou tov ^aiTrjpos auT&v
KaXovp.4pov. 6 Cont. Celsum. iii. 41. (i. 474, A.)
>'Ov ireireiV,ue0a ap^ijflep eTyai 0foi> Kai
'Tibv Qeov, Autos 6 AvTO\6yos iffTi Kai t\
A'lToaofia ko) t) AvToaKT)Bfla.

7 Peri Archon, iv. 28. (i. 190, E.)
Quomodo ergo potest dici, quia fuit
aliquando quando non fuit Filius ?
Nihil enim aliud est id dicere, nisi fait
aliquando quando Veritas non erat,
quando Sapientia non erat.quandoVita
non erat.
8 See the famous passage, In Jerem.
Horn. ix. 4, (iii. 181.)
5 Cont. Celsum. i. 60, (i. 375, A.)
Awpa a, Xv1 oijtciis oyofidaui, avvBeru
Tip! 4k ®eou Kai ayOpcinrov 8vt]tov
rrpoafiyeyKay. 10 Cont. Celsum. i. 68, (i. 383, D.)
n<3s euh6yoi hv tis A&TdV . . . ^ kot1
4irayy*\lav tou [©eou] — for so it seems
best to read with later Editors, — ®ebv
€?foi TriffTeiJoi 4v av6po)irivo> tpavevTa
awjj.ari 4ir' evepytaiq tov ysvovs rjfxuv ;
11 In S. Joan. torn. ii. 28, (iv. 87, B.)
0ebs/O {nrep iraVTa t&. yeyrjTa, 4vt)vQpd>-
TTJO^y. 12 Cont. Celsum. viii. 12,(i.751, A.)
'Ep ttJ trvtSttiti tov &ov\ev/ia,TOS.

SECT. IV.] OPINIONS OF ORIGEN. 35
Father1 are in the Son ; — these clear and definite assertions
cannot be overthrown by teaching of more dubious orthodoxy.
So that we shall endeavour to explain, or adopt in their most
orthodox sense, such expressions2 as, that the operation of the
Father extends to all things; that of the Son, as less than
the Father, to such as are rational only; that of the Holy
Ghost, as less than the Son, to such as are holy only; as,
again, that the Son3 is a Second God ; that the Word, com
pared with the Father, is not the Truth,4 but compared with
us, the Image only of the Truth ; that the Son5 is not the
Most High God over all ; that the Father, and not the Son,6
is to be addressed in prayer ; that the Father and the Son are
hypostatically Two,7 it being usual, in the time of Origen, to
use hypostasis in the sense of substance.
Again, with respect to the Divinity of the Holy Ghost, the of the
statements of Origen are, in many places, clearly and formally the hoi.y
orthodox. If the soul,8 he writes, have not God, if it have not
the Son, saying, I and the Father will come unto him, and
make Our abode in him, if it have not the Holy Ghost, that
soul is deserted ; but it is inhabited when it is full of God.
The Jews, he says, appeared to thirst after God, the only Fountain
of Waters, but because they thirsted not after Christ and the
Holy Ghost, neither can they drink of God.9 In like manner
he speaks of the Trinity That rules all things,10 the Trinity
That is to be adored11: and yet, in other places, he seems, as we
have seen above, to deny the co-equality of the Holy Spirit
with the Father.
1 In Jerem. Horn. viii. 2, (iii. 171, 6 Cont. Celsum. viii. 13 et seq.
C.) riaPTo yap '6aa To5 0eo5, ToiavTa 4v 7 Cont. Celsum. viii. 12, (i. 751, A.)
aAtijj 4aTtv. 8 In Jerem. Horn. viii. 1, (iii. 170,
2 Peri Archon, i. 5, (i. 62, D. E.) C.)
This is one of the passages that 9 In Jerem. Horn. xvii. 9, (iii. 251,
Rufinus softened down, and indeed E.) "ESofaP SeSn^Kevai p.las irriyrjs tZu
totally changed ; but it is preserved at iSaTaiy, tov Qeov, IooScuor 4ireifir) Se
the end of the Epistle of Justinian to ouk iBlifaaav Tby Xpiarbv Kai Tb 'Ayiov
Menas. npeO,ua, owe txovo~l *¦'*'" ovi% airb tov
3 Cont. Celsum. v. 39, (i. 608, D.E.) 0«w.
4 S. Hieronym. ad Avit. Ep. 59. 10 'ApxHrijv.— In S. Matt. torn. xv.
6 Cont. Celsum. viii. 714, (i. 752, 31, (iii. 698, B.)
D. ) "Earai Be Tipor . . . iirortBtadai Tby n UpoaKvyririiy.— In S. Joan. torn.
~S.vTT\pa ilvai top fityiarov 4irl naat vi. 17, (iv. 133, C.)
®6oV a\\J oVrt yt rjp.ets Toiovroy.
d2

Incarnation;

36 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
On the subject of the Incarnation, Origen's doctrine can
hardly be accused of heresy ; and if exposed to a charge of
error, it is easy to explain how that error arose, and to define
how far it extends. That the Word, Consubstantial with God,
on the as touching Deity, is Consubstantial1 with man as touching
humanity, — that the Hypostatical Union2 is everlasting,— that
the Two Natures yet remain unmixed and unconfounded ; that
Christ really and verily died,3 really and verily ascended into
Heaven in our flesh, and in our flesh sitteth at the Right Hand
of God ; — these things are almost as clearly asserted by Origen,
as by S. Cyril or S. Leo. His occasional obscurity and appear
ance of heterodoxy arises from his belief in the pre-existence of
souls ; whence it followed, in his judgment, that there was an
union of the Word with the human soul, before the union of
the Word with the body. This doctrine, though erroneous, is
not heretical ; for Origen most carefully guards himself against
appearing to teach that there was a time when the Soul of
Christ was not hypostatically united to the Divine Word :
nay, he clearly deduces4 Its sanctity and impeccability from
that perpetual hypostatical union.
But the warmest admirers of Origen must be contented
if they can vindicate him from the charge of grave heresy;
for the errors and absurdities which abound in his earlier
writings, and more especially in his treatise Peri Archon, are too
manifest to be denied, and too gross to be excused. That God
created in the beginning a certain number of pure spirits,
capable of retaining their original holiness, but also capable of
falling, — that the greater part of these spirits actually have
fallen, — that according to their degrees of guilt they were
punished by being united to matter more or less gross, — that
accordingly some became angels, some stars, and others men ; that
the Blessed are still exposed to the liability of sin, and that, on the
other hand, Satan will one day repent and be pardoned, so that
God shall be All in All : — these are but some of the many
doctrines which, however hypothetically proposed, have rendered
1 Cont. Celsum. vi. 47, (i. 669, E.) » Cont. Celsum. 56 (i. 430, E.)
2 Peri Archon, ii. 6, 3, (i. 90, B.)
Deinceps inseparabiliter Ei et indis- 4 Peri Archon, ii. 6, 6, (i. 91, A.)
sociabiliter inherent.

SECT. IV.J OPINIONS OF ORIGEN. 37
the authority of Origen so small, and have exposed him to
suspicion of, and condemnation for, heresy in matters of graver
import. It is a curious, and not unprofitable, inquiry, in what degree, influence of
and to what effect, the authority of Origen influenced the sub- the Aiexan-
sequent history of the Alexandrian Church. Notwithstanding
his general condemnation, in after ages, both by East and West,
and the more particular odium which attached to his name in
Egypt, his influence, (or rather that of his school,) pervaded the
Church of that country in a manner of which, at the time, his
adversaries and his supporters were alike unconscious. In
reading the works of Origen, we are not to consider his tenets
and opinions as those of one isolated Doctor ; — they are rather
an embodiment of the doctrines handed down in the Catecheti
cal School of Alexandria. And this school was the type, or
model, according to which the mind of the Alexandrian Church
was cast : the philosophy of Pantaenus descended to Clemens, —
and from him it was caught by Origen. Heraclas, though
opposed to the principles of the latter, gave evident tokens of
having unconsciously imbibed them : — and, still later, Pierius
was known as the second Origen.
The truth is, that in every people there is a national ten
dency to carry certain doctrines to an extreme length : an
hereditary predisposition, so to speak, to a particular heresy.
Thus, the English Church has, from its earliest infancy, evinced
a tendency to Pelagianism, and the Ethiopic to Judaism.
Now, the two great forms into which heresy has divided itself
in all ages, have been rationalism, and that which, for want displayed in
of a better term, we may call spiritualism, or mysticism, of the Aiex-
Under the former division we may class Arianism, and Nes- church to
torianism ; under the latter, Sabellianism, Monophysitism, and
Monothelitism. To the one, the Church of Antioch was given
from the earhest times ; to the other, that of Alexandria. Now
of this class was the mind of Origen, the mortal enemy of
rationalism, and of all the heresies springing up from it. And
Egypt never gave way to any such : and from Egypt arose the
Doctors by whom they were overthrown : Arianism by S.
Athanasius, Nestorianism by S. Cyril. But to mysticism it fell
an easy prey. The head-quarters of Sabellianism were fixed in

38 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
the Pentapolis ; and S. Dionysius, who first exposed that heresy,
was not an Egyptian by birth or education. But when, in that
exposure, he himself appeared to rationalise, his Dicecese was up
in arms against the innovation in doctrine. Again : — we may
wonder that ApoUinaris, the forerunner of Eutychianism,
should have risen in Syria, till we remember that his father,
the elder ApoUinaris, was born and bred in Alexandria. In the
same manner Alexandria yielded to the teaching of Dioscorus ;
while that heresy as well as Monothelitism was first detected and
exposed in the rationalistic city of Constantinople.
It is therefore certain, that the same principle which dictated
the Angelic theories of Origen, gave birth to the subtle heresy
of the Jacobites, and the still more refined poison of Monothe
litism. But it is also true that the same tendency, subject in
this instance to Catholic authority, produced a S. Athanasius
and a S. Cyril. The tendency, in itself, one way or the other, is
neither good nor bad ; the greatest saints have given proofs of
sharing it. S. Chrysostom could not have been a Monophysite,
nor S. Cyril a Nestorian.
Nor is it any objection to urge, that the doctrine of Origen
has been accused of Arianism, but never of Sabellianism, and
that it was actually appealed to by the Arians in defence of their
tenets. It is the property of heresy, that apparently opposing
forms should be, in the long run, identical. Thus, nothing can,
at first sight, seem more directly contrary to Arianism than
Nestorianism ; yet, in truth, the result of both is the same.—
And, indeed, there are passages in the writings of Origen, of
an apparently1 Sabellian tendency, which have not received the
consideration, nor been thought worthy of the explanation, that
they merit.
In short, Origen's claim to orthodoxy will probably remain
an enigma until the end of all things. He can hardly be
accused of heresy whom S. Athanasius, S. Basil, S. Gregory
Nazianzen, S. Hilary, S. Ambrose, and S. Gregory Nyssen, have
defended ; — he can hardly be acquitted of it whom so many
synods, if not a General Council, have condemned.

1 Cont. Celsum. vi. 64. (i. 681, D.) In Jerem. Horn. xix. I. (iii. 262, A.)

SECT. V.J THE DECIAN PERSECUTION AND ITS RESULTS.

39

SECTION V.

THE DECIAN PERSECUTION AND ITS RESULTS.

If we may believe the Egyptian writers, Dionysius, who had for |-'?i""y^us'
some time past performed the duties of the Episcopate, and who AD- 24?*
now succeeded to its possession, had been brought up a Pagan,
and was1 deeply skilled in astrology. It happened that the
Epistles of S. Paul were one day lent to him by a poor woman
who had embraced the True Faith ; and a perusal of them in
duced him not only to purchase the volume, but to make in- ^0^on,rer"
quiry whether the Christians were in possession of other works
that bore a similar character. The woman advised him to apply
to the Priests of the Church ; and, on his complying with her
advice, the books which they lent, and the instructions which
they gave him, were made the means of his conversion.
The new Bishop, a Sabaite by birth, that is,2 as appears pro
bable, an Arabian, was a man of good family,3 but an idolater.
On his conversion he studied under Origen, for whom4 he always
1 Renaudot, p. 25, who seems, in
the next page, by mistake to attribute
this tradition to Heraclas.
2 See Byaeus, § 28, Comm. Praev. in
Vit. S. Dionys. (October, Bolland. ii.)
But the author of his life, prefixed to
the beautiful Propaganda edition of his
Fragments, strenuously controverts this
opinion, and affirms the author of the
Chronicon Orientale to have meant
nothing but Pagan by the term Sabaite.
3 Ruinart, Act. Sine. pp. 179, 80,
(ed. 2, which we always quote.)
4 It is said indeed that he had
written a treatise against Origen,
(Anastasius, Qusest. sup. Genes. 25,)
but this writer must confuse some
other Dionysius with the Bishop of
Alexandria. Baronius has fallen into
the mistake of supposing the latter
opposed to Origen: the contrary is
shewn by Pagi, 246, iii. iv. ; HaUoix,
Orig. Def. i.22; and Huet, Origeniana,
i. 3, 10.

* There is a great difficulty with
lespect to this date. Sollerius gives
248 as the year of the accession of
S. Dionysius : and to this end he
supposes with the Chronicon Orientale
a vacancy of the Patriarchate for a
year and some months. Byaeus seems
more probably to assert that S. Dio
nysius was consecrated in or about the
February of a.d. 247 : — and deceased
in that month, or the preceding, of
A. u. 265. Thus he would have sat
only seventeen years complete, as
Eusebius, (H. E. vii. 28,) says, and
would also have assumed the Episco
pate in the third year of Philip, as
Eusebius (H. E. vi. 35) also testifies ;
which third year ended in March, 247.
It is not probable, as Byaeus observes,
that in a time of peace, as the reign
of Philip was, the See of Alexandria
should have remained so long vacant.

40 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
retained a sincere attachment. At a later period, he addressed
to him, when suffering for the Faith of Christ, a consolatory
treatise ;— thus repaying to him the same comfort that he had
loveto so often given to others. On the death of Origen, Dionysius
orisen' addressed an eulogy on his character to that Theoctistus,1 Bishop
of Caesarea, whom we have already had occasion to notice.
Dionysius was a man of universal learning ; and the first of
those great Fathers by whom the throne of Alexandria was
rendered so illustrious. As, like all the Masters of the Cate-
learning, chetical school, he had joined the study of philosophy to that of
Theology, he was the means of bringing many Pagans to a
knowledge of the Truth ; and he was particularly conversant
with the writings of heretics, and had an inexhaustible treasure
of arguments against their various perversions of the truth.
" I was at considerable pains," he says2 in an epistle to
Philemon, " in reading the books and acquainting myself with
the traditions of the heretics. I thus, for the moment, polluted
my soul with their most vile devices ; but I obtained this advan-
appiication tage from them, — the confuting them in my own mind, and the
DivPimt™ical abominating them much more than I had previously done.
There was a certain brother among the presbyters who was for
hindering me from this practice ; and who feared that I should
be contaminated3 with the same pollution of wickedness. My
own mind, he said, would be injured ; and I thought that he was
speaking the truth. A vision, however, sent from God, came
and confirmed me ; and a word spoken to me expressly com
manded me thus : ' Study every thing that shall come into thine
hands ; for thou art capable of examining and proving all things ;
and this habit of reading was, at the beginning, the occasion
even of thy believing.' I received the vision, as consonant with
the apostohc exhortation to them that have powerful minds,
— Be ye wise* bankers."
1 Photius.Cod.ccxxxii. — This epistle 3 We read, in Valesius's very elegant
is there said to be addressed to Theo- conjecture, aup.<pipea9ai. Heinichen,
tecnus : but this Theoctistus must be however, retains avLupipeaBai, the
meant, and not Theotecnus, who was reading of all the MSS. ; which must
his second successor. For Theoctistus then be taken in tlie sense of being
survived Origen some time. Compare carried away with.
Le Quien, iii. 543 ; and Valesius on 4 These words are affirmed by
Eusebius, vii. 1. Origen, (in S. Joan. torn, x.) and
5 Preserved by Eusebius, H.E. vii. 7. after him by S. Jerome in his Epistle

SECT. V.] THE DECIAN PERSECUTION AND ITS RESULTS. 41
On his accession to the Episcopate, he resigned the charge
of the school into the hands of Clemens, the second Master of
that name. It would appear that, before his consecration,1
Dionysius had been married.
Philip is beheved to have been a Christian, at least in creed ;
the means by which he attained the Empire shew him to
have been entirely uninfluenced by the spirit of the True Faith.
But the Church, with a single exception, enjoyed a profound
repose during the whole of his reign ; — that single exception
occurred in Alexandria. In the winter of a.d. 249, the popu- Lo<;al perse..
' A * cution at
lace were excited against the Christians by a man, who united Alexandria :
the professions of poet2 and soothsayer. The particulars of the
persecution are preserved in an epistle written by Dionysius to
Fabius3 of Antioch.
Metras,4 an aged man, was the first victim. The populace Martyrdom
seized him, and insisted on his blaspheming Christ ; on his ' "'
refusal, they fell upon him with clubs, tore his face and eyes
with sharp reeds, cast him out of Alexandria, and stoned him.
A few days after they drew a woman named Quinta into a s. Quinta,
temple, and on her refusing with horror to adore the idol which
to Minervius and Alexander, to have Saviouk, and were handed down by
been spoken by Christ : so too by tradition. — And this appears the most
S. Epiphanius, Haer. xiv. It is also probable supposition.
quoted as from S. Paul. Other ' Byseus, — (October, Bolland. ii.
Fathers are quoted by Cotelerius, on 17,) — tries hard to evade the force of
the Apostolic Constitutions, ii. 36. Tillemont's arguments, and with
Three opinions have been put forward Valesius, to prove the Bishop un-
on the subject : — The first is that of married. But the plain sense of the
Usher, (Proleg. ad S. Ignat. Epp. cap. Patriarch's own expressions (Euseb.
8,) Valesius, Huet, Salmasius, (de H. E. vi. 40) seems to shew the con-
Foenore Trapez. 809,) and Fabricius, trary.
(Cod. Apoc. N. T. i. 330,) that the 2 'O tokSp tjj it6\a. tou'ttj p-dyris ko.1
words in question are taken from the toi-mfc, says S. Dionysius. We follow
Apocryphal Gospel according to the Valesius in taking the words literally.
Hebrews. The second, that of Suicer, Others, as Pearson in his Ann. Cyp.
Thes. Eccl. ii. p. 1283; with whom ccxlix. § 1 , understand the meaning to
the modern German School of Critics, be, a doer of evil to this city in past
e. g. Paulus on S. Luke xix. 23, times, and a kind of prophet as to
appears to agree: that the sentence those that were coming upon it under
is adapted from the Parable of the Decius.
Talents, or from 1 Thessalon. v. 21, 3 Euseb. H. E. vi. 41.
or from a comparison of both passages. • There was a church dedicated in
The third is that of Cotelerius, that his honour at AIexandr.a.-Ru.nart,
the words were really those of the Act. Sine. 124.

42 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
it contained, they bound her by the feet, dragged her over the
rough pavement of the city to the place where S. Metras had
suffered, and stoned her. This second martyrdom was the signal
for a general attack on the Christians. Their houses were
assaulted _; their goods thrown into the street and burnt ; them
selves insulted, and forced either to hide themselves or to leave
the city. Dionysius escaped unharmed ; and had to bewail the
s. Apoiionia apostacy of but one from his flock. S. Apollonia, who had
devoted herself to virginity, and had attained a great age, was
seized by the Pagans, who, after brutally striking her on the
face till her teeth fell out, threatened her with being burnt alive,
having lighted a fire for the purpose, unless she would praise
the gods. She appeared to hesitate, and the persecutors
imagining themselves successful, loosed her ; but she only availed
herself of freedom to shew her constancy and courage, by entering
of her own accord the blazing pile. They then beset the house
and s. sera- of Serapion, attacked him as he sat by his own hearth, tortured
plOD' him in a fearful manner, and having broken all his bones,
carried him to the roof of the house, and thence threw him into
the street. No street nor lane could be passed in safety ; bands
of infuriated Pagans paraded every public place, compelling
those whom they met to blaspheme Christ, or burning their
houses and torturing their persons. All these Martyrs are by
the Western, as well as the Eastern Church, reckoned among
the Saints.
a.d. 249. Thjg persecution seems to have lasted for nearly six months,
and to have been put a stop to for a brief season by the murder
of Philip, at Verona. He was succeeded by Decius, elevated to
the purple in Pannonia. Immediately on his accession, the
Decian eighth persecution began ; it was more terrible than any, except-
Persecution: ;ng ^ne \ast; an(j the most successful of all. For, in the interval
of peace which the Church had enjoyed, faith and love had
begun to wax cold ; worldliness and self-indulgence had crept in ;
and this to such a degree, that some of the holier Bishops gave
warning, while all was yet tranquil, of the storm about to burst
forth, and which they saw to be necessary for the purification of
the Church.
The account which Eusebius gives us of the sufferings of the
Christians at Alexandria, is the more valuable, as being extracted
from the letters of Dionysius himself, fragments of which are

SECT. V.] THE DECIAN PERSECUTION AND ITS RESULTS. 43
preserved both by that historian and by S. Jerome. They were
addressed, when the Church had regained her tranquillity, to
Fabius, Patriarch of Antioch, Didymus, Domitius, and others.
On the first tidings of the persecution, the consternation in terror,
Alexandria was dreadful. Some of those who had previously
made a high profession, ran voluntarily to the altars, exclaiming
that they had never been Christians, and sacrificing with
alacrity ; others, urged on by their neighbours, came with pale
countenances and trembling hmbs, amidst the jeers and mockery andaposta-
. cies at Alex-
of the heathen, who evidently perceived them to be almost audria.
equally afraid of living by sin, or dying in tornlents. Others
confessed the name of Christ before the magistrate, were
thrown into prison, and after a few days' endiu*ance, apostatized ;
others, after resisting the torture for some time, yielded to it, and
offered sacrifice.
S. Dionysius gives us an account of what befel himself, pre
facing his statement with an appeal to God that his story is
exactly true. The Edict for persecution had no sooner reached
xilexandria, than Sabinus, Augustal Prsefect, dispatched a ser
geant of police in search of the Prelate. The Bishop remained
quietly in his house ; while the party of soldiers sought him for
four days, in every unlikely place, roads, rivers, and fields ;
but, by a divine infatuation, never thought of searching the
Bishop's own habitation. On the fifth day, Dionysius received
a supernatural intimation to fly ; he was accompanied by his s. pionysius
children and several of his priests. During his journey, he was
made useful to some of his flock ; probably in confirming their
minds, and alleviating their fears.
At sunset, however, the Bishop1 fell into the hands of his
persecutors ; and, it being then not more than five or six o'clock,
was examined before the magistrates, and sentenced to exile at is exiled,
Taposiris. This was a httle city in Mareotis, about a day's
journey from Alexandria. A priest named Timothy, who is by
some believed to have been the Bishop's son, was absent when
Dionysius left his house ; on returning there towards evening,
he found the place occupied by soldiers, and learnt that the
1 The account of S. Dionysius is unraveling it, and we have followed
involved in many difficulties. Byusus, his hypothesis.
cap. v. has taken great pains in

44 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
Prelate had been sent to Taposiris. After hearing these tidings,
he took the road to Mareotis, and the anguish that he felt was
sufficiently displayed in his countenance. A countryman, whom
he met, inquired the cause of his agitation. On learning the
misfortune that had befallen Dionysius, the man, then going to
a nuptial feast, at that time carried on through the whole night,
hastened to the house where the banquet was prepared, and
stated the circumstance to the assembled guests. They arose as
one man, laid hands on what they could find as instruments of
and rescued, defence, and assaulted the house where the Bishop was confined.
The guard took them for banditti, and dispersed. Dionysius,
who had retired to rest, was at first under the same mistake,
and pointing to his clothes, bade them take all he had, and
begone. When he discovered then- real design, and perceived
that they were bent on his liberation, he refused to stir ; and
besought them, if they were really willing to do him a service,
to rid his guards of any further trouble, by cutting off his head.
It was in vain that they prayed and conjured him to have pity,
if not on his own life, at least on the state of his Church ; he
remained inflexible. They at length had recourse to actual
violence ; and raising him forcibly from his bed, carried him
off. All those who had been with him followed; he made
choice of two only, Peter and Cams, to be his companions, and
with them retired into the desert till the violence of the perse
cution should have exhaused itself.
ofTjiSian ^n ^e meantlme lts f^T was unabated. Julian,1 an aged
Christian, an inhabitant of Alexandria, was summoned to the
tribunal. He was so much tormented by the gout, as to be
unable to walk without the support of two assistants, and lean
ing on their shoulders he appeared before the judge. One of
them, at the first sight of the terrible preparations, lost courage,
s. cronion, and apostatised ; the other, whose name was Cronion, but who
was surnamed Eunus, together with Julian, witnessed a good
confession. They were bound on camels, scourged through the
whole extent of the city, and burnt alive without the gate. As
they were passing to the pile, amidst the insults of the populace, a
s. Besas, soldier named Besas protected them to the utmost of his ability ;
1 Euseb. vi. 41. — There was also a cation of this martyr, which was re-
church at Alexandria, under the invo- stored by S. Eulogius. Ruinart, 126.

SECT. V.J THE DECIAN PERSECUTION AND ITS RESULTS. 45
and the rabble, enraged, cried out that he deserved the same
fate. He was taken before the judge; confessed himself a
Christian, and was beheaded. It does not appear that he re
ceived the Sacrament of Baptism ; supplied to him, in this case,
according to the behef of the early Church, by the Baptism of
Blood whereof he was counted worthy. Macar, a Libyan, and s. Macar,
worthy, says S. Dionysius, of his name (which signifies blessed),
was burnt alive. By the same means Epimachus and Alexander,
after enduring a tedious imprisonment, the torture of the iron
hooks, and scourging, were called to receive their crown.
Dionysia, the mother of several children, was among the Mar- s. monysia,
tyrs ; Ammonarium, a virgin, having declared her resolution, at
the commencement of her examination, not to utter a word, was
tormented long and cruelly, but without flinching from her
determination. Mercuria also, and another Ammonarium, wit- and others.
nessed a good confession. The judge, mortified to be thus
baffled by women, contented himself with causing the other
prisoners of the same sex to be beheaded. Heron, Ater, and
Isidorus, died gloriously for the Name of Christ. Dioscorus, confession
a youth of fifteen years old, was brought before the magistrate oorus-
in company with these elder Christians. Thinking that his
tender age would make life the sweeter, and death the bitterer,
the judge addressed him kindly ; failing in this, he tried
torture with as httle effect ; he then caused the three others
to be tormented and finally burnt ; and afterwards renewed
his offers to Dioscorus, hoping that the sight of the suffer
ings of his friends might overcome his obstinacy. At length
he ordered him to be set at liberty, giving him time, he said,
to reconsider the subject ; and the youth retired to Diony
sius in the wilderness. Nemesion was at first accused of
robbery ; having repelled that charge, he was denounced as a
Christian ; tortured twice as much as the robbers with whom he
was tried ; and finally burnt with them. A short time after
wards four soldiers, and another Christian, came before the
prefect ; a prisoner was at that moment undergoing the torture,
and his resolution was evidently failing. Advancing to a spot
where he could see them, the soldiers made signs to the sufferer
to hold out but for a few monents longer, and so secure his
reward. The bystanders regarded them with astonishment;

46 patriarchate of Alexandria. [book i.
but before any accusation was brought against them, they volun
tarily came forward, and professed themselves Christians.
Wearied out with cruelty, and terrified at the wide spread of
Christianity, the prefect ordered them to immediate execution ;
and they were hurried to it, exhibiting tokens of the liveliest
JOy-
Confessors But those who suffered at Alexandria were by no means the
m Egypt. wna[e 0f the Egyptian believers who laid down their lives for
the Faith. Many were torn in pieces by popular violence in the
other cities ; many fled to the mountains, and there perished
with hunger and thirst, cold and weariness ; many fell into the
hands of the Arabians, and were reduced to slavery ; many
made their escape, but were never afterwards heard of. Among
the last was Chseremon, Bishop of Nilopolis, with his wife.
Some, who were overtaken by the soldiers sent in pursuit,
bribed the officer to liberate them. Ischyrion, who was the
deputy of a magistrate, was commanded by him to sacrifice to
idols. He refused ; and after suffering, in the first instance,
reproaches, in the next, ill-treatment, was thrust through by his
master with a stake.
Dionysius,- after giving Fabius the above account, refers to
those who had fallen away in time of persecution. " Those god
like Martyrs," he says, " now the assessors of Christ, and the
partners of His Kingdom, the sharers of His Judgment, and to
be fellow-judges with Him, while they were on earth, received
some of their brethren who had lapsed and were guilty of
having sacrificed to idols, and beholding their conversion and
penitence, and believing that it was acceptable to Him, Who
willeth rather the repentance than the death of a sinner, ad
mitted them to their communion. What then, my brethren,
do ye advise with respect to such ? What are we to do ? Shall
we shew ourselves to be of the same opinion with the Martyrs,
and uphold a matter decided, or rather a grace conferred by
them, and have mercy on those that were pitied by them ; or
shall we render their decision null and void, and make our
selves judges of then- sentence, and grieve their kindness,
and overthrow appointed order, and offend God ?" We shall
presently see the importance of the inquiry.
In the meantime, Alexandria was not deserted. The Priests

SECT. V.] THE DECIAN PERSECUTION AND ITS RESULTS. 47
Maximus, Dioscorus, Demetrius, and Lucius, are mentioned by
Dionysius1 as having been particularly active in the city; Faus-
tinus and Aquila in the country. Of the Deacons, Faustus,
Chseremon, and more especially Eusebius, signalised and en
dangered themselves by their zeal in visiting the prisoners, and
in burying the dead.
It was while he was in the desert of Libya that Dionysius s. monysius
addressed his exhortation on Martyrdom to Origen, who was origen on
now imprisoned, had already suffered on the rack, and was °m*
threatened with death by fire. Of this work, considerable
fragments remain.2 It commences by a statement3 of the brevity
of all earthly sufferings ; it proceeds to set forth that God,
to Whom4 only all wisdom belongs, appoints the measure and
the term of our afflictions ; that though His ways are above our
thoughts, yet, with Job, we5 shall finally acknowledge them to
have been just ; that by trial only can we obtain an insight into
the devices of Satan ; that it was from want of such experience
that Eve fell so irreparably ; that the enduring hardness is the
one way by which we become good soldiers of Jesus Christ ;6
that our Lord Himself has left us an example, not of apathy to
pain, but of resignation under it, not of praying that the Cup
might never come, but that having come it might pass ; that in
His Agony we are to look for our best consolation in our own ;
that we are to deal with our enemies in all gentleness and meek
ness, even as He7 dealt with Judas ; — and here the fragment
abruptly terminates. —
1 In his Epistle to Domitius and Now no other work, addressed to
Didymus. — This Epistle is considered Origen,has been ascribed to Dionysius,
by Eusebius (H. E. vii. 11) to refer to except that on Martyrdom ; and the
the Persecution under Valerian ; and whole of what remains is very suitable
Baronius follows him. But Valesius to such a treatise. Though, had we
contends, and Byaeus, in a section only been informed that the fragments
devoted to the consideration of the were the composition of Dionysius,
subject, seems to have proved, that the we should rather have referred them
historian is mistaken, and that it refers to his work on Temptations to
to the time of Decius. Euphranor.
2 For these we are indebted to 3 Cap. i. (Ed. Propaganda.)
Nicetas Serronensis, who in his Col- 4 Cap. iii.
lection of Commentaries by the Fathers 5 Cap. v.
on S. John and S. Luke, gives them 6 Cap. vii.
under the title of Dionysius to Origen. 7 Cap. xi.

48 patriarchate of Alexandria. [book i.
s. Paul There was one sufferer in this persecution, whom Dionysius
the wilder, does not mention, and of whose name, afterwards to become so
illustrious, he was probably ignorant. This was S. Paul, the first
hermit.1 He was a native of the Lower Thebais, and was left
an orphan at the age of fifteen. His property was considerable,
and pains had been taken with his education. Finding himself
at liberty to fix the place of his abode, he became an inmate in
the family of a married sister, with whom he lived till the Decian
persecution. To avoid its fury, he retired to a country house
belonging to his brother-in-law ; and there learnt that the latter
intended to inform against him, for the sake of gaining his
property. The young man was thus compelled to retire into
the desert ; and he soon acquired a love for the loneliness of
his retreat. He frequently changed his dwelling, advancing by
degrees into the wildest depths of the wilderness. At length
he discovered a spot so well adapted for the life he proposed to
lead, that he fixed on it as the final place of his abode. It was
a cavern, the mouth of which was shaded by a palm ; a fountain
burst forth from the side of the hill, and entered the earth
again at no great distance. The leaves of this tree afforded
him his garments, and its dates his sustenance until a better
method of subsistence was provided for him. He was twenty-
two years old when he retired into the cave ; and here he dwelt
for ninety years.
ad. 251. ^e next transaction in which S. Dionysius was engaged
affords a remarkable instance of the immense power tacitly
claimed by, and unhesitatingly ceded to, the See of Alexandria
in these early ages. The Chair of Rome was vacant, S. Fabian
having received the Crown of Martyrdom on the 20th of
January, a.d. 250. Such was the fury of the persecution that
the Roman clergy, of whom there were then forty-six Priests and
seven Deacons, found it impossible to proceed to another elec
tion ; for Decius, says S. Cyprian, would sooner have allowed a
competitor in his Throne than a Bishop in his metropolis.
Early life of There was at that time in Rome a priest named Novatian
originally a Stoic philosopher, then possessed by a Demon, after
that baptised in illness, and never subsequently confirmed : he
had been raised to his Sacerdotal rank in double violation of the
1 S. Hieronym. vit. S. Paul. § 4.

SECT. V.J NOVATIAN ATTACKS S. CORNELIUS. 49
Canons ; for clinic Baptism and the not having received " the
Lord's Seal" were each a bar against Holy Orders. He, how
ever, entertained the idea of raising himself to the highest
station in the Church ; and was confirmed in his design by the
arrival of Novatus, a man of bad character, a Bishop1 or Priest
of Africa, who was compelled, by the fear of punishment, to
leave Carthage. Every effort was employed by the two adven
turers to raise Novatian to the vacant Chair, but in vain ; for in *!e a?pjr?» to
' ' the Chair of
the month of June, a.d. 251, Cornelius was, by the unanimous R°me;
consent of clergy and people, elected Bishop of Rome.
The confederates, aware that they had every thing to fear from
the resolute character of the new Pontiff, determined to use
their utmost endeavours to procure his deposition. Novatus had,
at Carthage, charged S. Cyprian with too great harshness in re
admitting to the Communion of the Church those who had lapsed
during the persecution; but he now united with Novatian in attack- Taises ? p"-
° f ' ty against
ing Cornehus on precisely opposite grounds. Novatian attracted s.ComeUus:
to his party several of those who had distinguished themselves as k ^jj"^ ^Z
confessors during the Decian persecution ; and to invest his cause Confessors'
with the fairer colours, he denied on oath that he had any inten
tion of aspiring to that Bishopric which ought, he contended,
from the crimes of its present occupier, to be declared vacant.
The dispute became serious ; and Dionysius, who had, as
he afterwards gave proof, deeply considered the subject of
the reconciliation of apostates, thought fit to interfere. He to whom
addressed two letters2 on the point in question ; one to the w'rite™ysiu
1 Baronius believes Novatus to have non-appearance of Novatus as one of
been a Bishop, because S. Cyprian the consecrators of Novatian by sup-
says, (Ep. xlix. Ed. Parcel.) qui posing him unwilling to put himself
Felicissimum satellitem suum diaco- forward on the occasion, from a belief
num  constituit. (254, lix.) And that the ends of his schism would be
certainly the plain sense of these words best secured by his keeping in the
implies that he was possessed of back ground ; or by referring to the
Episcopal authority. But Pagius, inquiry that might thereby have been
(250, xv.) followed by the greater part occasioned as to the crimes that had
of modern Ecclesiastical historians, driven him from Carthage.
assumes him to have been a Priest, - Euseb. H. E. vi. 46, ad fin. —
because he did not assist in the con- Byseus, by a comparison of the account
secration of his friend Novatian. They given of these letters with the Epistles
explain the passage in S. Cyprian as of S. Cyprian, which we have, seems
meaning that Novatus procured the satisfactorily to have shewn that they
ordination of Felicissimus. But it were written before the consecration
were surely equally easy to explain the of Novatian.

50

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[BOOK I.

his tenets.

faithful at Rome in general, dwelling on the virtue of peni
tence, as effecting a re-admission into the Church even for
apostates, and exhorting all parties concerned to peace and
brotherly love ; — the other more particularly to the Confessors.
These letters appear to have been written towards the beginning
of August.
In order to have a firmer ground on which to act, Novatian
sent some of his disciples to three country Bishops, in a corner
of Italy, informing them that urgent business required their
presence in Rome. When they were come, he invited them to
a banquet, where he made them eat and drink to excess;
and while in this condition, at the uncanonical hour of four
in the afternoon, they laid their hands on him, and conse
crated him Bishop. One of these unhappy men afterwards con
fessed his fault, and was received by S. Cornelius to lay-
communion ; the two others remained impenitent ; but all three
were deposed.
The principal tenet of Novatian was the following : that those
who had once fallen in time of persecution, could never be received
into communion, whatever penance they might perform ; that
the Church had no power of forgiving such, and could only
leave them to the infinite mercy of God. The judgment of the
Catholic Church has ever been more favourable.
At this time, there was no general rule by which the reception
of the lapsed was regulated. In the vacancy of the See, the
Roman clergy, meeting in council, had decreed that those
who, after expressing their penitence, were seized with mortal
illness, should be allowed to receive the Holy Eucharist. For
Carthage, other cases, they decided nothing. S. Cyprian followed in the
Alexandria, same course. That of S. Dionysius was milder. " I had given
directions," he writes to Fabius, " that communion should be
allowed to the dying, if they desired it, more especially if, pre
viously to their last illness, they had requested it." Whereas,
according to the Roman and Carthaginian rule,, if the dying
man had during health exhibited no signs of repentance, he
was to be debarred from receiving the Viaticum. The rule of
S. Gregory Nyssen, a hundred and forty years later, may be
taken as a specimen of a penitential more than ordinarily strict.
For voluntary apostacy, the guilty person was to continue for

Rules as to
the recep
tion of the
lapsed in
Rome,

SECT. V.J DIONYSIUS' LETTER TO NOVATIAN. 51
the whole course of his life among the penitents ; but even such
an one was to receive the Viaticum on his death-bed ; and S.
Basil adds, in his penitential canons, that the communion
should be given with confidence in the compassion of God.
But for apostacy occasioned by the fear of death, or the infliction
of torments, S. Gregory appoints only nine years' penance ; and
it was this species of denial of the Faith to which the schism of
Novatian principally referred. The followers of this schismatic
took the name of Cathari or Puritans.
Novatian, immediately after his consecration, wrote letters, Novatian
i i • • i /~n • ¦ i • writes to
as the custom was, to the principal Churches, giving them notice the Great
of his election, and pretending to have been ordained in spite of
his opposition. These epistles created, in many places, great
confusion. The cause of Novatian, at first sight, appeared fair,
as shewing zeal for the preservation of the Church's purity ;
and the names of those who had signed the letters carried great
weight with them ; since many were known to have been Con
fessors at Rome for the Faith, and men, therefore, not to be
suspected of countenancing schism.
Cornelius, for his part, was not idle. But the missives of the
two rivals were attended with different effects in the two great
Eastern Sees. Fabius, then Bishop of Antioch, was inclined to
the party of Novatian ; Dionysius, on the contrary, replied to
the letter of the schismatic in the following terms :
"Dionysius1 to his brother Novatian, greeting. he iB
J j d o answered by
" If you have been compelled, against your will, [to assume s.Dionysius.
the Episcopate] you will prove the truth of your account by
retiring from it spontaneously. It were better to suffer all
things, of what kind soever, than to cut in sunder the Church
of God. And the martyrdom suffered for the sake of avoiding
a schism were not less glorious than that endured for refusing
to sacrifice to idols. Nay, in my judgment, it would be more
illustrious ; in the one case it is borne for the sake of the
Martyr's own soul, in the other, for that of the whole Church.
1 Euseb. H. E. vi. 45. — Eusebius, Rufinus, by way of improving the
who confuses Novatus and Novatian, error, adds, Hsec eadem etiam Nova-
(as all the Eastern writers, except tiano scfipsit, — which is manifestly
S. Dionysius, appear to have done,) absurd.
gives this letter to the former ; and
E 2

52 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
And if, even now, you can persuade or compel your brethren to
return to concord, your well-doing will be greater than your
fault. The latter will not be laid to your charge : the former
will be spoken of to your honour. If you have no influence
over them, and they refuse to obey, save at least your own soul.
I pray that you may hold fast the peace that is in the Lord,
and so bid you farewell."
This letter, which was highly celebrated at the time,1 and for
many years afterwards, produced no effect on the arch-schismatic ;
for he continued in his separation till his death. His schism
had already begun to assume the character of a heresy, by his
denial of the Power of the Keys in the case of apostacy ; and he
afterwards rendered it still more heterodox by extending that
denial to the crimes of murder and fornication, and by con
demning second marriages.
The letter of Dionysius to Novatian was written, it would
seem, towards the end of August ; and, in that or the ensuing
month, he received an Epistle from the Roman Confessors,
The confes- bewailing their error, and mentioning their return to the Church.
sors return. ° o
The Council of Carthage, under S. Cyprian, had already decreed
that Apostates were to be received on performing penance;
though, if in Holy Orders, merely to lay-communion : its
Canons were confirmed by Cornelius and sixty Bishops in the
Rome?1 °f Council of Rome, where Novatian, persisting in his error, was
a.d. 251. condemned. He, for his part, dispatched Novatus into Africa,
to sustain his falling party ; and the absence of this man, the
originator of the schism, combined with the letters of S.
Dionysius and S. Cyprian, and probably the treatise of the
latter on the Unity of the Church, occasioned the return of
the Confessors. The Bishop of Alexandria, in the September
of the same year, addressed two letters of congratulation to
them on the subject.
It is plain that the Church of Rome had been in great danger
of suffering a long schism. The personal authority of S. Cor
nelius was not sufficient to carry him through the trouble by
which he was surrounded : the influence of the Confessors who
1 S Jerome, for instance, quotes it, ously abstains from giving Novatian
in his work on illustrious men. It the title of Bishop ; though we find it
may be observed that the Saint studi- added in the translation of S. Jerome.

SECT. V.J SPREAD OF THE NOVATIAN SCHISM. 53
were leagued against him was great ; the terrors of the perse
cution depressed the Faithful externally as much as their own
internal dissensions weakened them, and had it not been for the
exertions and weight of character of Dionysius and Cyprian,
the consequences to the Church might have been most pernicious.
But, though Italy was now quiet, Novatianism was in danger of gg^."^
pervading the East. We have already mentioned that Fabius "> the East:
was favourably disposed to it ; and to him Dionysius addressed
the letter on the Decian persecution, to which we are indebted
for our knowledge of its effects in Egypt, and subjoined the
history of Serapion,1 as a manifest proof that God approved of
the administration of the Holy Communion to dying penitents,
even though they had been guilty of the crime of apostacy.
He also addressed his own Dicecese on the same subject ; and s- ^jj^?'
divided the penitents into different ranks, according to their
various degrees of guilt. To Conon, Bishop of Hermopolis2
Magna, he sent a letter on the same subject ; his solici
tude extended itself even as far as Armenia, and he wrote
to Meruzanes,3 Metropolitan of Sebaste, who appears to have
been inclined to Novatian errors ; as also to Thelymidres,4 then
Bishop of Laodicea. The heresy appearing to make some
1 Serapion was an inhabitant of his step, he cried out that he knew the
Alexandria, who had passed a long Priest was unable to come : " but act,"
life in the practice of piety. In the he continued, " as he gave directions,
persecution he was overcome by and set me free." The child did as
torments, and denied the faith. he had been commanded, and Serapion
When the storm had passed, he was gave up the ghost. S. Dionysius
received to penitence, though refused infers from this event, that Providence
Communion. He fell ill, and re- had evidently retained the old man
mained three days without the power in life, till he could receive the
of speech ; on the fourth, recovering Eucharist ; and thereby testified ap-
for a few moments the use of his probation of the conduct of those who
voice, he requested to receive the allowed the Communion to apostates
Eucharist, and relapsed. The boy on their death-beds.
who waited on him ran to the Priest. 2 Eusebius only says Hermopolis ;
It was night, and the Priest, through but from Severus, who was, as we
illness, was unable to come. Break- shall often have ocasion to observe,
ing off a fragment of the consecrated Jacobite Bishop of the same See,
Bread, he gave it to the messenger, we learn that Conon was Bishop of
with directions, after soaking it, to Aschumin, i. e., Hermopolis Magna,
place it in the mouth of Serapion. Kenaudot, p. 36.
The old man was awaiting the return 3 See Le Quien i. 419.
of the boy ; and as soon as he heard 4 Le Quien ii. 791.

54 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
progress at Alexandria, Dionysius addressed to his own flock
a most elaborate letter,1 which appears to have been successful
in preventing the perversion of the faithful.
favourable Fabius, however, was not convinced by the epistle which he
to !t : had received from Dionysius ; nor yet by four or five written to
him by S. Cornelius of Rome. And the persecution lulling for
a short time on the death of Decius, and succession of Gallus,
he took the opportunity of convoking a Council at Antioch to
consider and to decide the question. To this Dionysius was
summoned by several Prelates, among whom were the celebrated
Firmilian, and Theoctistus of Caesarea, whom it is pleasant thus
to find in friendly communication with the See of Alexandria.
But the same messenger that brought the summons, brought
also the tidings of the decease of Fabius, and the accession of
s. Dionysius Demetrian. On the eve of gomg to Antioch, Dionysius informed
goes thither. i 'J
Cornelius2 of these events ; and, together with this letter,3 he
dispatched one of brotherly communion to the Church of Rome.
Antioch °' ^e Council was held under the presidency, it seems, of the
a.d. 252. new Bishop of Antioch4 ; and after the reading of the letter in
1 'EinffTpeTTTiKr).— Euseb. H. E. vi. there is none. Boschius the Bolland-
46. — The earlier commentators trans- ist ( Julius iv. Dissert, de Pat.
late it hortatory ; and so Fleury ii. Antioch. § 86) thinks that Demetrian
260, une exhortation a son troupeau merely held the Council summoned
d'Alexandrie. Valesius interprets it, by his predecessor. Byseus tries to
objurgatory. We follow Heinichen, prove that that Council was never held
(in Euseb. H. E. iv. 28,) Danz. (de at all, and that the real Council was
Euseb. p. 100) and Suicer, (i, 1194) not held till a.d. 256. In the letter
in taking it to mean laboured ; and so 0f S. Dionysius to S. Stephen of
S. Cyril (in Hos. cap. 11) uses Rome, (Euseb. H. E. vii. 5) he speaks
hiarpetpeia. 0f the East as then at peace from the
2 Euseb. H. E. vi. 46. schism of Novatian. Now this letter
3 S.aKociK^.— The sense is not cer- was written in A.u. 256 at the earliest ;
tain. Goar, in his notes on George therefore, according to Byseus, it fol-
SynceUus, takes it to have been an lows that the Council could not have
epistle of the same kind as those called met long before. But this is by no

dices, dimissoriai, and the like. means a necessary consequence. If
Valesius and Stroth make it to refer to (Ecumenical Councils have been so
things connected with the Diaconate ; long resisted before they were received
and Danz applies it to Nicostratus the and acknowledged, much rather might
Roman Deacon or Confessor, and one a provincial Synod, like that of
of the obstinate followers of Novatus. Antioch, fail in at once effecting that
4 Byasus (October Bolland. ii. 34,) order which it subsequently estab-
here seems to make a difficulty where lished.

SECT. VI.J THE MILLENARIAN CONTROVERSY. 55
which Pope Cornelius explained the history of Novatian, and
the Acts of the Council of Rome, the schismatic was condemned
as favouring sin, by rendering repentance unavaihng.
It must have been either during his absence from, or
immediately after his return to, Egypt, that Dionysius heard of
the decease of Origen, who, worn out with years and labours, Death of
was called, as it is not unreasonable to hope, to receive the
forgiveness of his errors, and the reward of his sufferings.
The Church of Alexandria, as it is plain from the treatise
addressed to him by her Bishop, had long ceased to regard him
as excommunicate.

SECTION VI.
THE MILLENARIAN CONTROVERSY.
That, on his return from Antioch, Dionysius visited Alexan
dria, it seems natural to conclude ; though we have no certain
evidence of the fact. It was at the same time that the great Plague at
pestilence, which lasted, with intermissions, fifteen years, and of a.d. 252.
which we shall have further occasion to speak, spread from
Ethiopia into Egypt, and thence over a large portion of the
Roman Empire.
It does not appear that the persecution of Gallus extended ^gjjg0"?8"13
into Egypt; and the afflicted Church of Alexandria had time to a!d.°264*
breathe. Dionysius, in visiting his Dicecese, had arrived at
Arsinoe,1 when he found that city and the surrounding villages ^smoe in_
under the influence of an opinion which threatened, if not Mmenari™
checked in time, to degenerate into heresy. A belief had errorsi
existed, from the earhest ages of the Church, and had num
bered among its adherents Cerinthus and Papias, that, after
the General Resurrection, Christ would personally reign on
earth ; that for the space of a thousand years His Saints, under
that dominion, would enjoy all corporal, as well as spiritual
1 See Tillemont, M. E. iv. 85. absolute certainty. See S. Dionysius,
2 Euseb. H. E. vii. 24, 25. Ed. Propaganda, p. 312: and Lumper,
* This date cannot be fixed with Historia Theol.-Crit. xiii. 67.

56 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
delights ; — and that in this sense the predictions and descrip
tions of the Apocalypse were to be understood. Nepos, a Bishop
originally of Arsinoe,1 had adopted these tenets ; and as his character
by Nepos ; both for learning and hohness stood justly high, his teaching
was received with avidity, and a party speedily formed itself in
his favour. The Millenarians, or Chihasts, however, were not
unopposed ; and to support his views, Nepos composed a work
which his followers regarded as an impregnable bulwark of his
doctrine. As his opponents insisted that the Apocalypse, in
those portions which he brought forward, was to be understood
in a typical sense only, he entitled his treatise, A Confutation
of Allegorists. The arguments were ingenious, the language
persuasive ; and it is not wonderful that the essay should have
been considered unanswerable.
Nepos, however, had before the period of which we write
been taken from the world, leaving behind him the reputation
of a faithful, laborious, and learned prelate ; and endeared to
his flock by the many hymns that he had composed for then-
use.2 After his death, those who held his sentiments began to
defended by seParate themselves from the communion of others ; and, led on
coracion: ^j ane CoraciOIlj to denounce the rest of the faithful as
heterodox. S. Dionysius, whose account of the transaction is preserved
to us by Eusebius, on his arrival at Arsinoe, called together the
Priests and Deacons of that city and of the neighbouring villages,
and, in general, such of the faithful as chose to attend, and
aeconfePr°-SeS proposed that the matter should be quietly and candidly discussed,
and the treatise of Nepos more particularly examined. For Nepos
himself he professed to entertain the highest respect ; both for his
piety and his talents, and, more especially, he added, since he
had already fallen asleep. It was unanimously agreed that his
advice should be followed ; and for three days continuously, from
morning till evening, the good Patriarch sat in the midst of the

1 At least this appears, as Le Quien turns it: urn der vielen von ihm
(ii. 581, 2) observes, most probable ; gedichteten lieder ; not as Valesius.
though the name of the See of Nepos ob Psalmorum multiplices canius,
is nowhere ghon. because S. Dionysius proceeds, " with
2 This is undoubtedly the meaning which even now many of the brethren
of T/js ttoWtjs \f/a\p.w$ias : — as Stroth are delighted."

ence :

SECT. VI.] THE MILLENARIAN CONTROVERSY. 57
Priests, reading and commentinp; on the work of the deceased the yiftion
. . ° is calmly
Prelate, receiving and replying to objections, giving to all discusaei1 :
arguments their due consideration, and modifying his own opi
nions, or confessing himself to be wrong, if his opponents seemed
to have truth, in any matter, on their side. He relates that he
admired the moderation, intelligence, and docility of his auditors ;
their unfeigned anxiety to attain the truth, and the order and
propriety which they observed during the whole discussion.
At the end of the three days, Coracion declared himself con
vinced ; and promised that he never more by writing or word of the Miiie-
iii narians own
mouth would uphold the doctrine of Nepos. Thus, by the truly their error:
evangelical conduct of this great Prelate, the schism was nipped
in the bud.
The Patriarch, however, thought fit to confute it in writing,
as he had already done in conversation ; the rather, that the
Treatise against Allegorists had been dispersed through many
parts of Egypt. This gave rise to his Treatise on the Promises, we0™o„s hIS
in which he relates the circumstances that we have just Promises :
recounted. In treating of the Apocalypse, as the only portion of Scripture
on which Nepos had founded his hypothesis, the writer's sin
gular reverence and modesty may well account for the equally
rare and happy result of the Arsino'itan Conference. He was
evidently inclined to believe the authority of the Book of Reve
lation doubtful. "But," says he, "I should not venture to
reject it, when so many of our brethren highly esteem it. I
believe that it is above the capacity of my intellect, and consider
that it contains a certain hidden and marvellous explanation of
all things that it sets forth. For though I understand it not,
yet I suspect that there lies in it a sense deeper than words ; I fngp^ation
measure it not, and judge it not, by my own reason ; but allow- Apocalypse ;
ing faith more room, am of opinion that its contents are too
lofty for my comprehension. I condemn not that which I
cannot understand; I rather admire it the more, because I
cannot fathom it."
He then enters into an examination of the book, wliich we
no longer possess ; and having shewn that it cannot possibly be
understood in the literal sense, he proceeds to argue, that though
composed by an inspired writer, it had not S. John the Evan-

58

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.

but denies
that it was
written by
S. John.

Nepos never
condemned
in a Provin
cial Council.

gelist for its author. His principal proof is drawn from the
fact that, while the Evangelist shrinks, in his Gospel, from
naming himself, and in his three epistles designates himself
only from his character, or not at all, the writer of the Apoca
lypse seems to bring his name forward, on every occasion where
the subject allows him to do so.1 " He sent and signified it by
His Angel to His servant John" ; — " John2 to the seven Churches
which are in Asia"; — " I John, who am your brother and com
panion in labour"3 : " I John saw these things and heard them."4
From the various phrases employed, in the Gospel and the Apo
calypse, and their different degrees of grammatical correctness,
he arrives at the same conclusion.
There appears no reason to beheve, that Dionysius found it
necessary to summon a Council on the subject of Millenarian
errors ; — and that a Provincial Synod5 condemned and deposed
Nepos, after his death, which has been asserted by some writers,
is evidently a fable.
We now enter on the consideration of a more important con
troversy; and shall find the conduct of S. Dionysius marked,
during its course, with the same moderation and love of peace
that had distinguished him at Arsinoe.

SECTION VII.

QUESTION OF RE-BAPTISM.

je-baptism
Vf heretics
ordered by
Agrippinus and the
Council of
Carthage,
circ. A.D.
200:

It will be proper, though by so doing we a little deviate
from the strict order of time, to give a concise and uninterrupted
view of the unhappy division that arose on the question of
reiterated Baptism : — and of the share that Dionysius took in
its discussion.
Agrippinus, Bishop of Carthage, had in a synod of African
Bishops decreed, in violation of Apostolic tradition, that Bap
tism could not be validly conferred by those who were out of

1 Apocal. i. 2.
3 Apocal. i. 4.
3 Apocal. i. 9.

Apocal. xxii. 8.
Labbe, Cone. i.

832.

SECT. VII.] QUESTION OF RE-BAPTISM. 59
the pale of the Cathohc Church ; that heretical Baptism was,
consequently, null and void; — and that such as had received
none other should, on entering the Church, be re-baptized.
More than fifty years afterwards, this question was again mooted
in Africa ; and eighteen Bishops of Numidia, uncertain as to
their proper duty, consulted S. Cyprian, who then occupied the bys.cyprian
Chair of Carthage. That Father happened at the time when (a.d. 255;)
their letter arrived, to be holding a Council, which was attended
by thirty-one Prelates ; and they, in a synodical epistle, replied
to the inquiry of their brethren. The tradition of the African
Church, they said, was to be observed ; the Council of Agrip
pinus had decided the matter. S. Cyprian replied in a similar
strain to the same question, after the dissolution of the Council ;
but without entirely satisfying the doubts that had arisen in
his province.
He therefore judged it expedient to summon another and (a™"^ *
more numerous Synod of the Bishops of Africa and Numidia; |eafstreer.)
and seventy-one Prelates assembled at Carthage in the early
part of a.d. 256. The decrees of the former Council were con
firmed in this ; and a synodical epistle was addressed to S.
Stephen of Rome, informing him of the decision of the
African Church, and requesting his confirmation of their Acts.
Stephen, though afterwards a glorious Martyr, was evidently
a man of hasty temper ; and he replied by an angry letter, in
which, not content with exposing the fault of receding from an
Apostohc tradition, he threatened the African Bishops with
excommunication, if they persisted in their sentiments.
S. Cyprian, undaunted by the reception of this epistle, con- and third
voked a third Council on the same subject ; and used his utmost September 1,
, . n , 1 , , n A.D. 256.
endeavours that it should be as numerously attended as was
possible. Eighty-five Bishops were present ; and the decision
of Agrippinus was a third time confirmed as well by their own
subscriptions, as by that of two absent brethren, whose proxies
were given to the Synod. The Acts of this Council were
dispatched to Rome under the care of some of the Fathers.
But Stephen refused to see the messengers ; he forbade the Rupture
faithful of Italy to shew them any hospitality ; and com- s'stephen.
* See Pearson, Annal. Cypr. for the verification of this date.

60 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
manded them to return without loss of time to Africa, and to
inform their brethren that, unless they acknowledged their
error, he should proceed to the threatened excommunication.
S. Cyprian, finding that the African Church was unable to
carry its point, looked round him for assistance. He knew that
his opinion was prevalent in the East; that the Councils of
Iconium and Synnada, holden in or about the year 230, had
ordered iteration of Baptism ; and that some of the most eminent
s. cyprian among the Oriental Prelates, as S. Firmilian1 of Caesarea, and
applies to °
s. Firmilian. Helenus of Tarsus, had incurred the displeasure of Stephen by
their adherence to the decrees of those Synods. To Firmilian,
then, Cyprian wrote ; consulting him on the steps which it
might be proper to pursue under the present emergency, when
their common cause was in danger, and when the See of Rome
appeared to be stretching its prerogatives too far.
It has been conjectured2 that, in this letter, which no longer
exists, S. Cyprian had requested Firmilian to interest Dionysius
in the matter. With Firmilian, the Bishop of Alexandria must
have been personally acquainted ; for they had met in the Council
of Antioch ; of Cyprian, he seems to have had no more intimate
s. Stephen knowledge than that necessarily arising from the high station and
s?Dionysius: well known character of each Prelate. It would seem, however,
that Stephen himself was the first to bring the subject before
his reply, Dionysius. The latter, in his reply, earnestly requested the
Pope to proceed with moderation, and not to disturb the
peace of the Church, then, as he relates at length, but just
recovering from the Novatian schism,3 by any harsh decision with
1 Our reason for reckoning this 2. To Philemon.— 3. To S. Dionysius
illustrious Prelate among the Blessed of Rome, then a Priest. Of these no
may be seen in the Preface. fragments remain : but they are men-
2 By Boschius the Bollandist in his tioned in the next following. — 4. The
previous Commentary to the Life of first to S. Sixtus, quoted by Eusebius,
S.Stephen, under August 1. Byams H. E. vii. 5,6.-5. The second to
(October ii. 37) has proved this hy- Philemon, quoted by Eusebius, H. E.
pothesis, chronologically, to be almost vii. 7. — 6. The second to S. Dionysius,
impossible, however ingenious at first quoted by Eusebius, H. E. vii. 8. 
sight. 7. The second to S. Sixtus, quoted by
3 Quoted by Eusebius, H. E. vii. 5. Eusebius, H.E.vii. 9. — 8. The third to
The arrangement of the letters of S. Sixtus, not quoted, but referred to
S. Dionysius will be this: — 1. To in the same § of the same chapter.
Pope S. Stephen quoted as above. — Of these, Eusebius does not reckon

SECT. VII.J QUESTION OF RE-BAPTISM. 61
respect to the African and Oriental Prelates. At the same time
he wrote to Dionysius and Philemon, who had consulted him on
the same subject ; they were then Priests of the Church of
Rome ; and the former afterwards attained to the Chair of S.
Peter. S. Cyprian and S. Stephen, though they could not agree on
a matter of minor importance, were united by a glorious and
nearly contemporary Martyrdom in the persecution of Valerian.
To S. Sixtus, the successor of Stephen, Dionysius again wrote ; 1^tsitu^opB
and a second time urged the necessity of union and mutual
forbearance. To Philemon and Dionysius he also addressed to Philemon
two other letters ; and in the former, speaking of the subject „f R0™Jf as
in question, he affirms (what none can doubt), that the tradition
wliich he had from ' the blessed Pope Heraclas' was to require
renunciation of error, and profession of Faith, but not to re-
baptize those, who having been baptized in the Church, had
been seduced to heresy, and had then rejoined themselves to
Cathohc Communion. And in a second letter to S. Sixtus, he
relates the following tale :
" One of the brethren, who gather together in the church, his second
' a ° ' letter to Pope
and who had long been accounted a member of the congrega- s. sixtus:
tion before my ordination, or even, as I think, that of the
blessed Heraclas, happened to be present at a Baptism. When
he had heard the questions which were put to, and the
answers received from, the candidates, he came to me weep
ing and bemoaning himself; and falling at my feet, he con
fessed and abjured the Baptism which he had received among
the heretics, as not being of the same kind, nor having any
the remotest resemblance to it ; rather, he affirmed, it was full of
impiety and blasphemy. His soul, he said, was filled with the
most bitter remorse ; nor did he dare to lift up his eyes to
God, since the commencement of his Christian life had been
those unholy words and actions. He therefore besought me
to bestow on him that most pure laver and adoption and grace.
the 2nd and 3rd in his enumeration, 2, 3, 4, 5th. The first three of these
perhaps because they were short. must have been written in a.u. 256 ;
Tlp&Tepov fiiv ohiya, says Dionysius, the last five between August, a.d. 257,
speaking of them, 4iriaTn\a. So that and August a.d. 258. See Byseus c. a.
he reckons the 4, 5, 6, 7th, as the

62 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
This I dared not to do : saying that his long continued commu
nion was sufficient. I bade him be of good courage, and
approach with an untroubled conscience to the participation
of the Holy Mysteries. He, however, continues to mourn; he
shudders to approach the Table, and hardly, though exhorted,
dares to assist at the prayers." On these circumstances he
requests the Pope's advice. Eusebius informs us that he
addressed the Church of Rome again on the subject of heretical
Baptism, in the name of the Church of Alexandria ; and
considered the question at great length.
s. Diony- A doubt has been raised as to the opinion which Dionysius
sius's own ¦; • i i •
opinion, himself entertained on the validity of heretical baptism : a
question, which but for the extremely confused account given
by Eusebius, after his accustomed manner, of the whole cor
respondence, could hardly have been agitated.
statedhbylis" ^ aPPears dear that the views of S. Dionysius were opposed
s. Jerome, to those of the re-baptizers ; but that he was for allowing each
Church to act according to its own traditions. S. Jerome
indeed says,1 that he. consented to the dogma of S. Cyprian
and the African Synod, and wrote many letters on the re-bap
tism of heretics, which were then extant. But, in the first place,
it is very doubtful if that Father were in possession of more of
his epistles than the fragments preserved to us by Eusebius ; and,
in the second, if he were, as we cannot suppose Dionysius to
have contradicted himself, the lost letters must have contained
the same doctrine with those which we now possess.2
and rendered Now, of the five Epistles of which we have fragments
obscure by .. 11 loni ¦
the confused remaining, the first, addressed to S. Stephen, contains nothing
account of . ° . , . . &
Eusebius, which can be alleged either for or against our assertion. The
same may be said of the fourth, which is written to S. Dionysius
of Rome. But in the second (which is the first to Pope Sixtus)
he says, " Consider the importance of the subject. It has been
decreed, as I am informed, in very large Synods of Bishops,
that they who come over from heresy should first be instructed3
1 Catalog. Illust. Vir. 69. 3 TlpoKaTrixr/QzyTas. — See Coutant's
2 And yet Fleury (ii. 305) unhesi- remarks on the note of Valesius,
tatingly follows S. Jerome, " Saint Ed. Prop. S. Dion. 154.
Denis eveque d'Alexandrie etoit dans
les memes sentiments que S. Cyprien."

SECT. VII.] QUESTION OF RE-BAPTISM. 63
in the True Faith, and then be washed and purged from the
filth of their impure leaven." And again, in the third Epistle,
which is to Philemon : — " I have learnt this also, — that this
custom was not now introduced for the first time, nor in the
African Church alone ; but long before this, under Bishops who
have preceded us, and in very populous Churches ; and that it
approved itself to the Synods holden at Iconium and Synnada,
and to many of the brethren. Whose decisions if you over
throw, I cannot bear that they should be thrown into strife
and contention. For it is written, ' Thou shalt not remove the
landmarks of thy neighbour, which thy fathers have set'."
These fragments, if they at first sight seem to countenance ^"Sawn
S.Jerome's assertion, appear, on a little closer consideration, from ^
to be nothing more than a deprecation of too harsh a mode
of vindicating what Dionysius allowed to be the true doctrine.
True, he seems to say to the Roman Pontiff and his Presbyter,
you have right on your side; but recollect by how many
Bishops, and for how long a time, the opposite notion has been
received, and do not plunge the Church into confusion by
excommunicating the re-baptizers as if guilty of heresy.
The story which we have above quoted from the second letter w\hatof°the
of Dionysius to S. Sixtus leads us to the same conclujion. Africans,
That Prelate certainly doubted whether the baptism were valid
that had been received by the aged man of whom he speaks ;
but -clearly he doubted this, not because it was conferred by
heretical hands, but because it was conferred in an heretical way.
This baptism, we are expressly told, was in no respect similar"
to that of the Catholics. If then, even in such an extreme case,
Dionysius doubted of the propriety of re-baptism, a case in
wliich every Council that treated the subject commanded
reiteration, how strongly must he have been opposed to a second
Baptism, when the rite had been administered, though by
heretics, in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and
of the Holy Ghost !
It is objected that S. Dionysius himself assigns another
reason for refusing in this case, to re-baptize, — namely, that the
aged man who applied to him had made good his want of
baptism, by his long enjoyment of the Communion of the
Church. This, however, seems rather an argument addressed

64 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
to the inquirer himself, than a reason brought forward for the
consideration of the Pope. Be it so, he seems to say : con
sider, if you will, your heretical Baptism invalid. But be
of good cheer, nevertheless ; it has been supplied to you by your
frequent participation in the Divine Mysteries. To conclude : in
the case before us, is there any doubt that S. Cyprian would
have re-baptized the individual without further hesitation ?
One thing more we learn from this account. It appears clear
from it that, as early as the time of Demetrius, the practice of
the Alexandrian Church was opposed to the iteration of
Baptism, or the layman of whom Dionysius writes would not,
in the first instance, have been received without it. And
whatever authority the testimony of S. Jerome may be supposed
to have, it cannot possess more weight than that of S. Basil,1
d?unBusil w^° exPressry affirms that Dionysius allowed the validity of
states. - heretical Baptism, and adds his astonishment that so great a
master of canonical learning should not even have rejected
that of the Pepuzenes; although, says he, they baptized into
the Father, and the Son, and Montanus and Priscilla. By
this he simply intends to say that by the Holy Ghost they
meant the Spirit that had animated Montanus and Priscilla,
and of whom, indeed, Montanus professed to be an incarnation.
OTntrovers ^e contioversy, for the time, remained undecided ; or rather,
the increasing fury of the persecution of Valerian removed the
principal disputants to that Place where there are no more
controversies. It was decided by the Council of Nicaea2 ; and
before that period, iteration of Baptism was virtually abandoned
by all, except a few of the Numidian Prelates. The interference
of S. Dionysius seems not to have been without its effect ; and
to it we may ascribe the abstinence of Stephen from excom
municating S. Firmilian and the African Bishops.
1 Epist. Can. ad Amphiloch. § 5. — tine so often speaks, — seems to be
And see Coutant's note; Opp. S. generally conceded to the arguments
Dionys. Ed. Propagand. p. 158. of Bellarmin and Natalis Alexander ;
2 That it was not finally condemned through others, as Launoy and Sir-
till then, — and that Nicsea was the mond, understand the expression of
" Plenary Council" of which S. Augus- the Great Council of Aries, a.d. 314,

SECT. VIII.] VALERIAN PERSECUTES THE CHURCH. 65

SECTION VIII.
The controversy on Baptism was yet at its height, when an un- a.d. 257.
expected calamity overwhelmed the Church. Valerian, who had incited by
hitherto favoured Christianity in a remarkable degreee, insomuch,
says Dionysius,1 that not even those who were openly said to be
Christians, (that is, Philip and Alexander Severus,) proved them
selves warmer friends to its professors, now altered his conduct
and commenced that persecution which is usually reckoned as
the Ninth. To this change he was incited by Macrianus, a man persecutes
whose wealth, experience, and military talents, gave him influence
second only to that of the emperor. He had been informed by
an Egyptian astrologer, that he should one day succeed to the
Imperial Throne : — and he, in consequence, took on himself the
patronage of the whole tribe of soothsayers and prognosticators.
As the Church ceased not to proclaim the abandoned character
of these men, and the unlawful nature of their art, Macrianus
determined to revenge himself on those that had insulted and
injured his favourites.
As soon as the edict of persecution reached Alexandria, Dio- s. Dionysius
nysius was summoned before iEmilian, Augustal Prefect. He fessingr be.
was not left to face his trial alone.2 Maximus, then one of his an»
priests, afterwards his successor, accompanied him to the tribu
nal : so also did three deacons : and a Christian from Rome,
named Marcellus, who happened to be at Alexandria, went with
the Patriarch to the Augustal. Of the good confession that
these servants of Christ then witnessed, we have an account
from the pen of Dionysius, who, however, with characteristic
modesty, chooses rather to transcribe the pubhc Acts, than to
relate his answers from his own remembrance.
" iEmilian, the Prefect, said : — I now, by word of mouth, as
heretofore by writing, set before you the clemency of our princes.
They give you the power of preserving your lives, if you will
1 Euseb. H. E. vii. 10. * Euseb, H. E. vii. 11.

66 PAIBIABCttATE OF AKEXAHDBIA. (BOOK I.
torn to that which is agreeable to nature, and adwe die gods
that presene their onpire, and forget that which is contrary to
nature. What say yon to this ? I expert Oat yon tdU not be
unthankful with respect to their kindness, since, assuredly, they
are for turning tou to a bettor coarse. Dionysius answered : —
All men do not adore the same divinities, bat each worships
those whom be considers to be gods- "We reversace and adore
One God, the Maker of all things, Who gave the empire into the
bands of Valerian and Gaffienus, beloved of God, and to Him
we pray continually, that their government may remain unshaken.
/RmiKan, the Prefect, said to them : Who binders your adoring
Him also, if, as you say, He b God, together with those that are
by nature gods I Ton have been commanded to worship the
gods, and such gods as all own. Dionysias said: We adwe
none other. ^RmiHan, the Prefect, said to them : I see that yon
are at once ungratefol for, and unconscious of, the clemency of
our Augosti. Wherefore yon shall not reanain in this city, bat
to ksKT" shall be sent into Iibya, to the place called Kefro. I hate
ebosen this spot as directed by the Augusti. But it shall in no
manner be lawful for yon, nor for any else, to hold assemblies, nor
to enter into the so called cemeteries. If any one shall be con
victed of not going to the place which I have mentioned, or shall
be found in any assembly, he shall bring danger on his own
bead, and the fitting anhnadygsion shall not be wanting. De
part then whither you have beat commanded.0
Kefiro, or, as die Aralnans call it, Talqrn,3 lay in the wilds of
Libya; and thither Dionysius, though labouring under iDness,
was at once homed. A huge body of Christians accompanied
him thither; some from Alexandria, others from various other
parts of Egypt. Hie Gospel had not hitherto been preached in
this place ; and there, to use die Patriarch "s own words, the
Lord opened a great door for the Word. Pot though the httle
band of beherers were reviled and exposed to personal violence,
before long a large number of the heathen left the worship of
idols, and gave their names to Chmst. God had evidently led
His savants to that place, to be the founders of a flourishing
Church; and when that ministry was fulfilled, he conducted
them to another spot. Among die Bishop's fellow exiles, we
1 Severe, ap. Rmsd. p. 36.

ittgrat

SECT. VIII.] DIONYSItV PASCHAL LETTERS. 67
have already spoken of Maxiinus. The deacon Eusebius, having
been sent into Syria to oppose the heresy of Paul of Samosata,
was there made Bishop of Laodicea, and the deacon Faustus, in
extreme old age, finished his course by martyrdom under Diocle
tian.1 JEmihan, hearing of the progress that the Faith was making
at Kefro, gave orders that Dionysius should be removed to
Coluthion, a city of Mareotis. The Bishop confesses that he thence to
was much annoyed on receiving this intimation : the place was
infested by robbers, and tenanted by a wild race. His friends,
however, represented that it was nearer to Alexandria ; that if at
Kefro the resort of Christians had been great, the inhabitants
of the metropolis would flock to Coluthion as to a suburb ; that
the change was evidently designed, by the Head of the Church,
for its good. And so it fell out.
While Dionysius was thus enacting the part of a brave and
vigilant pastor, and towards the end of the persecution, he was He defends
exposed to considerable annoyance by Germanus,2 an Egyptian agSS
Bishop, though it is uncertain in what See. Germans accused the Germanas :
Patriarch of general carelessness and remissness in his pastoral
duties, but more especially of neglecting, during the time of his
exile, to assemble for worship the Christians who were with him.
Dionysius replied by the letter, to which we are indebted for the
particulars which have reached us of his behaviour, during both
the persecution of Decius and that of Valerian.
At the same time, he was engaged in writing other letters, addresses
both rea^rding his own Church, and that of other countries. He ters to
"~ i •!-.•>¦ 1 t> ¦ 1 • different
was m correspondence with t>. Sixtus on tlie .Baptismal question : persons:
we find him also addressing the presbytery of the Alexandrian
Church, during the greatest violence of the persecution. Two
other letters, respectively addressed to Flavian, and to Didymus
and Domitius, require a few observations.
They were Paschal letters, and, as it is supposed3 by some, the
first of then- kind. But whether S. Dionysius followed the
example of his predecessors, or was the original author of the
1 Euseb. H. E. vii. 11, ad fin. Le " Vit. S. Dionys. in Ed. Propagand.
Quien, ii. 731 B. p. ciii. ^ e haTe already stated vp. 29}
that some writers attribute their origin
5 Euseb. H. E. ii. 1. to S. Demetrius.
F2

68

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[book

and com.
poses his
Paschal Cycle of
eight years.

custom, it is certain that from this time, the Patriarchs of Alex
andria annually announced the date of the commencement of
Lent, and of Easter Day. Custom at first, at the Council1 of
Nicsea this became law ; and many of these Paschal Epistles,
especially of Theophilus, S. Cyril, and we may now add, of S.
Athanasius, still remain to us. They began with a sermon on
the Festival, whence they are indifferently known as Homilies or
Epistles, and end with the required announcement. Those of
Dionysius appear to have been addressed to various Egyptian
Bishops, and not to have been possessed of, nor to have claimed,
authority beyond the limits of his ownDioecese. Afterwards
this office, exercised with respect to the whole Church,2 was a
most honourable, and somewhat laborious function of the See of
Alexandria. Alexandria had been, from the first, so noted a school of Mathe
matics, that it is not wonderful to find its Prelates engaged in
calculations connected with the Calendar. But we may justly
admire the zeal displayed by Dionysius for the minuter points
connected with the Service of God, when we find him, during
office of the the violence of the persecution, engaged in the composition of
Alexandria his Paschal Cycle. It contained a period of eight years.3 S.
Hippolytus had already composed one of sixteen : but that of S.
Dionysius was, by the Fathers of Nicsea, made the basis of a
more extended cycle of nineteen3 years, which is known by the
name of the Alexandrine. The octennial period was doubtless sug
gested to the Patriarch by the Octaeterides of Cleostratus, Har-
palus, and Eudoxus. It was in his above-named Epistle to
Heortastic Domitius and Didymus that he promulgated this cycle; and
Epistles. \&ic\ down,4 at the same time, his celebrated Canon3 that Easter
cannot fall previously to the Vernal Equinox.

1 Le Quien ii. 378 B.
2 S. Leo, writing to Marcian, (Ep.
94) says, speaking of errors in regard
to the celebration of Easter, " Studue-
runt itaque Sancti Patres (sc. Nicaeni)
occasionem hujus erroris auferre, om-
nem hane curam Alexandrino Episcopo
delegantes ; quoniam apud iEgyptios
hujus supputationis antiquitus tradita

esse videbatur peritia," &c. And see
Le Quien, ii. 377.
3 It is singular that both Tillemont
(iv. 274) and Fleury should speak of
this as a cycle of eighteen years ; there
being no ground for, nor reason in,
such an arrangement.
4 Vit. S. Dionys. ii. 1.
5 Euseb. H. E. vii. 10 : — where see
Stroth's translation and note.

SECT. IX.] RISE OF THE SABELLIAN HERESY. 69

SECTION IX.
RISE OF THE SABELLIAN HERESY.
Hitherto S. Dionysius, though often well nigh overwhelmed Rise of sa-
. . „,. . . bellianism
with affliction, and suffering alike from sickness and want, from
the oppression of enemies, and the calumnies of false friends,
had run a course equally glorious for himself and profitable for
the Church over which he presided. He had stood forth the
pacificator of the East and West ; he had crushed, in its rise, a
dangerous heresy ; he had been distinguished for his zeal in as
certaining the discipline, as well as maintaining the doctrine of
the Church, and he had gloriously confessed Christ in two se
veral persecutions. Again he was called to defend the One Faith
against a new and more perilous heresy ; and although, through
the infirmity of human nature, he had nearly tarnished his former
glory, and from an illustrious defender, become a powerful adver
sary of the Truth, the same meekness and humility that had
made him willing to hsten to the reasonings of the partizans of
Nepos, rendered him ready to give ear to the admonitions of a
Roman Council.
It was at the commencement of . the persecution of Valerian,
or perhaps even somewhat earlier, that Sabellius began to dis
seminate his doctrine in Pentapohs : and denying the real dis- in Pentapo-
tinction of Persons, to annihilate the doctrine of the Ever Blessed
Trinity. The heresy was not new : — it was, in effect, the same
with that which had, at an earlier period, been propagated by
Praxeas ; and had been taught to Sabellius by his master, the
heretic Noetus. In its earlier forms, it had made but httle pro
gress ; but now, assuming a more definite shape, and attracting
to itself the elements of congenial errors, it spread rapidly through
the whole of Pentapolis. If it be true that Sabellius1 was Bishop
of Ptolemais, as an uncertain tradition asserts, it had a firm basis
whence to propagate itself : and falling in, as we have elsewhere
1 So Zonaras asserts : but his evidence is unsupported by any other writer.
Byseus, Octob. Bolland. ii. 47.

70 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
its rapid observed, with the mystical temperament of Egyptian minds, it had
soon infected, not only a large portion of the laity, with a con
siderable number of Priests, but was cherished by more than one
Bishop in the neighbouring Sees, in particular, by Ammonius of
Bernice. The dogma thus acquiring strength may be briefly
stated as follows : — That the Father, the Son, and the Holy
andfunda- Ghost are one Hypostasis; one Person with Three Names;
dogmas. that the same Person, in the old dispensation, as Father, gave
the law ; in the new, as Son, was incarnate for the sake of man ;
and as Holy Ghost, descended upon the Apostles at the Day of
Pentecost. As the natural consequence of the dissemination of this
doctrine, the Son of God was no more preached in the churches.
But some there were who were valiant for the Truth of God, and
who girded up their loins to contend for the Faith. They repre-
itisopposed: sented, in the words of S. Dionysius,1 that the new teaching was
full of impiety and blasphemy against the Almighty God, the
Father of Our Lord Jesus : full of unbelief against His Only
begotten Son, the First-born of every creature, the Word, That
dwelt among men ; and full of madness against the Holy Ghost.
klgpmies1" '^le Partizans of Sabellius daily increasing, both parties ap-
Dionysi'usf' Peale<i to Dionysius, who was then in exile at Kefro. Not con
tent with consulting him by letter, they despatched trustworthy
persons to receive his decision by word of mouth ; and he listened
with patience to the assertions and arguments of the contending
factions. When they had concluded, he lost no time in making
his decision, and in setting himself, by several letters, to oppose
the new heretic. Of his proceedings, he gave an account to
Sixtus of Rome, in the first Epistle which he addressed to the
Pontiff on the subject of re-baptism, to which we have heretofore
who con- - , TT .
demns the referred. He wrote to Ammonius,2 who seems to have been a
Prelate of talent, and one whom it was therefore important, on
all accounts, to reclaim from error ; to Telesphorus, and to Eu-
phranor,3 who were probably also Bishops in the Pentapolis, and
again to Ammonius and Euphranor conjointly.
1 Ap. Euseb. H. E. vii. 6. doctrine. But the testimony of S.
Athanasius is decisive. Conf. De Sent.
2 Euseb. H. E. vii. 26. We might Dionys. § 5. with § 13.
have imagined that Ammonias, or as 3 Or Euporus, according to Euse-
Eusebius calls him, Ammon, was one bius. But the account of S. Athanasius
of the Bishops who upheld the Catholic is of far more weight.

SECT. IX.] RISE OF THE SABELLIAN HERESY. 71
But the last letter, instead of composing, did but excite the
controversy. Since the Sabellians, confounding the Father
and the Son, attributed to the former those things which re
ferred to the Human Nature of the latter, in the same manner
that the Patripassians had done before them ; it was the object
of Dionysius to demonstrate that what was attributed to the
Humanity of Christ, could not be predicated of the Father.1 0„nedxs"the
He thus intended to compel his adversaries to an admission of pSJ^c
the distinction between the Persons of the Father and the
Son ; and this was to be considered only as the first part of
his argument. He would then have demonstrated the Divi
nity of the Son of God ; and having confuted those that con
founded the Persons, would have guarded himself against the
imputation of dividing the Substance. And this method of
teaching is approved by S. Athanasius.
That Father was constantly traduced by the Arians, as if he
contradicted the doctrine dehvered by S. Dionysius ; he devoted
a treatise to the consideration and refutation of their objections :
and from it we obtain a fuller insight into the merits of the Pen-
tapolitan controversy, than the meagre and somewhat unfair
account of Eusebius supphes. The method pursued by Diony
sius was considered by his great successor to be consonant with
that employed by the Apostles. They, he says, exhibited first the
Human Actions of Christ to the Jews : they thus endeavoured
to convince them, from His miracles, that Messiah was come ,
and then, and not till then, made manifest, by the consideration
of His marvellous works, that this same Messiah was their Lord
and their God.
But the epistle to Ammonius and Euphranor unfortunately but, by a
r -Li J wantofeau-
contained only the first portion of the Patriarch's argument. In- n°.a against
J r p misconcep-
cautiously, it would appear, Dionysius suffered himself to be tion>
hurried on in his most true assertion of the Saviour's real Per
sonality and Humanity, to the failure of setting forth, according
to the full analogy, His Consubstantiality and Divinity. He as
serted nothing, so far as we now have the means of judging, that
was contrary to Catholic Truth ; but he did not sufficiently guard
his assertions from the possibility of misconception and misre-
1 S. Athanas. § 9. (i. 195. Ed. Patav. 1777). And see Byseus, Octob. ii. 48.
§147.

72 patriarchate of Alexandria. [book i.
presentation. When he was in reality speaking of the Human
Nature, his enemies might say, and weaker brethren might believe,
fdTthe°*hoe ^at ^e was sPea^inS °f the Divine. And one famous passage
dox. gave a handle to a formal impeachment of his orthodoxy.
"The Son of God, he wrote, was made and produced. He
is not proper in His Nature, but differing, in essence, from
the Father, as the vine from the husbandman, and the boat
from the shipwright : for seeing that He was made, He was not
before He was produced."
These expressions of S. Dionysius occasioned no small con
troversy throughout Pentapolis. Some, who were entirely
opposed to the doctrine of Sabellius, saw as much danger in
that of Dionysius ; and their zeal caused them to forget their
charity. — Without writing to their own Patriarch,1 without con
sidering that he might be able to explain or willing to retract
that which they deemed heretical in his statements, they laid a
The formal complaint before S. Dionysius of Rome, who had suc-
Catholicsof r J .
Pentapolis ceeded S. Sixtus in a.d. 259. The heads of their charge were
complain to
s. Dionysius two ; — that the Bishop of Alexandria asserted the Son of God
of Rome : ' r
to be a creature, and refused the word and the doctrine of Con
substantiality. A Council, whether already assembled for some
who, in other cause, or convoked by the Pope to decide on this, con-
condemns demned without hesitation the doctrine contained in, or deduced
submitted to from, the extracts submitted to them. The Bishop of Rome
wrote, in their name as well as in his own2, to his namesake of
Alexandria, informing him both of the charges made against
him, and of the decision to which the Council of Rome had
come. At the same time, perhaps to vindicate himself from the
suspicion of holding an opposite error, the Pontiff himself
composed a work against the Sabellians.3
The Bishop of Alexandria, on the receipt of these missives,
found himself put, as it were, on his trial, with Rome for his
accuser, and the whole Church for his judge. That he, whose
whole life had been one long struggle with heresy, — he, who
could look back on the time when he confirmed in the faith or
1 S. Athanas. de Sentent. S. Dion- talis Alexander, make a singular mis-
ysii, § 13. take, from a mistranslation of the
2 S. Athanas. de Synod. WOrds of S" Athanas»us, in attributing
this treatise against the Sabellians to

3

Baronius, (263, xxxvi.) and Na- Dionysius of Alexandria.

SECT. IX.] RISE OF THE SABELLIAN HERESY. 73
disposed to unity the very Pontiff who now appeared as his
opponent, — that he should thus be compelled to stand on his
defence must have been a bitter task ; and one which a proud
spirit would probably have refused, even though he had thereby
plunged the whole Church into an abyss of confusion. Not so
Dionysius. He had already, it appears, addressed a letter1 to the Bishop a j>. 261 or
of Rome on the same subject ; and more particularly in defence the Bishop
of his unwilhngness to use the word Consubstantial. But he andria com-
0 t poses his
now, under the title of a Refutation and Apology2, composed Refutation
four books,3 or epistles,4 (for they are indifferently called by both Apology ;
names) against the accusations of the Pentapohtans. He com
plains that his accusers quoted his words in so disjointed and
arbitrary a manner, that they misrepresented his sense ; — that
they uniformly afiixed to them the worst signification, and in whicn he
made him say things which he was far from intending. denies,
His adversaries had urged against him that he had asserted
the Son to be different in substance from the Father ; bringing
forward the unhappy, — because nakedly stated, — illustration of
the Vine and the Vinedresser.
He replies, that he had not used the term Consubstantial, as
not having found it in Scripture5; but that his meaning, if
rightly considered, was the same with that of those who em
ployed it ; that the examples in his first letter sufficiently proved partly
this, and that on this account he was grieved to be unable, at charges
the moment, to lay his hands on a copy of it ; — that as a plant against him.

1 This is clear from the passage of Apology. But Eusebius (H.E. vii. 26)
the first book of the Refutation, quo- and S. Jerome (Catalog. 69,) expressly
ted by S. Athanasius, de Sent. § 23. say that there were four : so that the
2 S. Athanasius perhaps (de Sentent. non-quotation of the fourth by Atha-
§ 1 4) rather stretches a point in argu- nasius is probably accidental. After
ing from this very title that the Arians all, it is just possible that Fleury is
could not claim Dionysius as their own. right ; and that Eusebius counted in
But see Bull, Defens. F. N. ii. 11, 4. the previous Epistle to Dionysius of
3 Modern writers generally say, Rome as one of the books of the
three. Fleury, vii. 54, "Saint Denis— Apology, because it was on the same
repondit — par un ouvrage divise en subject.
trois livres." This probably arises from 4 S- Athanasius calls them so more
the fact, that S. Athanasius, in the be- than once : so does S. Basil (de Spirit.
fore quoted treatise, refers only to the Sanct. cxxix.)
first, second, and third books of the 5 De Sent. 20.

74 patriarchate of Alexandria. [book i.
differed from its root, a river from its fountain, while yet in each
case, the nature of both was the same ; so it was with respect
to these Divine Persons.
It had been urged against him that he had asserted the Son
not of necessity to be eternally existent. He answers, that
what he affirmed was totally different ; namely, that the Father
only was self-existent, the Son existing in and by the Father1;
in the same manner as if the Sun. were eternal its splendour
would be co-eternal ; yet not self-existent, but eternally derived
from the Sun. He had always, he said, affirmed the eternity of
the Father's existence as Father ; and therefore by implica
tion affirmed the eternity of the Son. It had also been objected
that he had spoken of the Father and Son separately, as if
wishing to make a division of Their substance.2 He answers,
that in naming the Father, he implied the Son by the very
title; if there were no Son, how could there be a Father?
In like manner, in naming the Son, he implied the Father ; if
there were no Father, how could there be a Son ? His oppo
nents had said, that the Father, according to him, had created
all things. He defends himself by returning that he had ex
pressly guarded that assertion. The Father, he had affirmed,
was not properly and by way of generation Father of the
things which He created ; therefore He had not created that of
which He was properly and by way of generation Father ; and
therefore it followed from his statement, that the Word was
uncreated. Proceeding to another illustration, he says,3 that as the heart
indites a good word, the thought and word yet remaining en
tirely distinct and unconfused, the one dwelling in the heart,
the other on the lips, while yet one does not exist without the
other, but the thought engenders the word, and the word
exhibits the thought, and the thought is an implicit word, and
the word an explicit thought, and the thought is the father of
the word, and the word the child of the thought, existing with
it, existing from it ; even so that Great Father and Universal
Mind hath before all things His Son, as His Word, Interpreter,
and Angel. 1 Ibid. 18. 2 Ibid. 17. a Ibid. 23.

SECT. IX.] RISE OF THE SABELLIAN HERESY.

75

This apology was considered satisfactory ; — and the Bishop of His defence
Alexandria retained his reputation as the first living Doctor of 1S accep
the Church.1 Doubtless it was providentially ordered that the
suspicious passages in the letter against Sabellius received so
full an explanation ; — otherwise that Epistle would have formed
the great bulwark of the Arians in the subsequent controversy.
Even as it was, they, as we have seen, abused it to their own
purposes ; — and there have not been wanting some, and they
not unable, judges who have believed him, however innocently,
to have given the first hint to the then undeveloped frenzy of
Arius.2

1 It is curious to read the account
which the Mahometan historian,
Makrizi, gives of the tenets of Sabel
lius. — "Others said: That the Son
depends on the Father, as one flame
of fire depends on another flame, and
that the one cannot be severed from
the other without thereby receiving
detriment. This was the opinion of
Sabellius from the Thebais, and his
followers." (§ 123, Ed. Wetzer.)
2 The opinions entertained by S.
Basil and Gennadius on the orthodoxy
of Dionysius, will be more fitly ex
amined in a note. The words of the
latter, who flourished towards the close
of the fifth century, are these : Nihil
creatum, aut serviens, in Trtnitate
credamus, ut vult Dionysius, fons
Arii. But the testimony of this author
has not much weight in a subject like
the present ; the rather that all he
knew about Dionysius he seems to
have known through S.Basil. To the
latter Father, therefore, we turn. In
his epistle to Maximus, — the passage
is too well known and too long for
quotation, — he makes the three follow
ing assertions • 1. That Dionysius
sowed the first seeds of the Anomoean,
— the rankest off-shoot of the Arian,
heresy ; 2. That he is inconsistent,
sometimes allowing, sometimes reject
ing, the use of the word Consubstan

tial ; 3. That he reckons the Holy
Ghost among created things, and thus
rejects His Divinity. With respect to
the first assertion : it seems certain
that S. Basil, at the time of writing
this Epistle, had not read the defence
of Dionysius by S. Athanasius ; but
that he had not read Dionysius's own
defence, addressed to his namesake of
Rome, whatever Baronius says to the
contrary (263, xliii.), is sufficiently
proved by Tiilemont (Mon. Ecc. iv.
262), and Byaeus (§ 215), to be ex
tremely improbable. All .that can be
said is, that Basil, at the time of wri
ting to Maximus, was young, — it is
certain that he was not yet a Bishop,
— and that he wrote somewhat more
hastily than his mature judgment ap
proved. As to the second assertion
of S. Basil, it is as unjust to accuse
S. Dionysius of inconsistency on this
point, as it would be to bring the same
charge against the Church itself.
The great Council of Antioch, holden
a.d. 269 or 270, against Paul of Samo
sata, rejected (at least this seems most
probable,) the term ,becausethatheretic
had abused it : the Council of Nicrea
insisted on it.because Arius couldbe ex
posed by none other. Thus, in writing
against Sabellius, Dionysius refused
to employ it, lest he should appear to
favour the sentiments of his opponent ;

76

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[BOOK I.

SECTION X.

A.D. 260.

Valerian is
taken prisoner :

the Thirty
Tyrants:

WAR, FAMINE, AND PLAGUE IN ALEXANDRIA.
The exile of S. Dionysius was not of very long duration. He had
himself applied to Valerian the words of the Apocalypse ; "there
was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphe
mies ; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two
months."1 And in fact Valerian, after persecuting the Church
for three years and a half, was taken prisoner by Sapor, King of
Persia, by whom he was treated with every indignity during a
ten years' captivity, and at last flayed alive. He was nominally
succeeded by his son Gallienus, who had been associated with him
in the purple ; but the Roman Empire groaned under the violence
of the Thirty Tyrants. Gallienus was anxious to put a stop to
the persecution ; but Macrianus, who with his sons, assumed the
purple in the East, remained the same bitter enemy to Christianity
that he had ever been. Alexandria owned allegiance to him2 ;

when accused of denying the Divinity
of the Son of God, he expressed his
willingness to adopt it. It may also be
observed that, where he most strongly
denied the Son's Consubstantiality
with the Father, he is speaking of
His Human Nature. With reference
to S. Basil's third assertion, it has
been thought, among others by Bull,
(D.F.N, ii. 11,3,) Byseus, (§ 217.)
and Tillemont, (iv. 282,) that he after
wards changed his opinion. In his
first canonical epistle, he twice gives
Dionysius his usual title of Great :
and in his treatise on the Holy
Spirit, he cites a passage of his
in defence of the doctrine of His Divi
nity. It is true that, in quoting this
testimony, he calls it wonderful; and
the Benedictine Editors thence infer
that Basil never changed his opinion :
but, argues Byeeus, it seems fairer to
interpret his meaning to be an ex

pression of admiration at the majesty
and clearness of the passage which he
is citing. This might be very possibly
said, if the word used by S. Basil were
Sav/idaiov — but since it is irapd$o£ov —
rather strange and unexpected than
admirable — and above all vapdSo^ov
anovaai, we cannot but think the Bene
dictine Editors' interpretation the
more probable.
1 Apocal. xiii. 5. Euseb. H. E. vii.
10. s This seems the most natural way
of composing the contradictory evi
dence of historians. We have fixed
a.d. 260 as the date of Valerian's cap
tivity. Pearson in his Ann. Cyp. and
Pagi in his Critice have summed up
nearly all the arguments that can be
brought forward, the former for 260,
the latter for 259. Byseus devotes
§§ 235—260 to a discussion of the
subject.

SECT. X.] WAR, FAMINE, AND PLAGUE IN ALEXANDRIA. 77
and the persecution continuing, Dionysius was, for the time,
unable to return to his flock.
But Macrianus, marching against Aureolus, who had appeared A-D- 261-
in Illyria as a claimant of the empire, was defeated and slain by
him on the borders of Thrace. Thus Egypt fell into the power
of Gallienus. A rescript was immediately addressed by that
emperor to "Dionysius, Primus, Demetrius,1 and the other
Bishops," permitting them to enjoy the general toleration of persecution
rehgious opinions, and strictly forbidding all persons to molest ^|sndria:
them on account of their belief. On this, Dionysius returned
to Alexandria.
But the peace enjoyed by that Church lasted only a very short
time. A quarrel broke out between the soldiery and the popu- insurrection
y " .... in that city :
lace on the most trifling pretence2 (it is said to have arisen in
a dispute between a slave and a soldier, as to whether had the
better shoes). The whole city was in a state of sedition; the
governor was attacked by stones, weapons, and every other
missile that popular indignation supplied. Despairing of life,
iEmilian, a man of parts and vigour, assumed the purple ; — the ^muian
army supported him ; — and he had soon subdued the Thebais purple ;
and the whole of Egypt. He then again returned to his me
tropolis. Part of the city held for Gallienus, part acknowledged
iEmilian ; while Theodotus besieged Alexandria with the troops of A/^gd^J.
the emperor. There were two Christians,3 Eusebius and Ana
tolius, both natives of Alexandria, and both in course of time
Bishops of Laodicea, whose actions deserve to be recorded.
Eusebius was a partisan of Theodotus ; Anatolius among the christian
followers of iEmilian. That part of the city which acknowledged Eusebius
Galhenus was free from any further trouble than the presence Anatolius.
of the army necessarily occasioned; while the other portion
suffered all the horrors of famine. Eusebius, who dwelt in the
former, receiving information from his friend of the dreadful
sufferings of which he was daily eye-witness, used his influence,
which was not inconsiderable, with Theodotus, to obtain a promise
of safety to any one, who would abandon the usurper, and sur
render himself prisoner. He gave notice of this to Anatolius,
1 Euseb. H. E. vii. 13. Who Primus 2 Trebellius Pollio de xxx Tyrannis,
and Demetrius were, it is impossible cap. 21. Euseb. H. E. vii. 21.
to discover. 3 Euseb. H. E. vii. 32.

78

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[BOOK I.

The Great
Plague reappears ;

death of
iEmilian :

who assembled the Senate, and proposed submission to the
Romans. A tumult instantly arose ; but the speaker kept his
place. " At least," said he, " let those who cannot be of any
assistance to us, let the infants, the aged men, and the women,
avail themselves of this promise of security. Weak by nature,
exhausted by famine, what service can they render ? They will
but consume the corn which we should husband for the support
of those who can fight in our defence."
The Senate assented ; and multitudes took advantage of this
permission to escape to the enemy's camp. The Christians,
disguised as women, passed the gates and were in safety ; and
Eusebius took care to provide the nourishment and the medi
cine necessary for those who had suffered such extremity of
hunger. iEmilian possessed nine of the public granaries ; and frightful
famine was followed by pestilence. We have already remarked
that Alexandria, since the first ravages of the plague that had
visited it from Ethiopia, had never been entirely free from it.
It began in autumn, and ended about the rising of the dog star.1
But now the new elements which unwholesome diet, want of
the necessaries of life, and a crowded population, added to pre
disposition towards this disease, caused its ravages to be terrible.
Easter drew on ; and still on all sides raged war, famine, and
disease. " It is easier," writes Dionysius in a Paschal Epistle
to Hierax, an Egyptian Bishop,2 — " it is easier to travel from
east to west, than from one part of Alexandria to another. The
heart of the city is wilder and more pathless than that vast
desert, through which Israel journeyed. The river, as in the
time of Moses, seems turned into blood, and fetid ; — what water
can cleanse the stream itself ? When will the dark and clouded
air become clear and serene ?" — It would appear — for the words
may well be taken literally — that Alexandria was enveloped in
the same dense, close, murky atmosphere that is known to have
accompanied so many great plagues.
At length the arms of Theodotus were crowned with success ;
iEmilian fell into his hands, and was strangled in prison.3 But,

1 So Cedrenus informs us.
chen, in Euseb. vii. 22.
2 Euseb. H. E. 21.

Heini- 3 In these dates, we follow Byseus,
whose reasoning on the subject is
most masterly. Valesius and Heini-

SECT. X.] WAR, FAMINE, AND PLAGUE IN ALEXANDRIA. 79
on the approach of another Easter, the plague appears to have a.d. 264.
raged with increased violence,1 and the subject of Dionysius' s
Paschal letter,2 addressed to the Alexandrians in general, was Paschai
charity. He begins by remarking that to other men such a s.Dionysius.
season would Httle seem the time for a festival ; that every street
and lane of the city was full of misery, that the multitude of
funerals, and the countless numbers of the dying, seemed
to fill all quarters of Alexandria, — that as of old in Egypt,
so also now, there was not a house where there was not
one, — and would there were only one ! — dead. Nevertheless,
as in times past persecution and tyranny could not prevent
them from celebrating the Festivals of the Church, so that the
desert, the ship, the prison became the House of God, (though
none were so blessed as the Martyrs, who were banqueting in
the Kingdom of Heaven ;) so now, in the midst of sickness and
death they might share in the same holy joy. The pestilence,
he observes, while it had not spared the Christians, had com
mitted the greatest ravages among the heathen. Many of the
brethren had taken their fives in their hand, and attempting for
the love of Christ to cure the sick, had died with them ; others
had succeeded in preserving the lives of them to whom they
ministered, at the expense of their own : — they had tended their

chen, more or less closely, agree with ovvtx&s \otfUi. — So that, if this plague,
him. The Editor of the Propaganda as usual, abated at the rising of the
edition makes the letter to Hierax, dog-star in 263, its fresh and more
and the Paschal Epistle on Charity, to terrible attack in the autumn of that
have been written in the same year, year might well be spoken of as a new
263. visitation. We prefer this explanation
1 We thus explain an apparent con- to another which has suggested itself
tradiction between the epistle to to us, — that by the peace which
Hierax, and that on Charity. In the Christ gave might be meant peace
former, Dionysius speaks of the plague from persecution ; without reference
and the war as co-existing : — in the to anything else. The context hardly
latter, after talking of the peace which admits this : The persecution of the
Christ had given to us alone, he Fagans, says he, we suffered alone ;
speaks of a QpaxvraT)) avavvor) and in their civil commotions we suffered
then proceeds, inueaTiaiaitya/ fj v&aos with them ; and then we enjoyed the
aiiTT). It will be observed that in the peace that Christ gave us alone.
letter to Hierax he says but little of This difficulty has not, that we are
the plague, and that rather as a con- aware, been noticed.
tinuation of the pestilence that had 2 Euseb. H. E. vii. 22.
already lasted for several years, — 01

A.D. 265.

80 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
persecutors, and supplied the necessities of those who had been
the murderers of their brethren. Some there were, who taking
up the bodies of the Saints, closing their eyes and lips, bearing
them on their shoulders, washing, composing, and adorning
them, had need, no long time after, that the same offices of love
should be performed to themselves. The Priests and deacons
especially signalised themselves in these deeds of charity; —
and three of the latter, whom we have already mentioned,
Faustus, Chseremon, and Eusebius, fell victims to their love.
The Pagans, on the contrary, endeavoured to avoid death at the
sacrifice of every tie of domestic love ; they would not visit the
sick, they would not bury the dead, and yet they were unable,
after all, to preserve themselves.
The Confessors, who gave their lives for their brethren, are
commemorated as Martyrs on the twenty-eighth day of February.
Eusebius,1 in the Coptic Calendar, is honoured by himself on
the seventh of the same month.
In the ensuing summer the plague seems to have much
abated; — and in his next Paschal Epistle, which was also his
last, addressed to the Christians thoughout Egypt,2 Dionysius
speaks of the city of Alexandria as at rest.

SECTION XI.

END OF S. DIONYSIUS.
Worn out with years and with his labours for the truth,
Dionysius seemed but waiting for his signal to depart and to be
with Christ, which to him was far better, when it pleased God
to make manifest that His servant's continuance yet a little
while in the flesh was more needful for His Church. Paul,
> At least, if we compare the season ftd^frn P"fl of the thirteenth of
of the year both with that in which Jacatit (= Feb ?>) .g the g Eusebius
the Alexandrian Martyrs are cele- who kid down hig j.fe ^ fte pesti_
brated, and with the real time at ience
which the plague was at its height, 2 PJuseb H E vii 22
(i. e. about the beginning of Lent)
there can be little doubt that the

SECT. XI.J END OF S. DIONYSIUS. 81
surnamed from his native city, Samosata,1 (it was situated near
the Euphrates under Taurus, and is now called Sempsat,) had
been raised, about the year 261, to the Chair of Antioch. He
had not long enjoyed that dignity, when being consulted by the
famous Zenobia, in whose power the East then almost entirely
lay, on the doctrines of Christianity, he brought forward certain
dogmas which, gradually acquiring form and consistency, ap
peared to the neighbouring Bishops nothing short of heresy.
He taught that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, propounds a
~ ' ' J new heresy:
formed but one Hypostasis; that the Word and the Spirit
were in the Father in the same manner that reason is in man,
that is, without any real and personal existence ; so that, except
by a latitude of expression, it is improper to speak of either
Father, Son, or Holy Spirit, — but only generally of God.
The Son, he argued, must be prolatitious and without hypostasis ;
how otherwise, such was his blasphemous sophism, could He be
consubstantial with the Father ? On any other hypothesis, he
said, we assert three substances, and thus fall into a modified
Tritheism. Nor was his life at all calculated to recommend
his doctrine. He was arrogant, avaricious, and an affecter
of novelties; — and the Presbyters of his own Church were
thoroughly convinced of his unsoundness in doctrine, and
worthlessness of character.
A Council was convoked at Antioch to consider the question, a council is
.. . . ... /v. summoned
Anxious to obtain all the assistance in their power on an aflair at Antioch -
so momentous, and which might lead to the condemnation
of the third Prelate in the Church, the Priests and Bishops in
and near Antioch requested the attendance of S. Dionysius and s. Dionysius,
x # •* invited, but
S. Firmilian,2 as men unequalled in the East for theological unable to
learning and piety. Dionysius, then on his death-bed, exerted
his remaining energy, and addressed the Fathers of Antioch in writes to the
an epistle in which he vindicated the Catholic Faith : — and
doubtless, as Bishop Bull beautifully speaks, that divine soul,3
on the eve of departing to its God, divinely expounded the true
Divinity of the Saviour. But the Epistle has perished4; — and
1 Le Quien, ii. 933, 4. 4 As, in this assertion, we are con-
2 Epist. ii. Cone. Antioch. ap. tradicted by the great names of Baro-
Euseb. vii. 30. nius, Tillemont, and Bishop Bull, as
3 Bull, D. F. N. ii. 11, 11. well as by the authority of the very able

82

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[BOOK I.

the supposititious writings of Dionysius, wliich pretend to
supply its place, are a poor substitute for its loss.
The Council met ; and Paul, by artifice and a profession of
submission, at that time escaped. The Fathers, using the word

Editor of the Propaganda Edition,
and Dr. Burton, it will be well to
examine the question. Two writings
of Dionysius to Paul remain : — one in
the shape of an epistle to him ; the
other in reply to ten questions which
he had proposed. The first of these
makes mention of an earlier letter,
which he had written to learn the real
sentiments of the heretic. These
writings were discovered at the begin
ning of the seventeenth century, and
printed at Rome in 1608. Valesius,
Dupin, Ruinart, Basnage, and others,
account them spurious : and, though
the question is one of difficulty, the
arguments against them appear to us
overpowering. 1. The Epistle of Dionysius which
we have is directly addressed to Paul,
and makes mention of a previous
letter written to him. But the
Fathers of the Second Council of
Antioch, in their synodical Epistle
to Dionysius of Rome and Maximus,
say, that Dionysius of Alexandria
wrote to Antioch, Tby Tjye/xdya ttjs
Tr\avT)S ou5e irpoapr]attt>s a^nixras, ovSe
trpbs Trp6aunrov ypdtyas. It is answered
that the letter now in question, con
tains no express mention of Paul, its
superscription being merely Aioyiaios,
Kai ol ovp.Trpto(SiTepoi ttjs 'E,KK\7jo-ias
'AAt£ayfipeias, 4v Kupiijj xalpeiv. But
this does not satisfy the strong expres
sions of the Council j the letter men
tioned by them cannot have been
addressed to Paul, otherwise their
language would be calculated to mis
lead. And, as they affixed a copy
of this letter to their own epistle, the
perusal of it, if identical with that
which is now in question, would have
convicted them of exaggeration.

2. The writer of these Epistles does
not seem to have had a very clear
conception of the real doctrines of
Paul. Judging from his composition,
that heretic must have taught that in
our Lord there were Two Hypostases,
Two Christs, Two Sons : one "of
the Father, begotten before all
worlds, the other of S. Mary, and
not existing till receiving an exis
tence from her. This is, or approxi
mates indistinguishably to, Nestorian
ism ; — and, therefore, it is probable
that this letter was written after the
Council of Ephesus ; — and, perhaps,
intended as a. pious fraud to support
Catholic Truth. This is Ceillier's argu
ment (iii. 277) : but, we confess, that
though well put by itself, it does not
seem tous irrefragable. To the question,
how could Paul at once have taught that
Christ was prolatitious and without
hypostasis, and yet that He had Two
hypostases, Garnier's solution in [his
dissertation on Nestorianism, prefixed
to his Edition of Marius Mercator,
appears more ingenious than proba
ble. He imagines that Paul contem
plated a double state in the Word,
one immanent, — to use the language of
the Schools, — the other transient
(4v8td0eToy and KpoipopiKov): that while
He was in the Father, He had, ac
cording to Paul, no other hypostasis
than the Father's ; that when He
was sent on earth, He began to possess
a different hypostasis ; but that when,
having accomplished His work, He
returned to the Father, He again
was, so to speak, swallowed up and
lost in the Hypostasis of God. This
doctrine, a mixture of Nestorianism
and Sabellianism, not only reconciles
the supposed letter of S. Dionysius

SECT. XI.J

END OF S. DIONYSIUS.

83

consubstantial in the same sense that Paul had affixed to it, con
demned it, as it is generally believed : at the same time that they
set forth the Saviour's Divinity in the strongest and simplest
terms. But four years later, the heterodoxy and malpractices
of Paul being now undeniable, he was condemned and deposed ;
and Domnus substituted in his place.
While the first Council of Antioch was yet in dehberation,
Dionysius was called to the joy of his Lord. In the February and departs
of 265 he fell asleep1; and left behind him the reputation of J6e5b- or 'Mal-

with the accounts of Philastrius and
S. Epiphanius ; but has been thought
to explain and to harmonize with the
passages of S. Athanasius, in which
he adverts to the heresy of Paul of
Samosata. 3. But if, notwithstanding this ex
planation, any suspicion arises from the
preceding objection, that the letter of
S. Dionysius is in reality the work of
some anti-Nestorian writer, that sus
picion is very much strengthened
when we observe that the title BcotSkos
is six times in it applied to S. Mary.
It is granted that this word was used
long before the time of S. Dionysius ;
by Origen, for example, (Socrates,
H. E. vii. 32. Origen, in S. Luc. i. 43.)
and more particularly in the Church
of Alexandria (Ed. Propagand. Prsef.
p. 27 ; Fabricius, B. G.v.236,) and, no
longtime after Dionysius, by S. Alex
ander, (Theodoret, H. E. i. 4,) and,
as is well known, by S. Athanasius.
But an occasional use of this name is
all that can be proved before the
Council of Ephesus ; and is very dif
ferent from its adoption, six times, in
the course of one epistle of no very
great length, — a thing of which the
writings of no other ante-Ephesine
Father can furnish an example.
4. A very strong argument to the
same end, is this. In this epistle
Dionysius expressly applies the word
Consubstantial to the Son of God';
and speaks in the strongest possible G

terms of His Divinity. Is it likely
that S. Athanasius, when he wrote the
treatise to which we have often
referred, in defence of the orthodoxy
of Dionysius, could have been ignorant
of, or could have forgotten, these
passages? Yet he nowhere quotes
them ; and granting that he was then
obliged to write in some obscure place,
where he could not procure the epistle
in question, he would surely have
referred to it as existing.
5. The same argument, though less
strongly, applies to the Epistle of
S. Basil to Maximus, to which we
have already referred.
6. It is urged, and it is not denied,
that the style of this letter differs
from that of the other works of
Dionysius ; that the Scriptural argu
ments appear weak, and the quo
tations not apposite. On the whole,
then, we are justified in concluding,
(notwithstanding the able attempt of
the Propaganda Editor to prove the
contrary, and his success in shewing,
from an old Latin version, that they are
of great antiquity,) that the Epistles
to Paul of Samosata are not really the
composition of S. Dionysius.
1 We have already given our reasons
(p. 39, note *) for this date. It is
singular, however, that by no Church
is he commemorated in February.
The Roman Martyrology assigned
Nov. 17, the Greek Menology, Oct.
3, to his memory: in the Coptic
2

84 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
peerless learning, unshaken orthodoxy, and a character that well
entitled him to his usual appellation of the Great.
SDtongsius- '^le *oss °^ ^e writing8 0I" Dionysius is one of the greatest
that has been suffered by Ecclesiastical History. Besides those
that we have noticed, fragments of a Commentary on Eccle-
siastes, and of a treatise against the Epicureans, on Nature,
his canoni- remain to us ; besides an Epistle to Basileides, which is received
cal epistle to . . .
Basileides. by the Oriental Church into its body of Canons. Basileides,
a Bishop in Pentapolis, had asked Dionysius at what hour the
Lent fast ended. At Rome, it appears, it did not conclude till
cock-crow on Easter morning ; in Egypt, it finished on the even
ing of Saturday. The Patriarch observes, that to fix the time
exactly was impossible ; that those are to be commended who
keep vigil till the fourth watch, while they are not to be blamed
who are compelled, by the weakness of their bodies, to repose
themselves earlier ; that the fast, however, was not at an end
till Saturday midnight. He' observes that some passed six days
of Holy Week without eating, — some four, some three, some
two, some not one ; and while he lays down no specific rule, that
he disapproves the conduct of those who make good cheer on
the first four days, and think to compensate it by a strict fast on
the Friday and Saturday. This canon exemplifies the wonderful
rigour of these earlier ages, both in making mention of some
who abstained from food during the whole week, and in simply
not imputing it as a fault if any, compelled by weakness, ate
daily. The second and fourth canons concern physical reasons
for abstaining from the Holy Communion, and the third is on
nuptial continence.
The great humility of S. Dionysius is conspicuous in the end
of this epistle. You have not consulted me, says he, through
ignorance, but to do me honour, and maintain peace ; you will
judge my observations for yourself, and let me know your
decision. We may remark, as an instance of the extraordinary
power of the See of Alexandria, that S. Dionysius, though
writing to a Bishop, addresses him by the title of Son, — an
appellation not used in the like sense, even by Rome.
Calendar, Sept. 14 is dedicated to may reconcile all accounts by sup-
him ; but March 9 is mentioned as posing Philip to have begun his reigu
the day of his decease. If the latter not, with most historians, at the be-
should be, as it may be, correct ; we ginning, but at the end of March, 247.

SECT. XII.] S. MAXIMUS AND S. THEONAS. 85

SECTION XII.
S. MAXIMUS AND S. THEONAS.
Maximus,1 whom we have already had occasion to mention as s. Maximus,
. Patr. XV.
the companion, was also the successor of S. Dionysius. The succeeds ''
uneventful annals of this Patriarch prove that the Church of
Alexandria, after her long afflictions, enjoyed some repose. The
persecution of Aurelian either did not extend to, or did not rage
in Egypt. The occasions on which this prelate appears in Eccle
siastical History are two only. The first is in the superscription
of the synodical epistle, written by the Fathers of the Second
Council of Antioch, when, as we have already seen, Paul of
Samosata was deposed. That letter is addressed to Dionysius of
Rome, and Maximus of Alexandria. The second is a letter2
written to him by S. Felix of Rome, the successor of Diony
sius, on the subject of the heresy, which survived the deposition,
of Paul.
Having governed his Church3 more than seventeen years, his death :
Maximus was called to his rest ; and some internal divisions, if
we may trust an obscure tradition,4 troubled Alexandria, which
1 He is called Maximinian byNice- makes the Dominical letter A, and
phorus. gives 282 as the year.
2 Sollerius, § 170. A fragment of ' 4 This appears from Abu'lberkat,
this Epistle was read in the Council of who, in the words of his translator,
Ephesus. says, Post Maximum, nescio quis Be-
3 Eusebius, (H. E. vii. 32,) says bnudensis factus est Patriarcha; at
eighteen, by which, perhaps, he means cum seipsum castrasset, gradu dejec-
more than seventeen : Makrizi, (§ 98) turn, ideoque ex Patriarcharum cata-
twelve : the Chronicon Orientale, logo expunctum dicunt. Quidam Beb-
twelve years and nine months : Euty- nudensisis a false translation of Wans-
chius (i. 392) eighteen: Nicephorus lebius,for "oneBebnuda," — orPaph-
and Georgius Syncellus, eight, (per- nutius. This story is confirmed by the
hapsbyafalsereading'of3)fon^):Abu'l- Chronicon Orientale, that the See was
berkat, more correctly, seventeen years vacant a year, a thing which cannot
and five months. The date of his easily be otherwise accounted for ;—
death, 282, is fixed, as well by the but is rendered improbable by the
context of Alexandrian chronology, as fact, that when the Jacobites, as we
by the assertion of the Chronicon shall see, wanted a precedent for the
Orientale, that it took place on Sun- deposition of Cyril ben Laklak, they
day, Barmuda xiv, (= April 9) which could find none.

86 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
schism at were at length composed by the elevation of Theonas1 to the
Alexandria : Evangelical Chair. The new Patriarch found his flock suffering
s. Theonas, from a local persecution ; but he courageously exposed himself
a.d. 382. ' to public observation : and at length, if we may believe Euty
chius, obtained leave to build a church.2
The Episcopate of this Patriarch was a time of much suffer
ing to the Egyptians. In its ninth year,3 Achilleus assumed
the purple at Alexandria, and held it for six years. The city
Achmeus was taken by Diocletian after an eight months' siege : its walls
assumes the *¦ ^
Elndria were leveUe<l with the ground, and the usurper and many who
had favoured, or were suspected of favouring, - his interests,
put to death. The whole of Egypt suffered severely : death,
exile, and fine were inflicted on many of the principal inhabi
tants in its various cities.
We possess an Epistle4 of Theonas ; — and the prudence and
piety which it exhibits may well make us deplore that we have
s. Theonas fout one. It was apparently written towards the beginning of
Ludan the reign of Diocletian, and is addressed to Lucian, chief of the
gentlemen of the bed-chamber. " The peace," says the Bishop,
" which the Churches now enjoy, is granted to this end ; that
1 The ^Ethiopic Calendar calls him tion of the Temple of Mary. Cuperus
"tCD'Ffl: Pococke, by a fault in aSrees with tbese authorities.
the MS. of Eutychius, Neron, (Com- 3 FaP- Critic. 296. vii.
pare Eutychius i. 399, with Renaudot * ™s Epistle, which only exists in a
53). See also Cuperus the Bollandist Latin Translation, was first published
(August iv. 397). ^ D'Achery in the xii. volume of his
Specilegium (p. 545). It bears as its
* Eutychius i. 397. He adds that title- ^3P*«« of Theonas the Bishop.
it was dedicated in honour of S. Mary, ^'^hery himself did not believe it to
and Severus asserts that it was called have been the writing of the Bish°P °*
Tamaoutha, that is, as Renaudot con- Alexandria, but his reasons are not
jectures, eaipurra, from the miracles strone : the principal being an argu-
performed there, though others, as the ment from the hostility of Diocletian

editor of S. Dionysius, explain it to

to the Christian name, and the con-

mean, the Mother of God. The Ethio- se^ueut ^Probability of his having
pians speak of it as a tower. But it is Christian courtiers. But at the begin-
difficult to believe that such a dedica- nm& of his reiSD > Diocletian, as every
tion took place at so early a period. one know3' loured the Christians.
The tradition, however, was very CuPeras seems to have demonstrated
widely credited ; and the Ethiopic the «""' Probab«*y (to say the least)
Calendar on the second of June, cele- that the letter was written h? Theonas
.. „ j. of Alexandria, § iii. It is given in
brates, as a great festival, 'Plffl/ t> .i>> r. v ¦ o , ...
' >r^,,«> Routh's Reliqma; Sacrse, vol. ni. p.
n/f: «"!<;,?«?»: the Dedica- 307, seq., 1st edition.

SECT. XII.] S. MAXIMUS AND S. THEONAS. 87
the good works of Christians may shine out before infidels, and
that thence our Father, Which is in heaven, may be glorified.
This should be our chief end and aim, if we would be Christians
in deed, and not in word only. For, if we seek our own glory,
we desire a vain and perishable thing : but the glory of the
Father and of the Son, Who for us was nailed to the Cross,
saves us with an everlasting redemption, — that great expectation
of Christians. I neither think therefore, nor wish, my Lucian,
that you should boast, because many in the Court have come,
by your means, to the knowledge of the truth : you should
rather give thanks to God, Who hath chosen you as a good
instrument to a good result, and hath given you favour in the
sight of the Prince, to the end that you should spread abroad
the savour of the Christian name, to His glory and to the
salvation of many." Having dwelt on the necessity of avoiding
every thing that might cast a stumbling block in the way of
Diocletian, " God forbid," he proceeds, "that you should sell to ™ *ecdhn^
any the entry of the Palace, or receive a bribe to suggest what ian courtier:
is unseemly to the Emperor's ear. Put away from you all
avarice, which worketh idolatry, rather than the Christian
religion. Unworthy gain, and duplicity is much unbefitting
him who embraces Christ, the Poor and the Simple. Let
there be no evil speaking, nor immodest language among you.
Let all things be done with kindness, courtesy, and justice : that
in all things the Name of our God and Lord Jesus Christ
may be magnified. Fulfil the duties to which you are severally
appointed with fear towards God, and love towards the Emperor,
and exactness and diligence. Account that all commands of the
Prince, which offend not against those of God, proceed from
God Himself. Put on patience as a robe : be filled with virtue
and the hope of Christ."
He then proceeds to the particular duties of those whom he is
addressing : — one of whom, it appears, had the charge of the
privy purse ; — another of the wardrobe, — a third of the gold and
silver vessels. The post of librarian was not yet filled up : but
the Bishop gives directions, in case a Christian should be nomi
nated to it, for the proper discharge of that function. The libra
rian should acquaint himself with the principal orators, poets, and
historians of antiquity. He should, as occasion served, intro-

88 patriarchate of Alexandria. [book i.
duce the mention of the Septuagint as a book that had attracted
the attention of a King of Egypt, and might not be unworthy
the perusal of an Emperor of Rome. The books which Diocle
tian most frequently read should be well arranged, and trans
cribed from the most correct copies, or amended by learned men ;
they should be handsomely, but not sumptuously, written, and the
affectation of purple membranes and gold letters, (unless the Em
peror expressly commanded it,) should be avoided. The Bishop
concludes with general exhortations for behaviour towards Dio
cletian, for cheerfulness, submission, and the utmost complai
sance that the Law of God did not forbid ; — at the same time,
retirement must be found for prayer, and for the reading of the
Scriptures, " which will enable you," — thus the letter concludes,
— " to fulfil your duties in the love of Christ, and to despise all
things transitory for the sake of His Eternal Promises, and shall
conduct you to the attainment of everlasting felicity."
AiSDe3oo History records nothing further of this Prelate1 : he was sum
moned from his labours towards the beginning of January,
3002 ; and was surnamed by his people The Column of the
Church.3 The Alexandrian school, during his time under the
management of Peter, the succeeding Patriarch, still retained its
fame, as it had done since the Mastership of S. Dionysius, under
the succession of Clemens II. , Pierius, Theognostus, and Serapion.

1 The Arabic writers will have it sword, and with a spear, and with a
that, in his time, Sabellius the heresi- shield, but I come to thee in the Name
arch came to Alexandria, and entering of the Lord of Hosts, the God of the
the church in which the Bishop was sit- House of Israel, Whom thou hast de-
ting, challenged him to a dispute on fied.'' The dispute began, and the Ca-
the Faith, promising, in case himself tholic champion was carrying convic-
were confuted, to return to the Catho- tion to the hearts of all the bystanders,
lie Church ; and requiring, if he were when Sabellius was seized with an apo-
victorious, that Theonas should em- plexy, and fell down dead. The greater
brace Sabellianism. The latter, think- part of this tale is certainly fabulous,
ing such a controversy beneath his own and probably the whole is so : though it
dignity, committed it to Peter, one of is likely enough that Sabellius may, at
his priests and his successor: and Sa- an earlier peiiod, as having been a
bellius loudly complained of the haugh- native of Pentapolis, have endeavoured
tiness of the Prelate, in not entering the to propagate his tenets in Alexandria.
lists, and appointing so youthful a sub- 2 Euseb. H. E. vii. 32, close to the
stitute. Peter replied, in the words of end.
David, " Thou comest to me with a ' Ludolf, Comm. p. 404. note (e.)

SECT. XII.J S. MAXIMUS AND S. THEONAS. 89
More particularly, Pierius1 enjoyed great reputation as a teacher
of philosophy, and left so many learned treatises on various sub
jects, as to acquire the title of the second Origen. He survived
the persecution of Diocletian, and took up his abode in Rome,
where he died.
One remarkable epoch dates from the Patriarchate of Theo- Era of
nas. It is well known that the ancient Alexandrian Church did
not reckon its years from the Incarnation, but from the Era of
Martyrs : that is, from the first year of the reign of Diocletian,
"that reign which sent so many Martyrs to Paradise. The Cop
tic Communion still employs that computation ; the orthodox
Alexandrian Church has long disused it; exchanging it, as
almost all other national customs, for the use of Constantinople.
In future, we shall employ both one and the other reckoning.2
1 S. Hieron. Catal. ii. 915, Prsef. in ing that the Ethiopic Church uses
Os. 6. xxiii. xxiv. the same computation, and calls it the
2 Scaliger, as is well known, reckons Era of Grace. He quotes Ludolf; but
the Era of Martyrs, from the nine- Ludolf says no such thing. An Egyp-
teenth year of Diocletian. Renaudot tian Ecclesiastic, writing in 1707,
clearly shews that it is to be computed called it flCE^ E(D%c4,*1D"t*:
from the beginning of his reign (p. ^^ ^ _ .^ ; .
f o ,, ¦ ,o*t^- ""rnZT: that is, the Year of
62): and so does Sollerius, p. 33* Dio- „* „ It. t™.- •
X . , A y. -o t Grace, 7207. Now the Ethiopians
cletian, as is amply proved by Feta- '
f , , , „ . , t. , • t. compute 5500 from the creation of the
vius, Labbe, Paei, and Buchenus, be- r . ,
. „ ¦- or., l.\l world till the Incarnation: thus the
ean to reign Sep. 17, 284 : but the . . , , ,
%. ,„ ; u ¦ t «. oon. r year of Grace 1S here eTidently the
Era of Martyrs begins from the 29th of J . „mmT„ .. „,„„ .
„ / B _ . , „ year of the World, however it may at
August of that year. Gregory Abu'l- , , . , , -, t, , .
5 . . , a j * X, X. other times have been used. Renaudot
Pharai is clear on the date of the era,
,»i ,a. tr, i > *. i .- n seems to follow Scahger.
p. 133 (84 of Pococke s translation).
Renaudot is certainly mistaken in say-

90

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA,

[BOOK I.

SECTION XIII.

PERSECUTION OF DIOCLETIAN.

s.Peter Hitherto, however illustriously her Prelates had confessed the
Martyr: J
Patr. xvn., truth, and however boldly they had testified, even before the
A.D. 300. ' J J '
a.m. 16. tribunal, to the Name of Christ, the Evangelical Throne of
Alexandria had never been filled by a Martyr. Of the other
two great Sees, Rome1 could claim that glorious title for sixteen
or seventeen of her Pontiffs : Antioch, for at least two of her
Prelates. Alexandria was now to be counted worthy of the
same honour.
The infancy of Peter is, by the oriental writers,2 ornamented
with many fables. They inform us, that he was ordained Priest
at the age of seventeen, and nominated by the dying Theonas as
his successor : events unlikely in themselves, and not based on
any satisfactory authority. From these authors, however, we
gain an additional testimony (were it needed) against the mis
statement of Eutychius, with respect to the Presbyteral College
founded by S. Mark. S. Peter was constituted Patriarch, we
are told by Severus, by the imposition of the hands of the
Alexandrian clergy and laity. But that the laity ordained as
Bishop, is evidently an absurd statement, and the words must
therefore be understood of election.
S. Peter's first act was not only attended with considerable
trouble to himself, but was fraught with momentous consequen
ces to the Church of Egypt. The See of Lycopolis,3 situate on
the northern boundary of the Thebais, appears to have possessed

his conse
oration :

Meletius,
Bishop of
Lycopolis,

1 Nothing shews more clearly the
comparative exemption of Alexandria
from the earlier persecutions, than the
fact that at the commencement of the
tenth, twenty-nine Pontiffs had already
governed Rome, while there had been

a succession of but seventeen in
Egypt. 2 Renaudot, p. 51.
3 Le Quien, ii. 598. Pliny, H. N.
v. 9. Wansleb. 24. It is now called
Siut, or Osiut, and is a Coptic See.

SECT.

XII.]

PERSECUTION OF DIOCLETIAN.

91

some honorary pre-eminence over the other bishoprics1 of the
Dicecese of Alexandria. Alexander,2 who during the time of Theo
nas, had filled that See,had distinguished himself by aworkagainst
the Manichaeans, which still exists. His successor was Meletius,
a man of far different character. He had for some time been a
cause of scandal, from the crimes of which he was suspected, and
at length, in some local persecution, or perhaps popular insur
rection, he renounced the faith, and sacrificed to idols.3 On apostatizes":
this, Peter convoked a Council at Alexandria, by which the
offending Bishop was convicted and deposed. Meletius, how- is deposed,
ever, was by no means willing to submit to the sentence. Instead
of appealing to another Council, he separated himself from the

1 S. Epiphanius, Haer. 68, (where
he is, unconsciously, using Meletian
documents,)says,Toui'KaTa.T$jp AlyvnToV
TtpoiiKusv, Kai Sevrepeuav Tip TX&rpip
Tip ttjs 'A\e%ayBptlas Kara tV apx^Tria-
Koiriv. And again, Haer. 69, MeA.eV(os
o T7js Aiyii-iTTOv airb ®rtfiatBos BoKay elvai
ko! ambs a.px'(^i<TKOwos. Renaudot re
jects these accounts as mere false
hoods, contrived by the Meletians, for
the propagation of their schism. But
not to say that this does not seem
a thing capable of invention, it
affords some grounds for the rapid
spread of the schism, if we allow the
superior dignity of its first mover.
For Tillemont's hypothesis, il estoit le
premier eveque de toute VEgypte
apres S. Pierre, peutestre par son
antiquite, (V. 3. ii. Ed. 1707,) there
seems no ground whatever.
2 Photius de Manich. Bibl. Coiss.
Cod. 270, p. 354.
3 This fact is denied by Basnage
and others. They found their argu
ments on the silence of S. Epiphanius,
who accounts Meletius an illustrious
Confessor : and also in the fact that
the Fathers of Nicsa, while laying
other crimes to the charge of Meletius,
say nothing of his Apostacy, which, if
true, would have been the gravest of
all. The account of Epiphanius is so

evidently extracted from falsified docu
ments, that much weight cannot be
attached to it : while the silence at
Nicaea may simply arise from the
difficulty at such a distance, (both of
timeand space,) of convictingMeletius.
Such arguments cannot avail against
the express and positive declaration
of S. Athanasius.
* The date of the Meletian schism
has been much contested. S. Athana
sius, in his encyclic epistle against
the Arians, asserts that fifty-five years
had then elapsed since its commence
ment. Baronius, and, though less de
cidedly, Tillemont, fix the date of that
epistle to a.d. 362, which would make
the schism to have broken out towards
the end of a.d. 306. But Pagi, (306.
xxix.)and the Benedictine Editors of S.
Athanasius, prove incontestably that
the encyclic epistle was written in 356,
which gives 301 for the date of
the schism. As to Tillemont's argu
ment (V. 3, 381, note viii.) that
this date is impossible, because the
tenth persecution had not then com
menced, whereas Meletius had already
apostatized, it is easy to reply, that he
did so in some local persecution ; for
such were not unfrequent during the
whole reign of Diocletian.

92

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[BOOK I.

raises a
schism:

his tenets :

he is joined
by Arius.

Communion of the Church; and thus obtained the miserable
renown of being the first leader of a schism at Alexandria, as
Novatian had been at Rome. Like Novatian, too, he professed
to separate himself from Peter, on account of the too great
facility with which the latter re-admitted apostates.
To strengthen his party, Meletius took upon himself to ordain
Bishops of his own sect : and he consecrated as many as thirty,
one of whom arrogated to himself the title of Bishop of Alexan
dria. Meletius further claimed a total exemption from Patriar
chal jurisdiction,1 and pretended, it would seem, to confer this
exemption on others. To what cause we are to attribute the
rapid spread of his schism, it is not easy to divine : possibly the
distance of Lycopolis from Alexandria, and the then recent acces
sion of Peter, may have been favourable to its growth. We have
already observed, that the Patriarch was the only Archbishop
(till the conversion of Ethiopia), in his own Dicecese ; and this
rendered the attempt of Meletius still more unjustifiable.
The schism soon began to develope into heresy ; — and the
monks who attached themselves to it, were foremost in this ad
vance. They are accused of Judaical observances in respect of
ceremonial purifications ; of mixing dances and unseemly mo
tions in the service of God : of looking for a Heaven that
abounded with sensual delights. It is possible that, in process
of time, they were guilty of some innovation in the Form of
Baptism : for S. Peter, as we are informed by Sozomen,2 refused
them as invahd.
Not content with the propagation of his sect, Meletius spread
the most unfounded calumnies against his Patriarch. And
these reports had a wide circulation, and enjoyed considerable
credit ; for we find S. Epiphanius himself misled by them.
One of the principal adherents of Meletius was Arius, a native
of Libya.3 This man, even then distinguished by his powers of
argument and persuasion, in a short time reconciled himself to

1 Socrates, H. E. i. 6. Sozomen,
H. E. i. 15, 24. Theodoret, i. 8.
2 Sozomen, H. E. i. 15. Tlerpov to
aurwv 0a.irTt(rp.a p.7) irpoffiep.4yov. It
seems impossible to take this as Baro
nius, (306. Ii.) following Nicephorus,

8. 5, does, that Peter simply forbade
the Meletians to baptize : because this,
and so much more, was included in
their excommunication.
3 Sozomen, H. E. i. 15.

SECT. XIII.] PERSECUTION OF DIOCLETIAN. 93
the Church, and was ordained Deacon by S. Peter. But when the
latter excommunicated Meletius and his partizans, Arius exclaimed
against his tyranny, and was so pertinacious in his opposition,
that the Bishop suspended him from the exercise of his ofiice.
And now the greatest and the last of the persecutions was
drawing on.
S. Peter had not sat fully three years, when Diocletian, urged Diocletian
._.,. J J jo commences
on by Galerius, commenced the last and the most bloody perse- the great
. ¦> L Tenth Perse
cution.1 By a first edict, issued at Nicomedia towards the end cution:
. -„ Feb. 23,
of February, he commanded the demohtion of the churches, and a.d. 303.
the destruction of the sacred books. A second rescript ordered
the imprisonment of all Ecclesiastics ; a third, which followed
close upon it, the death of all that should refuse to sacrifice. In
the beginning of the next year, a fourth and more stringent
edict, against all Christians, of all stations whatsoever, was
pubhshed ; and then the persecution began to grow tremendous
in Egypt and the Thebais.
Of these illustrious Confessors of Christ we must speak, not
as their acts deserve, but as the analogy of history will permit.
Eusebius was himself a spectator of the courage of some Egyptian
Martyrs who were crowned at Tyre.2 After being lacerated with Egyptian
1 i i iii Martyrsat
the scourge, they were exposed to the fury of leopards, bears, Tyre.
and boars, and these animals were irritated by strokes and
fire. But they either refused to attack the Christians, or were
repelled by some invisible force ; and, as in revenge, sprung on
the Pagan keepers of the arena and commissioners of the games.
One youth stood calmly awaiting their onset, extending his
arms in the form of a Cross, and occupied in prayer; — the
animals could not be induced to attack him.
Eusebius visited Alexandria while many of its inhabitants secondyear:
remembered the terrors of this period3; and professes himself in the
Thebais *
perfectly unable to recount the names of even the chief Martyrs.
In the Thebais, more especially, day after day, month after
1 In the chronology of this perse- 3 Euseb. H. E. viii. 9. The Martyrs
cution, so far as respects Egypt, of the Thebais are celebrated in the
Tillemont seems more satisfactory Western Church on the 5th day of
than other historians : Baronius and January. Their number is reckoned,
Fleury are guilty of several palpable in ancient Martyrologies, at 144,000 ;
inaccuracies. and that of the Confessors at 700,000,
2 Euseb. H E. viii. 7. which seems a great exaggeration.

94 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK. I.
month, and year after year, the executioners went on : fifty,
eighty, a hundred fell daily ; the executioners were wearied out
with slaughter, and relieved each other by gangs ; in some in
stances, the axe was worn out by use ; all kinds of tortures were
employed : some were crucified ; some suspended in the air by
the feet ; some burnt ; some drowned ; some were tied to two trees,
bent together by mechanical force, and torn asunder by them
when that force was relaxed ; some rent by hooks of iron, some
with potsherds. The Pagans themselves took pity on the suf
ferers, and as far as they could, sheltered and concealed them ;
but many Christians were unwilling thus to be deprived of the
glory of Martyrdom. The apostacy, so prevalent in the Decian
persecution, was now scarcely heard of ; women and children con
fessed Christ joyfully ; many were thrown into prison, mutilated,
and dragged through the streets ; many looked cheerfully on
the deaths of those they held dearest.
Martyrdom The first of the Egyptian Martyrs under Diocletian,1 with
Jan. 21. whose name and acts we are acquainted, was Asclas.2 A native
of Antinous in the Thebais, he was arrested at the command of
the magistrate Arrian, himself, at a later period, a Confessor of
Christ. On refusing to sacrifice, he was tortured with the iron
combs till his flesh hung down in strips ; and even then would
return no answer to the interrogatories of the magistrate.
Bizanon, a professor of oratory, who stood by, suggested that
the prisoner was senseless ; on which S. Asclas replied, My
senses have not left me, nor will I leave the God That made me.
The Confessor was removed to Hermopolis, and there subjected
to the torture of the lamps ; until Arrian, owning himself con
quered, said, As I think, you are about to die. S. Asclas re
plied, Though I die, I shall hve again. A stone was attached
to his neck, and he was thrown into the river. He suffered on
the same day that S. Agnes confessed at Rome. At the same
time S. Leonides obtained his Crown.
S. Apollonius, a monk of great eminence, occupied himself in
1 Unless S. Mennas, whose whole 2 His Acts, which appear somewhat
history is extremely uncertain, as also interpolated, are in Bollandus, under
the country in which he confessed, January 21. See also Petrus de Na-
is entitled to that honour. See Tille- talibus, iii. 16. Baronius, against the
mont v. 3, 91. testimony of all the Acts, places his
confession under Maximin, in 310.

SECT. XIII.] PERSECUTION OF DIOCLETIAN. 95
visiting and comforting his brethren ; many were encouraged by
his persuasion to stand firm. Philemon, a great favourite of the
people for his skill on the flute, met him one day in the city of
Antinous, and began to revile him ; the monk only besought
God to have mercy on his slanderer and not to impute his of ss. Apoi-
words to him. The gentleness of his answer so touched Phi- Philemon.
lemon that he hastened to the magistrate, and confessed himself
a Christian ; the latter, unwilling to deprive the people of their
favourite, tried to pass over the matter as a fit of insanity.
Finding him, however, in earnest, he condemned him, in com
pany with his seducer, as he termed Apollonius, to be burnt
alive. When they were at the stake, the monk besought God's
deliverance from that horrible death. The words were no sooner
uttered than a moist cloud surrounded the pile and extinguished
the fire. Arrian, and great part of the spectators, professed them
selves Christians on the spot. They were summoned to Alex
andria, and by the prefect's order thrown into the sea ; thus
being supplied, say their Acts, with a Baptism wliich the
Augustal little intended to give them.1
Notwithstanding the ferocity of the persecution at Alexandria,
the tendency of the faithful was rather to over -rashness than to
over-prudence. Both in Egypt and the Thebais, men of property,
of rank, and learning, gladly renounced all ; came forward to
confess Christ, and were found among the Martyrs.
The Confession of S. Theodora was attended with some re- of ss. Theo-
. , . . ., dora and
markable circumstances. She was of high birth, and equally Didymus :
celebrated in Alexandria for her family and for her beauty.
Eustratus Proculus, the judge, urged her not to disgrace her
ancestors, nor to despise the rites they had used ; in considera
tion of her youth and noble extraction, he allowed her three
1 The date of this Martyrdom is it Apollonius is said to have been a
much disputed ; and there is much con- reader, who was equally afraid to apos-
fusion in the facts. That S. Philemon tatize, and to endure Martyrdom. He
suffered under Diocletian seems clear therefore gave Philemon a sum of
from the consent of the best Martyr- money, in order that the latter might
ologies. Bollandus, Jan. 28. See also personate him, and sacrifice in his
Rufinus, De Vit. Patt. cap. 19; name. Philemon came before the
Ruinart, 486. There is another magistrate with this design ; but in
account of this event, preserved by his very presence was persuaded of
Simeon Metaphrastes ; but, from the the truth of the Christian religion,
known character of that writer, less professed himself a Christian, and
worthy of credit than the above. In suffered Martyrdom.

96 patriarchate of Alexandria. [book i.
days to make her recantation. On the expiration of that term,
finding her still resolute, the judge ordered that she should be
conveyed to one of those sinks of iniquity with which Alexandria
abounded, and tauntingly inquired, whether the God Whom
she worshipped could now save her ? Theodora, on entering
the place, prayed that He Who had delivered S. Peter from
prison would be pleased to manifest His Power in preserving her
from all contamination. A Christian, named Didymus, who
had heard the sentence, disguised himself as a soldier, and
entering the house, was admitted to the chamber where the
prisoner was confined, when he discovered his true design, by
urging her to take his military cloak and cap, and, under that
disguise, to make her escape. She did so ; and in the course of
an hour, a Pagan having come in, was astonished at finding a
man, seated by himself. Having heard much of the miracles
wrought by the Saviour, he cried out that a woman had here
been changed into a man, and fled with consternation. The
Augustal Prefect, informed of the truth, threatened to put
Didymus to the torture if he refused to discover where S.
Theodora was. The prisoner replied that he knew not : this only
he knew, that she was a servant of the Most High God, Who
had preserved her spotless. The judge commanded him to
sacrifice, and threatened him with double punishment, as a
Christian, and as having abetted the escape of a prisoner.
Finding him firm, he ordered that he should be beheaded. As
Didymus was being conveyed to the place of execution, S.
Theodora, hearing what had passed, hastened to the spot, and
disputed with him the guilt of disobeying the laws, and the
glory of Martyrdom. They were beheaded together ; and are
together reckoned among the Saints.
Third year •. The violence of the persecution was lulled for a short time by
lull in the ... . J
persecution: the abdication of Diocletian and Maximian. Galerius and
resignationof Diocie- Constantius succeeded to the purple : but the former possessed
all the real authority, and his nephew Daia, one of the Csesars,
who had adopted the name of Maximin, a young man of
semi-barbarous extraction, had the government of the East.
He prided himself as being the most vigorous opponent of
Christianity that had yet appeared. The persecution then
recommenced with redoubled fury.

SECT. XIII.J PERSECUTION OF DIOCLETIAN. 97
Phileas,1 Bishop of Thmuis, one of the most important Fourth 5 ear:
cities of Augustamnica Prima, now an inconsiderable town, renewed :
S. Phileas
and known by the name of Tmaie, came to Alexandria, probably visits
to concert some measures with S. Peter for the government of
their flocks during this dreadful crisis. While in the metro
polis, he addressed an exhortation to his Church, of which a
portion has been preserved by Eusebius.
" The Martyrs," — so he writes, — " fixing the eye of their i»s exhorta
soul simply and entirely on the God That is over all, and wel- Martyrdom:
coming death for piety's sake, held fast their calling ; for they
knew that our Lord Jesus Christ became man for us, to the
end that He might utterly destroy all iniquity, and might lay
up for us a provision for our entrance into Eternal Life : for
He thought it not robbery to be equal with God, but emptied
Himself, and took the form of a slave, and being found in
fashion like a man, He humbled Himself, and became obedient
unto death, even the death of the Cross. Wherefore desiring
the greater grace, these Martyrs, filled with Christ, endured
every labour, and all devices of insult, not once only, but some
have already done so twice; and setting at nought all the
threats, not in words only, but in deeds also, of the soldiers that
emulously exerted themselves in actions of cruelty, they flinched
not from their resolution. What account may suffice to describe
their courage, and their manliness under each torture ? For
since all that would had full permission to insult them, some
were struck with clubs, some with lashes, some with thongs,
others with reeds." — The Bishop proceeds to describe the tortures
inflicted on these noble athletes; how some, stretched on the
equuleus, had every portion of their body lacerated with combs
and pincers of iron ; how others were suspended by one hand
from the summit of a pillar, and in the tension of their sinews and
dislocation of their joints endured a torment greater than any
other suffering ; how others, torn with a thousand wounds, were
thrown into prison, if perchance protracted agony might weaken
their resolution.
As Easter,2 in the fourth year of the persecution, drew on, S.
1 Ruinart, Act. Sine. 473, who 2 Can. Pen. S. Pet. Labbe i. 955.—
places the confession of S. Phileas Can. Orient. 334. (By this work, to
after 306, as does Tillemont. which we shall often have occasion to
H

98 patriarchate of Alexandria. [book i.
Peter was pressed by those who had lapsed to appoint them
some canonical penance, and to re-admit them, on its accom
plishment, into the Church. Some had now been excluded from
Communion for three years, and were anxious once more to be
received as penitents ; the rather, that their lives were still in
hourly danger from the persecution. The Epistle which S.
Peter wrote on this occasion is received into the canons of the
Oriental Church. In the Coptic Communion, it is inter
polated with directions for the re-admission of such as had apos
tatized to Mahometanism : — the Syriac Version is free from such
additions, and contains a fragment on Penitence, between the
XHIth and XlVth canons, which does not appear in the Greek.
The 1st Canon ordains that those who, after boldly confessing
Christ, and suffering the torture, had at length yielded through
the infirmity of the flesh, should, in consideration of the time
they had already been excluded from the Church, be received at the
ensuing Easter, on condition of observing the then commencing
Lent with extraordinary devotion. By the Und, those who,
without enduring tortures, had fallen away, from the tedium
of imprisonment, are enjoined penitence for another year. By the
Hird, those who had endured neither torture nor imprisonment,
are, after the example of the barren fig tree, sentenced to four
years' more exclusion. The IVth is not, strictly speaking, a
canon ; but a lamentation over those whose apostacy had not
been followed by penitence. The Vth appoints six months'
further penitence to such as had feigned themselves epileptic,
or had hired Pagans to personate them and to sacrifice, and had
thus received a certificate of having obeyed the edict. The
Vlth and Vllth treat of the case where masters had compelled
Christian slaves to sacrifice in their place. The masters are
condemned to three more years, the slaves, to one, of penitence.
The Vlllth receives at once such as having lapsed, returned to
the conflict, confessed, and came off with life. In the IXth,
S. Peter receives to Communion, while he blames their conduct,
those who had presented themselves at the Tribunal. They
considered not, he says, the meaning of the prayer, " Lead us
refer, we intend the UTi$d\iov ttjs approbation of the Patriarch of Con-
vot\tt)s vi\is, the latest edition of the stantinople, by Constantine Gkarpolas.
Oriental Canons, put forth with the Athens. 1841.)

SECT. XIII.] PERSECUTION OF DIOCLETIAN. 99
not into temptation" ; they laid not to heart His example, Who
waited till His enemies came to take Him ; they listened not to
His Voice, " When they persecute you in one city, flee ye to
another." In like manner, they followed not in the steps of S.
Stephen and S. James, of S. Peter and S. Paul. By the Xth,
Clerks, hurried on by the same indiscreet zeal, are pardoned, on
condition of applying themselves for the future to their respec
tive duties. But if they had lapsed, though afterwards they had
returned to the conflict, they are received to lay Communion
only. The Xlth Canon is an explanation of the IXth, and
declares bystanders excepted from it, who, during the examina
tion or torture of a Martyr, had found themselves carried away
by a generous ardour of imitating him, and had confessed before
the magistrate. The Xllth and XHIth exempt from blame
— in opposition to the hard opinion of the Montanists — those who
had paid a sum of money, and thus escaped confession ; and
those who had evaded it by flight. The XlVth allows those to be
honoured as Confessors, and elevated to the Priesthood, who
had been compelled by force to swallow wine offered to idols,
or to throw incense on the altar. These Canons were ratified
by the Quinisext Council. It is to be remembered that those
of them which enjoin penance, pre-suppose three years to have
been already spent in it.
S. Phileas1 was now called to make good indeed his exhor
tation to Martyrdom. He was arrested by order of Culcianus,
the Prefect, who was extremely anxious that he should be
1 The date and locality of the suffer- Thebais when the Meletian schism
ing of SS. Phileas and Philoromus are commenced ; but Phileas suffered
attended with great difficulty. Ac- under him when he was governor of
cording to Baronius, they confessed in Lower Egypt, i. e., after he had been
the first year of the persecution ; but governor of Thebais, else he would
there is no authority for this statement, have descended from a superior to an
except a mistranslation of Eusebius. inferior government. If the schism
But S. Jerome says expressly that S. commenced in 306, as Tillemont fixes
Phileas suffered under the same tyrant it, this makes the Martyrdom of S.
as S. Lucian: that is to say, Maximin. Phileas at least a year later. But we
As Maximin began to reign in May, have already shown that this was not
305, and S. Phileas suffered in Febru- the case. Some (as, at one time,
ary, it must have been in 306, at the Valesius,) make him to have suffered
earliest. Tillemont and others make in the Thebais. But this is impossible.
another difficulty. Culcian (S. Epi- 1. Because he wrote his exhortation
phan. Haer. 68) was governor of the in Alexandria, just before his Martyr-
H2

100 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
confession lnduced to apostatize, because he had acquired great reputation
s 'pmim °f ^rom ^e s*uc^y °^ philosophy, was of a noble family, and
mus- possessed considerable wealth. He argued with him at great
length, urging him at least to offer sacrifice to his own God ;
¦setting before him the example of Moses, who offered burnt
offerings. Failing in this attempt, he inquired if S. Paul had
not denied the Resurrection of the Flesh ; if he had not been a
persecutor of the Church ; if he were wiser than Plato ? If
conscience were his motive for refusing, did not conscience, he
inquired, also forbid to leave wife and children in distress, and
to disobey the Emperor ? Was Jesus Christ, he further in
terrogated, Very God ? How was the prisoner persuaded of it ?
How could the Crucified be God ? The governor then boasted
of his clemency towards Phileas, who thanked him for it ; he
informed him plainly that had he been less wealthy, he would
not have taken so much pains to convince him by gentle
measures, but he was unwilling to deprive the numerous poor,
who were fed by his alms, of their only resource. As he
continued to argue and to entreat the Bishop to have compassion
on his wife, who was standing by, Philoromus, a magistrate of
Alexandria, who was present, inquired why the Governor en
deavoured to render Phileas faithless to his God, and how he
could hope by the miserable persuasions of earth, to divert him
from the eternal weight of glory, to which he was looking for
ward ? He was instantly arrested, and the two were, by the
Governor's order, led forth to be beheaded. At the place of
execution, S. Phileas, turning to the east, exhorted his hearers
dom (fio-ov otiiru Te\eiw8rio'6nevos) ; and advice as to the reception of penitents,
2.Because in the Acts, Culcian says that on which he was about to decide. S.
he could have punished him at Thmuis. Phileas, therefore, came up to Alexan-
But Thmuis was in Lower Egypt, not dria, towards the end of January, 306 ;
in the Thebais ; therefore Culcian at the conclusion of that month he
was then governor of Lower Egypt, wrote to his flock ; and on February 4,
not of the Thebais. It is strange that 306, he received his reward. Eusebius
another point has not been remarked, speaks of Phileas as a Bishop that
which seems to fix the date. S. Phileas suffered with S. Peter (H.E. viii. 13):
was absent from his See, in time of but there must either have been two
persecution, and just before Lent. of the same name, or the historian
Here are two extraordinary circum- must there be mentioning together
stances, which seem to require an ex- the names of the Bishops of Egypt
planation. Doubtless S. Peter sum- who had suffered in the time of
moned him to Alexandria, to give his S. Peter.

SECT. XIII.] PERSECUTION OF DIOCLETIAN. 101
to watch over their own hearts, to be on their guard against the
great Enemy, to suffer for the Saviour, and to remember His
own precepts. " Let us call," he concluded, " on Him Who is
spotless, and incomprehensible, and sitteth upon the Cherubim,
the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last : to Him be
glory for ever and for ever. Amen." On finishing these words,
he and his companion were beheaded.
In the fifth year of the persecution, the Prefects, wearied out
by the interminable Confessions to which they were every day
witness, began to content themselves with the punishment of
mutilation instead of death.1 Multitudes lost an eye, and were Mutilation
, . • i ofConfes-
branded, and then sent to labour in the mines ; and some sors :
experienced the same fate after having undergone the torture.
Among the most illustrious of these Confessors was S. Paphnu-
tius,2 a Bishop in Upper Thebais, of whom we shall have in
the sequel to speak more at length.
In the following years,3 whole armies of the Confessors were
sent from the Thebais, and condemned to the mines in Palestine
and Phoenicia. At one time we meet with ninety-seven, at
another, with one hundred and thirty of these Christian heroes,
sent into banishment ; and three Egyptians, Ares, Promus, and
Ehas, sealed the truth with their blood at Ascalon. In like
manner, two Bishops of Egypt, with a Priest named Ehas, and
Patermuthius, whom Eusebius mentions as known far and wide
by his charity, suffered by fire in Palestine. Thirty-nine Chris- Martyrdoms
/• i t» ¦ i pai i-T . n la Palestine:
tians, the greater part from the Patriarchate of Alexandria, laid
down their lives at Gaza. And, towards the close of the
persecution, four Bishops, Hesychius, Phileas,4 Pachymius,5 and
Theodorus, with many priests and laymen, were crowned at
Alexandria. It would seem that this S. Hesychius was the
same of whom S. Jerome writes,6 and who published a new
edition of the LXX.
1 S. Chrysost. Horn, in Mart. Egypt. 5 The Acts of S. Peter call him
Tillemont, v. 3, 119. Pachoromus ; and add that the num-
2 Baronius, 310, xxiii. ber of their fellow Martyrs was 660,
3 Euseb. H. E. 8, 13. wliich Valesius (Euseb. H. E. ix. 6,)
4 We have already given our reasons seems to credit.
for believing that this S. Phileas was
a different Prelate from him who suf- 6 Baronius, 306, liii.
fered with S. Philoromus.

102

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[book

Towards the conclusion1 of the persecution, an event happened,
which, though somewhat uncertain in a few of its details, is, in
its general character, undoubtedly true. Mennas, an Athenian
of consummate wisdom and prudence, was entrusted by
Maximin with the Augustal Prefecture. He used his influence
and talents, and, it is said, his power of miracles, to propagate
the Faith, to which he had been converted ; and, in consequence,
Hermogenes, also an Athenian, was sent out to supersede and to
punish him. The ex-Prefect was cruelly tortured, but super-
naturally healed. His arguments and constancy touched the
heart of Hermogenes, and both Augustals, to the astonishment
of the Pagans, did all in their power for the increase of the
Church. Maximin himself visited Alexandria, and condemned
and's^Her!8 both the Confessors to death ; and at this time it probably was
mosenes: that S. Catherine* suffered.
In Cyrene, the Bishop Theodore3 was among the Confessors,

1 Menolog. Dec. 10, Baronius, 307,
xxxiv. — xxxvii. In the Ethiopic
Calendar, on the same day, we have
Menas ; but then he is joined with
Simeon Behor, of whom the Coptic
Calendar says, that he was a Monk
who suffered Martyrdom under the
Mussulmans. But on the 4th of
Oct., we have O^ffj ; (Difj |\f :
Menas and Hasina: which last name
may be a gross corruption of Her
mogenes. 2 Eusebius, H. E. viii. 14, mentions,
among those who had resisted the un
holy solicitations of the tyrant Maxi
min, a lady of Alexandria, remarkable
for beauty, wealth, and talent. The
emperor used every possible means to
bend her to his will ; but on her con
stant refusal, his passion for her would
not allow him to take her life. Rufinus
adds, that she had consecrated herself
to God, and that her name was
Dorothea. Baronius ( 307, xxxi. )
thinks that this may have been the
celebrated S. Catherine, more properly
Hecaterina, which name, as derived
from Hecate, she might have been in
duced to change. Pagi (307, xvi.)

denies the possibility of this, because
the constant tradition of the Church
is, that S. Catherine suffered Martyr
dom : whereas Eusebius expressly
affirms that the lady of whom he
writes, was only condemned to banish
ment. With him agrees Bollandus
(February 6), and Tillemont v. 3, 101.
The present fame of S. Catherine, as
compared with the total ignorance
that prevailed, for many centuries, of
her name, is remarkable. Till the
tenth century, no mention is made of
her by the Oriental Church : in that
age, we are told, one Paul, a hermit,
celebrated her festival with great de
votion. The Crusades introduced the
fame of S. Catherine into the West.
She is not mentioned in the Ethiopic
Calendar. 3 TheRomanMartyrology, on the 26th
ofMarch,celebratesS.Theodore,Bishopof Ptolemais, and on the 4th of July, S.
Theodore, Bishop of Cyrene. These, as
Le Quien (ii. 621) observes, seem to be
one and the same person. There was
another Martyr Theodore, a soldier,
under Licinius, named by Eutychius
(i. 427), and celebrated in the Ethiopic

SECT. XIII.] PERSECUTION OF DIOCLETIAN. 103
with a Deacon Irenaeus, and two Readers, Serapion and
Ammonius. The Prelate survived. But none was more illus
trious than S. Cyrilla, in the same city. When the burning coals s cyrMa :
with the incense were forced into her hand, she held it motion
less, lest, if she shook them off, she should seem to have
sacrificed : after this she was grievously tortured, and so entered
into Paradise.
S. Peter's life was spared to his Church as long as it stood in s. Peter :
need of his care and protection. Like another Moses, he was
permitted to see the good land into which the Lord was about
to bring His people, though he himself might not enter there
into. He heard of the cessation of the persecution m the West,
and in Palestine ; he received tidings of the edict for liberty of
Christian worship that the dying agonies of Galerius wrung
from him, and then he was called to follow his companions, and
to close the long train of Martyrs for Christ. In his company
suffered Faustus,1 whom we have already mentioned as sig
nalising himself under S. Dionysius,2 Dius, and Ammonius.
It is remarkable, considering the high place which he held
in the Church, as well from his office as his sanctity, that no
authentic acts of his Confession have been preserved. The
Arabic historian, Severus, gives an account, which, though
mixed up with some fables, probably contams a good deal of
truth, and may, therefore, be worth while relating.
There was, he says, at Antioch, a Christian of some dignity, story of
named Socrates, who in time of persecution fell away. His
wife remained faithful, and requested her husband's leave to
to take his two sons to Alexandria, for the purpose of being
baptized there. He refused, fearing the emperor's wrath ; on
which she made her escape with them, and commending herself
to God, embarked for Egypt. A storm arose, and the sailors
gave themselves up for lost. The mother, unwilling that her
children should perish unbaptized, herself performed the rite, in
the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost. The tempest passed over, and the ship arrived safely
and Coptic Calendars, on the 20th of * Euseb. H. E., viii. 13.
July, and who is to be distinguished
from him who is known as Theodorus 2 Ante p. 67: and, of course to be dis-
Tiro, and celebrated by S. Gregory tinguished from him who is mentioned
Nyssen. at V- 47 and P- 8a

104 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
at Alexandria ; and, as it happened, at the very time that the
Easter Baptisms were about to be performed. Presenting
herself to a Deacon of the Church, she informed him of the
motive which had brought her into Egypt ; but said nothing of
the occurrence which had taken place on the voyage. The
Deacon laid the matter before the Bishop, who promised to bap
tize the children among the other candidates. When their time
came, he was twice miraculously impeded: and calling the
mother, he inquired what she had done. On hearing her tale,
he bade her be of good cheer : God, he said, had already
received her children; and the One Baptism could not be
repeated. Returning to Antioch, the mother and her infants
were burnt alive, by order of the emperor ; and stricter inquiry
commanded to be made for S. Peter.1
When it was known, this writer proceeds to tell us,2 that S.
Peter's life would fall a sacrifice to the emperor's indignation,
Arius, who had all this time remained excommunicate, requested
several of those with whom he was acquainted, as well clergy as
laity, to intercede for him with the Bishop. They did so ; and
anathema when they hoped that he was about to comply with his request,
on°Arius?e he said with a loud voice, " Let Arius be anathema from our
Lord Jesus Christ, in this world, and in the world to come."
Struck with the vehemence with which these words were pro
nounced, none dared to plead in favour of the guilty man ; and
S. Peter rising, and taking two of his disciples, Achillas and
Alexander, apart, informed them, that the anathema he had
pronounced was not the effect of any private resentment : that,
on the preceding night, he had beheld in a vision our Saviour
with a garment rent from top to bottom; that on inquiring,
"who, Lord, hath thus rent Thy garment?" he received for
answer, "Arius": that he knew therefore, that Arius would
bring some great evil on the Church. He further informed

1 The principal argument against ever, (p. 57,) does not seem inclined
this tale is, that it is not mentioned entirely to reject it. Severus is
by any Oriental writer on the Dis- inaccurate, at all events, because he
cipline of the Church : though almost speaks of Diocletian as still emperor.
all of them, as is well known, regard
Baptism administered by a woman to 2 See also the Acts in Surius,
be absolutely null. Renaudot, how- Nov. 25.

SECT. XIII.] PERSECUTION OF DIOCLETIAN. 105
them that they should, in turn, be his successors : he exhorted
them to oppose to the utmost whatever heresies might, whether
by Arius or others, be propagated, to shew themselves valiant
and vigilant for God, after the example of his predecessor,
Dionysius, of blessed memory, and his zeal against the Sabel
lians. He then bade them farewell, assuring them that they
should see his face no more : and turning to the rest of his
flock, he confirmed them in the Faith, prayed over them, and
gave them his benediction.1
When he was committed to prison, the Christians collected in Martyrdom
• • pit . . of S. Peter.
great numbers, determined to oppose the execution of the Imperial
Edict, and prevented the soldiers from entering by the door. It
was a stormy and rainy night : and the centurion took advan
tage of the noise of the elements, to throw down that part of
the wall which bounded the cell of S. Peter. When an orifice
had been made in it for this purpose, the Prelate, fearing that
the design would be observed, and the Christians endeavour to
to oppose it, made the sign of the Cross, and said, " Better is it
that we should die, than that such a multitude should meet with
evil for my sake." And with these words, boldly stretching forth
his head to the soldiers, it was struck from the body. At the
same time, a voice was heard by a consecrated virgin proclaim
ing, " As Peter was the first of the Apostles, so shall Peter be
the last of the Martyrs."2
Such are the Arabic traditions of the Martyrdom of S. Peter.
Eusebius simply relates, that he was unexpectedly arrested and
beheaded. He is named by the Greeks the Seal and End of the
Martyrs ; an epithet which is not literally true. For, even in
Alexandria, SS. Cyrus and John suffered two months subse
quently. Besides the Canons on Penitence, and the fragment of a Pas
chal Epistle preserved at their end, S. Peter composed a work

1 Pagi (310. iv.) rejects the vision that is true. The story is also related
of S. Peter, simply on the ground that by Eutychius. (i. 426, 7.)
the Acts varias suppositionis et fal-
sitatis notas praferunt. Thisis very 2 Makrizi says, (§ 102), that his
true: but is surely no argument wife and two sons were slain with him,
against their also containing much which is a mere fable.

106

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.

on the Divinity of the Saviour, and another on His Coming.
In the latter he confuted the opinion of Origen on the pre-exist
ence of souls.1

SECTION XIV.

S. ANTONY AND THE RISE OF MONASTICISM.

S. Antony,

though pre
ceded by the
Therapeutse,

S. Fronto-
uius,

S. Paul,

SS. Julian
and Basil-
issa,

While the Church of Alexandria was destitute of a Pastor, it
pleased God to raise her up a protector, in one whom we have
not yet had occasion to mention, but whose actions had already
excited great notice, and whose influence was beginning to be
felt in every part of Egypt. We speak of S. Antony, the Father
of Monastic Life.
We have already dwelt on the mystical temperament of the
Alexandrian Church. The natural result may be traced in the
adoption of the eremitical life by the holiest of her sons ; and the
case appears to have been so from the earliest age. Even under S.
Mark, the Therapeutse had already distinguished their holiness and
devotion, — and S. Frontonius,2 in the middle of the second cen
tury, had, with seventy brethren, led the life of a recluse, in the
same mountain tract which they had hallowed. S. Paul had long
since betaken himself into the wilderness : and was still leading
there his life of more than human asceticism. At or near Anti-
nous,3 S S . Julian and Basilissa, observing continence in the married
state, had formed a double kind of hospital for men and women ;
and there, when the latter had departed to her rest, the former

1 In the larger part of the Western
Church S. Peter is now commemorated
on the 26th of November,— because S.
Catherine is honoured on the 25th :
in the Oriental Church, generally
speaking, on the 24th . by the
Russian and Ethiopic Churches on
the 25th. As the mere enumeration
of the names of those Martyrs who are
known to have suffered in Egypt, in
the persecution of Diocletian, would
have interrupted the course of our
history, we have inserted them in
Appendix A.

2 Bollandus, April 14. See
Bellarmine de Monachis, ii. 5.

also

3 See their Acts under Jan. 9, of
Bollandus. There can be Httle doubt,
that they lived at Antinous, and not
at Antioch : and there seems to have
been no such place as ' Antioch in
Egypt,' which some of the MSS. men
tion. It appears certain that the
numbers of those that followed their
example are, by the same Acts, over
stated.

SECT. XIV.] RISE OF MONASTICISM. 107
received a glorious Martyrdom, in company with several asso
ciates, under Maximin. And separated by the Red Sea from
Egypt, the still illustrious monastery of Mount Sinai even then
existed : for forty of its inmates had suffered under Diocletian, aQd others,
and their house had been temporarily destroyed. It thus appears
that there were, at the time when S. Antony commenced his
career, a few holy anchorets scattered throughout Egypt : but
their number was small, their system undefined, their devotions
unconnnected, and it was not till the rise of Antony, that the tne real
deserts of Thebais and of Egypt became the favourite retreat Mo'nastSf
and the principal school of monks and anchorets.
Antony was born at Coma,1 a village near Heracleopolis, and His birth
on the boundary of Upper Egypt, about the year 251. Educated A-D' 250'*
at home,2 by Christian parents of noble birth, and considerable
property, he was so completely cut off from the knowledge of the
world, that he was acquainted with no one out of his own family :
nor did he ever learn to read any other language than his native
Egyptian. Christianity, during his youth, must have been protec- and educa
ted or connived at : for we read that he was in the habit of attend
ing with his parents the church, while at home he was a pattern of
obedience and submission. When he had attained the age of
twenty, he was left an orphan, with a younger sister in his
charge ; and for some time he continued the same course of life
to which he had been accustomed, and occupied himself with
her education, and with the management of his estate. At the
end of six months, however, while engaged in meditating on the
readiness with which the Holy Apostles abandoned all things
for the sake of Christ, he was struck, by hearing in the church
the words of our Lord, " If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell
that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have trea
sure in heaven : and come, follow Me." At once he resolved
1 It is not absolutely certain that And Nicephorus, (viii. 4,) airo Ktifitis
Coma was anything more than a cor- ovtih Keyop.ivi)s Kap.a. S. Athanasius
ruptionof /«fy«|, antonomastically used does not mention the name of the
out of honour to S. Antony. So Orte- place.
lius in his Thesaurus Geographicus, 2 S. Athanasius, in Vit. S. Anton.
thinks. Bolland. § i. 5. But after- i. 39.
wards it was undoubtedly used as a
proper name. Sozomen (i. 13) says, * Or a.u. 251, as others will have
iyivero Se ovtos AlyuwTws aitb KayiS. it. Ceillier, Hist. Gen. iv. 501.

108 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
to follow the Evangelical Counsel : and parting with all his
goods1'6 hls estates, which contained three hundred arurse,1 and were noted
for their fertility, he distributed them among his neighbours ;
that there might be no dispute between them as to right
of possession. His other property he turned into money, and
apportioned to the poor, retaining a small portion for the
future wants of his sister. But, going a second time to the
church, he listened to the words, " Take therefore no thought
for the morrow, for the morrow shall take thought for the
things of itself": and on his return home, he distributed the
remainder of his property to the poor, and placed his sister in a
kind of religious house for women, perhaps one of those which
had arisen in imitation of the Christian love of Basilissa. There
she prolonged her life to a good old age : and in her turn,
became the Mother and the Directress of many Virgins.
Having thus divested himself of all earthly cares, he resolved
on embracing a solitary life. In its perfection it was yet
entirely unknown : those who had adopted it dwelt in a retired
spot near some village, whence they might be supplied with
the necessaries of life. Such an hermit there was near Coma,
and from him Antony derived his first instructions in the
ascetic life. He made choice of a suitable retreat : and from
thence visited the different anchorets in the neighbourhood :
and em- selecting with a holy eclecticism the various points in the prac-
soiitary life : tice of each, which it was his desire to form into one perfect
Circ. A. D. > r
271- whole. In the mean time he wrought with his own hands, and
after supplying himself with bread from the profit of his labour,
distributed the rest among the poor.
Even while he dwelt in his first cell, he was exposed to those
temptations of Satan, which have rendered his history a mark
of scorn for the sceptic, of pity for the liberal, and of astonish
ment to him who believes in the wiles of an ever-present Enemy,
and in the unseen might of an ever-victorious Church. He that
1 From Strabo we learn that the was very necessary on" account of the
Egyptian names were subdivided into inundation of the Nile, which oblite-
toparchice, and these again into Upovpai: rated landmarks, and altered the very
and that the latter were the smallest shapes of fields. This may serve to
division of land, and contained each a explain S. Antony's fear of disputes
hundred square cubits. He adds, that with his neighbours as to property.
a minute and well ascertained division

SECT. XIV.] RISE OF MONASTICISM. 109
doubts the temptations of S. Antony, must doubt every super- histcmpta-
natural occurrence : must set at nought the testimony of wit
nesses never so numerous, of holiness never so manifest, of
historians never so judicious, of influence never so prevailing.
We are not about to relate, far less to defend, these narra
tions. But none can doubt thus much : that a life, as completely
contrary to every natural desire of the heart as was that of the
Egyptian hermits, such a total abnegation of every tie between
the individual and the world, such constant danger, want, and
suffering, days and nights so lonely, — and all this endured with
out the hope of human applause, because beyond the sphere of
human knowledge ; — that such a life, we say, which is believed
by all to have been practised, is far more wonderful, and far
more contrary to antecedent experience, than the marvellous
tale of the conflicts of S. Antony.
For some time he dwelt in a monument,1 situated at a con
siderable distance from his native village. At the age of thirty-
five, he resolved on a more secluded retreat. He would fain have
had the aged hermit, from whom he had learnt his first lessons
in asceticism, for his companion ; but the faith of the old man
shrank from an ordeal so terrible in itself, and hitherto so wholly
unattempted. On this, Antony crossed the river, penetrated,
by himself, the wilder parts of the desert ; and took up his abode
in a deserted castle among the mountains. He closed its doors, s. Antony in
0 the Castle :
and could not be persuaded to re-open them for twenty years, a.d. 235.
Bread was brought him half-yearly ; and he quenched his thirst in
a spring that arose within the building. His fasts were most
rigorous ; or rather his whole life was one continual fast. He
never tasted food till after sun-set ; and frequently prolonged
his abstinence for three consecutive days. His fame attracted
numerous visitors from various parts of Egypt : he spoke to
them from his prison, but would not permit them to see his
face. Frequently his visitors were terrified by the supernatural
and terrific sounds which issued from his castle : but the Saint
bade them be of good cheer, and scorn the efforts of those who
had been conquered on the Cross.
It was now the middle of the tenth persecution, when Antony, he begins to
overcome by the sohcitations of his friends,2 who were desirous cipies :
1 S. Athanas. Vit. S. Ant. § 16. 2 S. Athanas., § 24.

110 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
that he should form a monastic institute, came out of his castle.
They were astonished to find the same figure, the same counten
ance, that they remembered him to have possessed. His fasts
and his confinement seemed equally to have been unable to
affect him. The miracles that he then performed, as they must
much have cheered the faith of the Church under her heavy
trial, so they induced many of her children to . place themselves
under the guidance of the great Hermit.
Between the Red Sea and the Nile,1 and nearly opposite to
Mount Sinai, the desert is intersected by two ranges of moun
tains which, running north and south, stretch themselves inter
ruptedly for many leagues. That to the east is now called
Zaffarana : that to the west is known by the name Khalili.
hisMoLsl More northerly, and nearly opposite the ancient Heracleopolis,
teryi the mountains run east and west ; looking down from their
northern side, on the pilgrim's road from Cairo to Suez. The
whole of this region was soon tenanted by holy anchorets ; —
S. Antony himself founded his first, and more illustrious mo
nastery, towards its northern extremity.
It lay nearly equidistant from the cities of Memphis,2 Baby
lon, (now Cairo,) and Aphroditopolis (now Atfieh) . On an abrupt
stony mountain, situated at about thirty miles' distance from the
Nile, and only to be surmounted by the laborious zigzags of a
winding pass, it received its name from the little town of Troy,
which lay somewhat to the south of Babylon. At the summit
of this mountain, repeatedly termed by S. Athanasius the inte
rior, were two small cells, hewn out of the rock, and here it was
that Antony himself principally dwelt : his monastery was
situated on the opposite, or exterior mountain, known also by
the name of Pisper. These savage crags, the barrenness and
desolation of the interjacent plains, the melancholy sound of the
torrents, falling from rock to rock, till finally lost in the bibu
lous sand, seem to have impressed those who then visited the
1 Bollandus devotes § 2 to the 2 Comp. Palladius, § 25. S. Hieron.
description of the locality of S. An- Vit. S. Hilarion. S. Athanas. Vit. S.
tony's cell and monastery. Of course, Anton. 78, 79. See Pococke, i. 128 ;
he labours under the disadvantage of Granger, Relation d'une Voyage, &c.
inability to avail himself of the ac- 107.
counts of later travellers.

SECT. XIV.] RISE OF MONASTICISM. Ill
spot, as they do modern travellers, with the deepest awe. Soon
the adjacent mountains were too narrow a domain for his fervent
band of disciples : and, crossing the Nile, they began to fill the
deserts in the neighbourhood of Arsinoe.
Of his followers, many are still held in honour by the Church. His dis.
Among these, thetwo Macarii hold the first place. The Elder,1 or C'Ple5!
Egyptian, was not strictly speaking, a disciple, though he after
wards became the friend of Antony. The place of his retreat
was the savage wilderness of Scete, eighty miles beyond Mount
Nitria, and rather in Libya than in Egypt. Here he dwelt sixty
years, and became the spiritual father of many anchorets, who
peopled that desert. He was compelled by an Egyptian* Prelate
to receive holy orders, and saw four churches rise in the very
heart of the desert where he had withdrawn himself. The
younger, or Alexandrine, Macarius,2 originally a seller of sweet
meats, who was also elevated to the Priestly Office, had even a
wider reputation than his namesake.3 He had a dwelling in
Mount Nitria, another in the Desert, as it was afterwards called,
of Cells, from the multitude of hermits that there had their
abodes; and a third in that of Scete. In his power of abstinence
and self-discipline, he was unrivalled even by Antony himself.
There was yet a third4 hermit of the same name, who was placed
by S. Antony in charge of his monastery of Pisper : and who
succeeded him in the government of his five thousand monks.
Of no less renown was S. Pachomius, the first that committed a
monastic rule to writing. S. Isidore was another of the ancho
rets of renown. He also was a priest in the desert of Scete :
and was reckoned one of the Fathers of that wilderness. The
like reputation was also acquired by S. Pambo, who, above all
others, was noted for his diligence in manual labour. Among
the personal friends of Antony, were Sarmata, who was honoured
by martyrdom in an irruption of barbarians, and Amathas, who
ministered to the death-bed of the departing Patriarch of
monks. And the great S. Hilarion, a native of the neighbour-
1 Sozomen, iii. 13. Socrates, iv. rum prsecipua, primas partes obtinens,
18. Bollandus, Jan. 15. .... erat Alexandrinus.
2 Palladius de Vit. Pat. 8, 19. Bol- 4 See this point argued by Bollan-
landus, Jan. 2. dus, in S. Macarius the Elder, Jan.
3 Palladius says, Secundus autem 15. § i. 4.
a:tate, sed in eis qua? sunt monacho-

112 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
hood of Gaza, was to be the first propagator of Egyptian Mo
nasticism in his native land.
But at the time of which we yet write, these illustrious ser
vants of God were some in childhood, some in training for their
conflicts and victories. We will leave them in their deserts, to
fight, by their prayers, and tears, and fasts, the great battle of
the Alexandrian Church, on the relation of which we shall soon
enter. When they have passed long years of hardness and mor
tification, we shall return to them again, and endeavour to
sketch that life which as yet was but in course of formation.
Alexandria At the re-commencement of the persecution by Maximin, S.
a.d. 3u. Antony, exclaiming to those about him, "Let us go to combat
ourselves, or to see the combatants,"1 left his mountain, and
hastened to Alexandria, where he arrived just before the death
of S. Peter. Anxious as he was for martyrdom, he would not
"expose himself to the tribunal, but he ministered to the Con
fessors in the mines and in prisons : he went with the accused
¦before the judge, and he accompanied the condemned to the
place of execution. Several of his companions imitated his
example : and the Prefect, astonished at their boldness, issued
an edict, by which it was forbidden to any monk to present
himself in the hall of judgment, or to sojourn in the city. The
disciples feared, and hid themselves; the Master, clad in his
white robe, took up his position in a conspicuous spot, and
crossed the path of the Prefect as he passed with his train.
•Deeply grieving that he had not been honoured with the Mar
tyr's Crown, and perceiving that the violence of the persecution
was passed, he returned to the mountain.
rffsxyras, The last who fell under Maximin, for the faith of Christ,
thSr'com- were the holy Martyrs Cyrus, John, and their companions.2
AaD?3i2. Cyrus was a physician of Alexandria, who had improved the
1 S. Athanas., Vit. S. Anton. 60. meant that which he began. The
2 See their Acts, by an uncertain Ethiopic Calendar gives frfl^C :
Greek author, in Bollandus, Jan. 31. .^ r- . „ j.. : «, __ JL
We follow Tillemont in fixing a. d. • » • «.
312, as the date of their Martyrdom. (DATFII.P : Abukir and John,
It is true that most of the Martyrolo- Amogi and Athanasia. Abukir
gies make them to have suffered under is> of course, Abu-Cyrus ; but we
Diocletian : but it is very possible, cannot comprehend to whom or to
that by his persecution, is simply what Amogi refers.

SECT. XV.] THE ARIAN HERESY. 113
opportunities afforded by his profession to convert many of his
patients : under Diocletian he had, in obedience to the Lord's
commandment, fled into Arabia, and had there become ac
quainted with John, an officer of rank, who accompanied him
back to Alexandria, and became his guest. Hearing that
Athanasia, a Christian lady, had been arrested at Canopus, in
company with her three daughters, Theodosia, Theoctiste, and
Eudoxia, the eldest of whom was only fifteen years of age, the
two friends hastened thither, in order to console the Confessors.
And they obtained a signal reward for their charity ; for, being
themselves apprehended, and tortured in the most cruel manner,
torches being applied to their sides, and vinegar and salt poured
into their wounds, they witnessed a good confession, in which
S. Athanasia and her daughters followed them. The latter were
first beheaded : two days after, Cyrus and John in the same
manner put on immortality ; and by their deaths closed the
persecution.

SECTION XV.

THE ARIAN HERESY.
After a vacancy of about a year,1 and doubtless, as soon as s. Achillas,
prudence would allow, Achillas was raised to the Evangelical a.d.' 312:
Throne. We have already mentioned that he was a disciple of
S. Peter the Martyr2 : he had been ordained by Theonas, at the
same time with Pierius. It would appear that the friends of
1 There is much difficulty as to the phanius, (Haer. 69), three months:
length of the vacancy, and the time but, with his usual incorrectness as to
that Achillas, or Archillas, as the Coptic dates, that Father makes him suc-
Indices call him, filled the Chair. The cessor to S. Alexander. Gelasius
Chronicon of Eusebius gives ten or six (Act. Synod. Nic. ii. 1 .) gives him
years (for both numbers are read), to five months. From Pagi and Solle-
his Episcopate. Theodoret says, bxiyov rius, it would appear most probable
Xpiyov irpoiaTT}. Makrizi (who calls that Achillas was consecrated after, —
the Patriarch Archelaus) allots (§ 103) and probably, some little time after, —
six months to him, as does Severus, July 25, 312, (i. k. in the seventh
and the Chronicon Orientale. Euty- year of Constantine), and that he died
chius (p. 407), six months. Pococke June 13, 313. Sollerius, p. 44.
carelessly translates, years. S. Epi- 2 Euseb. H. E. vii. 32.

114

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[book

Sketch of
the history
of the
successors of
Diocletian.

Arius importuned him to remove the anathema pronounced by
his predecessor1: and he not only did this, but elevated the
future heresiarch to the Priesthood, and appointed him to the
church of Baucalis, already named as the oldest in the city.
The Jacobite writers will have it, that the death of the Prelate,
which followed shortly after, was a supernatural punishment for
having violated the last injunction of S. Peter ; and they there
fore exclude him from a place in their Calendar. If, however,
Achillas erred, it was through ignorance : otherwise S. Athana
sius would hardly have commended him Under the title of the
great. Achillas only sat seven months.
We will now for a moment cast our eyes on the state of the
Church Catholic.
Diocletian and Maximian, compelled to resign the purple by the
superior vigour and enterprise of Galerius, named, as we have al
ready seen, their successors; Galerius himself was nominated as the
Eastern, Constantius as the Western Augustus : the Ceesars were
respectively Daia, nephew to Galerius, and surnamed by him Maxi
min, and Severus. On this the persecution languished, and finally
failed in the West; and on the death of Constantius, his son Con
stantine, elevated to the purple by the soldiers, but contenting
himself, for the present, with the more modest title of Caesar, was
known to be most favourably disposed to the Faith of Christ.
Maxentius, however, at Rome, declared himself Emperor ; and,
to prejudice the army in his favour, associated his father Maxi
mian with himself. Severus, now Augustus in the West,
marched against them ; his troops forsook him : he fled to Ra
venna, surrendered himself, and was put to death. On this,
Maximian associated Constantine with him in the Empire :
Galerius marched into Italy, but was forced to retire with dis
honour : Licinius was presented by him with the purple, and a
hollow reconciliation took place between the six Emperors, Gale
rius, Maximian, Maximin, Licinius, Constantine, Maxentius.
Maximian endeavouring to destroy Constantine by treachery,
was discovered and capitally punished ; and the five surviving
emperors were acknowledged equals. Galerius, eaten of worms,
gave up the ghost, after having issued an edict in favour of the
Christians, which was only nominally obeyed by Maximin, and
1 Chron. Orient. — Eutychius, (p. 407.)

SECT. XV.] THE ARIAN HERESY. 115
the persecution ceased every where but in Syria and Egypt.
Then followed the civil war between Constantine and Maxentius :
the apparition of the miraculous Cross ; the defeat and death of
Maxentius ; Maximin, burning to revenge his loss, was defeated
by Licinius, and perished miserably : the Great Tenth Persecution
came to an entire end : and to the joy of the Church, Constantine
and Licinius were recognised as joint Augusti.
But the persecution, though no longer formidable, had not
entirely ceased at Alexandria, when S. Achillas was called from
his labours. Two candidates appeared for the vacant Chair :
the one was Arius ; the other iUexander, the friend of Achillas,
the disciple of Peter, and a man generally beloved for the
sweetness and gentleness of his disposition. The latter was s. Aiexau-
elected by unanimous consent of clergy and people : and Arius,1 Patr.xix.
who could not endure this preference of his rival, determined to a.m. 29.
find some pretext for separating himself from his communion.
The Meletians, who had not refrained from calumniating harassed by
Achillas,2 continued their accusations against Alexander; and Meletians:
they even went so far as to lay a formal complaint against him
before the Emperor3 : whether Licinius or Constantine be meant
it is impossible to decide. It would appear also that Alexan
dria was troubled by a faction, headed by one Crescentius, who
was schismatical on the proper time of observing Easter ; and
that Alexander was obliged to compose a treatise on the received
practice.4 As the life of Alexander was perfectly irreproachable, Arius
was reduced to calumniate his doctrine. An occasion soon pre
sented itself. The Prelate, in one of his sermons, maintained
the Unity of the Trinity ; and this statement was branded by Ac^ufjjfbsya
Arius with the title of Sabellianism. If the Father, he neuiamsm.
argued, has begotten a Son, there must be a period at
which the Son was begotten ; and consequently there must
1 Theodoret, i. 2. 4 S. Epiphan. Heer. 70. Tillemont,
2 S. Athanas. cont. Arian. Or. 1. vi. 1. 365.
3 Ibid. S. Epiphanius is strangely * This date will necessarily follow
misled by his Meletian memoirs, when from what we have said above, on the
he makes Meletius not only to have accession of S. Achillas ; so that it is
lived on terms of intimacy with S. needless to refute the Chronicon of
Alexander, but to have been the first S. Jerome, which places the com-
to bring before him the true principles mencement of his Patriarchate in 320
of Arius. or 321.
1 2

116

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[BOOK I.

Rise of the
Arian heresy :
A.D. 319 :*

and of the
schism of
Coluthus.

be a period when He had no being. Hence it followed, that
the Son of God was created by the Father ; and Arius
attributed to Him the power of either holiness or sin, maintain
ing that by His Free Will He chose the former, being equally
capable, had He so chosen, of the latter.1 The heretic did not
at first dare to preach this doctrine ; it would have been heard
with undisguised horror. But in private conversations he seized
every opportunity of insinuating it ; and being respected for his
sobriety and gravity, endued with great powers of persuasion,
and in the dechne of life, he soon found himself followed with
eagerness, and heard with attention. Thus it happened, that
many were already seduced to heresy before S. Alexander was
aware of the danger. In the meanwhile, the different parish
priests of Alexandria, — for Alexandria, as we had occasion to ob
serve in the introduction, was, like Rome, divided into parish
churches or title!1, to which the different Presbyters were
attached, — maintained different doctrines, and the faithful were
distracted, divided, and perplexed by the voices oftheir teachers.
The trumpet gave an uncertain sound ; and who could prepare
himself for the battle ? It would appear that, at this time, the
church of Baucalis, as it was the oldest, so also was it the most
honourable cure; it was in the heart of the mercantile part of
the city, and Arius thence acquired greater influence. He was
supported, among the parish priests,2 by Carponas, and Sarmates,
by Aithalas, Achillas, and his own namesake Arius ; among the
deacons, by Euzoius, Macarius, Julius, Menas, and Helladius.
Alexander, seems, at the outset, to have hesitated as to his
proper course ; and a momentary appearance of irresolution
encouraged the discord. The Arians exclaimed against him as
a Sabellian ; some of the Catholics called him an Arian, because,
in their judgment, he did not shew sufficient vigour in putting
down the new sect ; and Coluthus,3 one of the parish priests,
separated himself from the communion of his Bishop, and even
ventured (not, it is hinted,4 without simony,) to ordain Presby-

1 Socrates, H. E., i. 5. Sozomen,
i. 15.
2 Sozomen, i. 15.
3 In spelling this name with one 1,
we follow the rule given by Valesius,
in writing on the word Coluthion in

Euseb. H. E. vii. 11. S. Gregory
Nyssen (Lib. xi. cont. Eunom.) calls
the schismatic Acoluthus.
4 Theodoret,i.4, and Valesius, note 5.
* Le Quien, ii. Index, p. xiv.
Tillemont, vi. 3, 774.

SECT. XV.] THE ARIAN HERESY. 117
ters, pretending that the necessities of the times justified him
in this action. As schism is seldom unaccompanied by false
doctrine, he further taught that God is not the Author of
evil, which proposition, though capable of a Cathohc sense,
is heretical in that which Coluthus attached to it : namely,
that God does not produce those evils which, as punish
ments, afflict men.1 The Coluthians were never a power
ful sect ; and in the end, by no uncommon change, the greater
part of the followers, — for the leader himself, as we shall see,
recanted his errors,2 — allied themselves with the Arians.3
At length the evil rose to such a height, that Alexander was
compelled to take some decisive step for its termination. He
summoned a meeting of the clergy of Alexandria, and allowed ^Mexan6
to all a full liberty of explaining and defending their sentiments. dria •
Wilhng rather to persuade by reason, than to force by autho
rity, he refrained at first from giving his own judgment4 : and
the conference closed without any result, both parties claiming
the victory. A second assembly, held with the same intention,
equally failed of attaining its end. It was probably in one of
these two meetings that Arius presented to his Bishop a con
fession of Faith,5 very simple in its expressions, and bearing on
its face a Catholic sense : but so contrived as to be capable of
perversion to the heretic's own meaning : and which was there
fore rejected as unsatisfactory.
The heresy every day increasing, Alexander, after a solemn
warning to Arius to renounce his errors, and to return to the
Doctrine of the Apostles, found that his only resource lay in
excommunication. Assembhng then the principal Priests of synod of
° A J- Alexandria :
Alexandria, and of the neighbouring province of Mareotis, he AD- 3-°-
1 S. August. Lib. de Hseres. § lxv. 3 Sozomen, i. 15 (p. 32, 5, Ed.
It is necessary, however, to make the Reading: — which we always quote).
proviso in the text ; otherwise we run If this writer means anything further
into the opposite error of the Florin- by his expression, iriirovBe ti ko!
ians. S. Augustine, in ^lxvi. of the 'AKQaySpos TairpaiTa, tttj pxv toutovs,
same tract, thus draws the distinction ; ittj 5e iKelvous 4iraLviavt he contradicts
" God creates evil, by bringing just all other historians, and most of all
punishments on man, which Coluthus Socrates, who hints, (but with little
saw not ; but not by creating evil probability,) that Alexander, from a
natures and substances, so far forth as personal dislike to Arius, acted too
they are so : and in this lay the error precipitately against him.
of Florinus.'' 4 S. Basil, in Eunomium, lib. i. 4. i,
2 S. Athanas, Apol. cont. Arian. 289 (Ed. Paris. 1839).— Tillemont, vi.
§ 80. (i. 155, E. F.) 1,368.

118

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[book

Arius con
demned :

Commencement of S.
Athanasius

proposed that sentence accordingly. The partizans of Arius
made a show of defence : but their efforts were unavailing. Five
Priests and five Deacons only attached themselves to his fac
tion; thirty-six Priests, and forty-four Deacons signed the
sentence against him.1 Among the former, Coluthus signs
first : but this must have been a different person from the author
of the schism.2 Among the latter, the signatures occur of two
that bear the name of Athanasius.
One of these was already in the confidence of Alexander, and
had given promise of the highest talent. He was known by a
treatise against the Gentiles : in which, though the writer had
not much exceeded the twentieth year of his age,3 he displayed
such power of argument, such acquaintance with Scripture,
such deep learning, united with so much wit, and such elegance
of expression, that great things were expected from him. Born
about the year 296, his tender youth had exempted him from
the fury of the Tenth Persecution ; but doubtless, in the Mar
tyrdoms that he must himself have witnessed, and in the many
more which must have formed the daily topic of conversation,
his mind was led to that energetic sense of His full and proper
Divinity, Who was the strength of the Martyrs, that, in after
times, wrought such wonders for the Church. He was tho
roughly educated in profane as well as in Christian antiquity :

1 It is a question, whether the sig
natures of thirty -three Priests and
twenty-nine Deacons, given by Gela-
sius in his History of the Council of
Nicaea, cap. iii. (Labbe, Concil. ii. 148)
refer to this sentence or not. Gelasius
himself appends them to that encyclic
letter of Alexander, which is quoted
by Socrates (i. 3). Tillemont (vi. 1,
474, note ii.) examines this question
very unsatisfactorily. It would seem
on the whole, that Gelasius was in
accurate in this matter.
2 The Benedictine Editors will have
it that it was the same ; and therefore
are compelled to put the schism a year or
two later (B. E.Vit. S. Athanas. 322,1.)
3 It is morally certain that at the
time this work was written, the Arian
heresy had not broken out : — other
wise, towards its conclusion, the writer

could hardly have failed, from the very
nature of his subject, to touch on its
doctrines. But that S. Athanasius
was born about a.d. 296, is plain
from these considerations. He tells
us himself (Hist, ad Monach. 64),
that he had heard from his elders of
certain events connected with the per
secution of Maximian, — events, that
is, which happened in a.d. 303 or 4.
Now, had Athanasius been more than
seven or eight years old, he never
would have spoken of hearing of these
things, when he must have remem
bered them. Again, he says (de
Incarn. 56) that he learnt the doctrine
he there lays down from the Martyrs :
that is, before the end of a.d. 311.
We cannot imagine him to have done
so before the age of fifteen (B. E. vi.
296, 1).

SECT. XV.] THE ARIAN HERESY. 119
and Homer and Plato seem to have been, in an especial manner,
his admiration and study. In short, it might be said of him,
as it was of another, that he " was learned in all the wisdom of
the Egyptians, and was mighty in words and in deeds."
Arius, on his condemnation by the Synod of Alexandria, far
from owning himself in the wrong, was but the more eager to
strengthen his party, and to procure, by fan- means or foul, a
reversal of his sentence. Finding that his partizans were out
numbered in the metropolis, he excited, by letters and by
friends, the other portions of Egypt. In Mareotis, especially, the Arians
he was successful; and in Libya, his native country, Secundus, increase:
Bishop of Ptolemais,1 Theonas of Marmarica, (the latter of whom
is said to have been consecrated by the Meletians,)2 Secundus
of Teuchiri, and Zephyrius of Barce, pledged themselves to the
new heresy. Among the laity of Alexandria, great progress was
made by the insinuating manners and plausible language of
Arius ; and among the consecrated virgins he drew away great
numbers. Alexander found that the struggle, far from being
terminated by the decision of his first synod, grew daily more
formidable : and threatened the very foundations of his Church.
He therefore convoked a general Council of his province : and council of
we now, for the first time, learn the number of Prelates over a.d. 321.
whom the Patriarch of Alexandria presided : the synod was
attended by nearly one hundred3 : and it would appear that very
few could have been absent. Arius and his friends prepared
themselves to the utmost of their ability for their trial; but
notwithstanding the equivocal manner in which they stated Arius states
their dogmas, and their ingenuity in so couching their sentences
as to be patient of a Catholic sense, they excited the horror of
the synod. They stated, to use S. Alexander's own words, that
God was not always a Father : but that there was a period in
which He was not so ; that God, Who is, created Him That
was not from that which is not ; wherefore there was a time
when the Son was not, because He is a creature and a thing
made; that He is not similar to the Father in substance, nor
His True and genuine Word and Wisdom ; — but when called
1 Ep. S. Alexandri ap. Socr. H. E. tuv MeAmaiw- — and he may be the
i. 6 (p. 11 , 20). more easily credited on any point that,
2 So S. Epiphanius (Haer. 69,) says : reflects discredit on these schismatics,
— fy Se Kai Qeuvas KaTaaTaBeh tnrb J Ep. S. Alex. ap. Socr. (p. 12, 18)

120 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
so, is named so in an improper and lax signification, as having
His origin from the proper Word of God, and the Wisdom that
is in Him, by which He made all things, and among them the
Son, — for the heretics thus distinguished a twofold Word, and a
twofold Wisdom.1 One of the Prelates, whose zeal for the truth
led him to put the matter in its clearest and simplest light,
inquired, whether in the opinion of Arius, the Son of God could
change, as Satan had changed2? And the heretic unblushingly
replied, He can, because He is by nature not immutable. The
Prelates, on hearing this and other dogmas, came to an unani
mous conclusion, and declaring Arius and his followers separate
Arius is ana- from the Communion of the Catholic Church, delivered them
thematized : '
over to an a*nathema, till such time as they should repent and
recant. »
Among all the losses that Ecclesiastical History has sustained,
none is more to be regretted than the loss of a complete Arian
account of these events, such as that of Philostorgius. Till we
have it, — though it is not probable that such a work now exists, —
causes of we shall never be able to explain that wonderful mysteiy, the
progress of early progress of Arianism. A Priest at Alexandria, — and that,
Arianism. ipii o ¦
too, a man branded as the follower of a convicted schismatic, —
proclaims a novel doctrine : two synods are convoked against it
and condemn it ; and yet within six years, it convulses the
whole Church from Britain to India ; and compels an Emperor
to interfere in the restoration of peace. It is not wonderful
that Cathohc writers, more especially such as were engaged in
the struggle, should have been so pre-occupied with their sense
of the blasphemy of the new system, that they had no eyes for
its plausibility. Thus, Alexander mentions with horror the
dogma of Arius, — " There was a time when the Son was not, as
being a creature and a thing made." Doubtless the heresiarch
replied, Dionysius also said, " As being a thing made, He was
not before He was produced."3 If Arius asserted, the Son of
God is not similar to the Father in substance, — Dionysius had
said, He is different (we might rather say, alien,) from the
1 Bull, D. F. N. iii. 4. (Socrat. p. 1 1, 30.) S. Dionysius :—
2 Socrat. H. E. i. 6. Kai yap as iroiii/Aa &y, ovk -Ijv wply
3 Alius : — Aib ita) i\v TtOTe, 8tc ovk yivi\Tm. (S. Athan. de Sent. S. Dion,
t)v. KTiffim yap 4aTi i<al irohj/ua o Ti6s. § 4.)

SECT. XV.] THE ARIAN HERESY. 121
Father in substance.1 And though the Catholics might re
join, and we may allow, und have allowed, that the Patriarch
was speaking of the Son of God as regarded His Humanity, —
or that he was merely stating the case very strongly against
Sabellianism, or that, whatever he meant at the time, he gave it
a Cathohc explanation afterwards, for he never retracted it,
the statement of the Arians would seem to a mind incapable of
weighing evidence far more plausible than the laborious, how
ever true, explanation of the Catholics. This is but one instance
of the manner in which we must conceive those in the Commu
nion of the Church to have understated the strong points of the
Arians. There must, too, among the latter, have been much
apparent holiness of life : and doubtless, among the earlier
followers of Arius, much real conscientiousness. And here
again it is certain that the Catholics, fully (and most justly)
persuaded that heresy implies a wicked heart, spoke of those as
notoriously flagitious, whose heterodoxy was the only proof that
they were so. We cannot imagine that the people of Ptolemais,
after having been governed by a Martyr like S. Theodore, could
quietly have submitted to the rule of Secundus, his successor,
and the patron of Arius, had he been at that time in appearance
the villain that S. Athanasius calls him,2 and that he afterwards
proved himself to be.
But, after all, these considerations, though full weight be
granted them, are far too confined to account for the instanta
neous stride of Arianism from the weakness of infancy to the
strength of a giant. Alexander and Arius are not to be regarded
as simply the heads of two contending factions ; but as the em
bodiments of two principles, which had from the beginning
conflicted in the Church, but had never encountered each other
on the same scale as now. That the tradition of the Church,
from Apostolic times, was in favour of the teaching of S.
Alexander, was sanctioned by the Council of Nicsea, and asserted
the true and proper Divinity of the Saviour, is a point that has
been triumphantly proved by Catholics of all ages. But it is
not less true, that a tradition, disavowed by the Church, but
still existing in it, an under-current to the recognised course of
i Arius : — Oijre Se ofioios ko,t' oualav ovoiav Avrby elvai tov TlaTpds. (S.
T<f> Tlarpi 4aTi.y  (Socrat. ubi Athan. de Sent. § 4.)
supra.) S. Dionysius: — Ifyov (cot "- 6 iraynaKio-Tos. Orat. i.cont. Arian.

122 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. []300K I.
the stream, had also existed from primitive times : and taught
the opposite doctrine. It was this principle which, assuming
different appearances, but still acting to the same end, had in
the first century broken forth in the heresies of Cerinthus and
Ebion, in the third, in that of Paul of Samosata ; and now, find
ing the Church free from external tribulations, made Arius its
mouthpiece. It was but necessary to strike the chord, and in
every country hearts were found to respond ; the train had long
since been laid, and the weakest hand could fire it. The creed
of Arius was not heard by his disciples as something new and
unknown ; they recognised it as the true and boldly developed
expression of what they had previously held by implication, but
had shrunk from acknowledging nakedly. It is easy to see that
many of the texts quoted on both sides in defence of their doc
trine, could never have been so cited, had they not come down
to them invested with a traditional explanation : — for instance,
" My heart hath produced a good Word," on the part of the
Catholics ; " For we which live are alway," on that of the Arians.
And thus it happens that a City Priest has hardly been con
demned in Alexandria, when Egypt echoes with his doctrine;
hardly anathematized in a Provincial Synod, when Antioch and
the whole East is lit up with the controversy.
Arianism in ;p01. ft was s00n evident that the Council of Alexandria was
Mareotis. insufficient to stop the evil. Pistus, a priest of Mareotis, who
had apparently been condemned with Arius, was considered
second only to him in talents and influence : and he was after
wards raised, by the heretical faction, to the Episcopate of
Alexandria. The Deacon Euzoius, then one of the most
zealous among the new party, attained, as we shall see, to the
same dignity at Antioch. '
But now a new actor appeared on the stage, who quickly
reduced Arius, however he might still be considered the head of
his own peculiar sect, to a second rank in the grand movement
Eusebius of that was troubling the Church. This was Eusebius, Bishop of
Nicomedia ; one of the most hateful characters whom history
records. He was possessed of all the talents which were the
most likely to give influence at court : an insinuating manner,
a ready flow of eloquence, the reality of some learning, the
affectation of more; an insatiable ambition, a conscience that
1 B. E. V. p. a. and Tillemont, vi. 2, 14.

SECT. XV.] THE ARIAN HERESY. 123
never stood in the way of preferment : a sanctity of demeanour his charac-
so great, that miracles were ascribed to him ; an inward depra
vity so foul that he is accused of having joined Licinius in his
persecution. To that tyrant he had rendered essential services ;
and had even borne arms for him. Raised to the See of Bery-
tus in Phoenicia, in a manner contrary to the Canons, and which
gave some reason for doubting whether he had ever received
valid consecration, he found himself discontented with the
comparative obscurity of that city, though one of the largest in
those parts ; and casting his eye on those sees which from time
to time became vacant, he could find none more suitable to his
projects than that of Nicomedia. Not only was this city
reckoned the fifth in the world,1 but it possessed the principal
palace of the Eastern Emperor, which Diocletian had built
there : and as the Metropolis of Bithynia, it gave considerable
ecclesiastical authority. Eusebius had already acquired great
influence over Constantia, the sister of Constantine, and wife of
Licinius ; and this influence probably procured him the transla
tion that he coveted. The Faithful of Nicomedia had no voice
in the matter2 : the mandate of the Emperor prevailed ; and so
flagrant a violation of the Canons as an unnecessary translation
was allowed to pass unnoticed or uncondemned. For Eusebius
was one whom no man cared to offend ; and they who did were
sure, sooner or later, to rue his anger. He never forgot ; and
never forgave.
In what manner Alius and Eusebius had first become acquain
ted, it is impossible now to discover. They had long before the
time of which we write, communicated to each other their senti
ments on the Divinity of the Son, and found them similar. Arius,
as the more fearless of the two, carried his teaching to what his
friend must sometimes have considered an imprudent length ; — his friend.
nevertheless the league between them was firmly kept, and Arius™1"1
lasted till they were called to give an account of their evil
deeds. In fact, Eusebius, after the character of the Eastern
teaching, was probably the earlier inventor of the Arian system ;
and he always gloried in being a Collucianist,3 that is, a fellow
1 Libanius, Or. 8. Tillemont ex- 3 Theodoret, H. E. i. 20, (p. 50, 18,
plains the four cities to be Rome, Ed. Reading.)
Alexandria, Antioch, and Constanti- 3 Theodoret, H. E. i. 5 (23, 9).
nople or Carthage ; probably the latter.

124

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.

who,banishedfrom Alex
andria,

writes to
him,

goes into
Palestine,

thinker with S. Lucian of Antioch, who, whatever might have
been the orthodoxy of his own faith, (which he had sealed by
a glorious Martyrdom) had the misfortune of having numbered
among his disciples a great part of the champions of early
Arianism, or rather Eusebianism.
Arius, shortly after the Council, was compelled to leave
Alexandria ; perhaps because he thought that the dissemination
of his heresy required his presence elsewhere ; perhaps because
he was banished (as he himself asserts) by Alexander.1 For
however extraordinary this power may appear in the Prelate of
a yet heathen city, it is no more than was exercised, as we have
already seen,2 by S. Demetrius, on far less provocation, with
respect to Origen. The thoughts of Arius naturally turned to
Asia ; but before leaving Egypt, he addressed a letter to Euse
bius, to acquaint him with the state of affairs, and. to ask his
sympathy. This epistle, which is extant,3 displays most fully
the character of the two men. On the side of Arius, there is
abject flattery ; falsehoods which he and Eusebius must equally
have known to be so; the most unfounded calumnies against
Alexander, and the most determined perseverance in his own
doctrine. The unbounded vanity of Eusebius, his willingness
to be deceived, his wish to deceive, are most clearly displayed
in this letter of his correspondent. — " Your sentiments," he
replied,4 " are just ; — that which was made was not before it
had been made, because its existence had a beginning."
Arius, on this, went into Palestine, accompanied by several of
his followers, and among the rest, by Carponas and Achillas.5
Here his flattery won on many of the Prelates : he represented
himself as one who ardently desired peace, but had been perse
cuted by his Bishop for the maintenance of dogmas ever held in
the Church, and not invented by him ; he brought forward his

1 Tillemont is probably right in
imagining (vi. 2, 18), that Arius had
his own reasons for wishing to quit
Alexandria, as Sozomen (i. 15,) asserts.
But had he recollected the instance of
Demetrius, he could never have said,
of the banishment of Arius by Alex
ander, — " Quoique cela soit encore
plus difficile a croire et a comprendre
qu'a justiher.''

2 Ante, p. 28.
3 Theodoret, H. E. i. 5.
4 At least, if Tillemont be right in
ascribing to that reply the few lines
which S. Athanasius (De Synodis,) has
preserved of a letter from Eusebius to
Arius. 5 S. Epiphan. Hser. 69,

SECT. XV.] THE ARIAN HERESY. 125
own views with more or less distinctness, as he saw the minds
of those whom he addressed more or less disposed to embrace
them, and he requested their interference with Alexander to
receive him again to communion. Many fell into the snare, and
and, with really good intentions, furnished him with the letters hisfaction.
which he requested ; some embraced the pernicious doctrine of
the heretic ; and but a very few stood on their guard, and re
quested Alexander not to re-admit Arius till he had given some
satisfactory proof of penitence.
The Bishops who were the most active partizans of Arius, in
addition to Eusebius, Secundus, and Theonas, were Theognius
of Nicsea, Menophantes of Ephesus, Maris of Chalcedon, Patro-
philus of Scythopolis,1 Theodotus of Laodicea, Paulinus of Tyre,
Athanasius of Anazarbus,2 Gregory of Berytus, Aetius of Lydda ;
those most opposed to him were S. Macarius of Jerusalem, S.
Philogonius of Antioch, and Hellanicus of Tripoli.
Alexander, though an old man, took the most active measures Efforts of s.
to defend the Faith. Provincial Councils were held in several
parts of Egypt : and the Patriarch wrote letters to all provinces of
the Church, entreating the various Prelates to contend earnestly
for the Truth, and to refuse Communion to Arius. As many as
seventy of these are known to have existed; and a century
later they were collected as curiosities. But two only of them
remain to us. They were not without their effect ; and those
addressed to the Bishops of Palestine, among others to the cele
brated historian, Eusebius of Csesarea, a man disposed towards
Arianism, but wishing to stand well with all parties, obliged
Arius to retire to Nicomedia. The subtle Eusebius, of Nico- Arias retires
media, now openly coming forward as his champion, wrote media :
again and again to Alexander to rescind his condemnation ; and he writes to
Arius himself addressed a letter to his Bishop, which we still have, der . e an"
He professed to believe in One God ; Only wise, good, just
1 This was the ancient Bethshan : Prima, but afterwards became the
t))c BaiBaav, 5) 4aTi I.KvBihv n6\is, say Metropolis, ecclesiastical as well as
the LXX. (Judges, i. 27.) It was for civil, of Cilicia Secunda, and later
many ages the Metropolis of Palestina still, having been destroyed by earth-
Secunda, till that honour was more quakes, was rebuilt by Justin, and took
fitly assigned by the Latins to Naza- his name. It is now an Armenian
reth. Le Quien, iii. 681. Archiepiscopate under the Catholic of
2 This was then a town of Cilicia Sis.

126 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
and powerful ; in One Son of God begotten by Him before the
worlds ; by Whom He made the worlds ; begotten by Him, not
in appearance, but in verity ; created by Him unchangeable ;
though a Creature, yet not like His other creatures ; though a
Son, not like His other sons : not come forth from the Father,
as Valentinus held ; not consubstantial with Him, as Manes
taught ; not confounded with Him, as Sabellius averred :
" all which heresies," adds Arius, addressing Alexander, " your
self, Blessed Pope, have condemned." From the Father, he
proceeds, the Son received life and glory : the Father is the
Source of all : so that in the Godhead are three Hypostases.
And the epistle concludes with the assertion that S. Alexander
had formerly taught the doctrine now condemned by him, — the
existence of the Father before the Son. This confession of
faith was signed by such disciples of Arius as were with him at
Nicomedia ; and when it reached Egypt, by Secundus, Theonas,
and probably others.
Encyclic It was probably not till then that Alexander wrote an encv-
Epistleof S. . \ X. ¦,.,-,• n ¦ ¦
Alexander, chc Epistle, containing a brief history of the Arian Schism,
and an exposition of the True Faith. It opens thus beautifully :
" To his beloved and most honourable fellow ministers in all
parts of the Cathohc Church, Alexander, Salutation in the
Lord.
" Since the body of the Catholic Church is one, and there is a
command in the Divine Scriptures, that we should keep the
bond of hke-mindedness and peace, it follows that we by letter
should signify to each other that which happens to each ;
that whether one member suffer, all the members may suffer
with it, or whether it joy, all may rejoice with it. Wherefore,
in our Dioecese, certain men have gone forth, workers of iniquity
and the enemies of Christ, teaching an Apostacy which may
well be thought and called the forerunner of Antichrist. I
would fain have consigned a matter of this sort to silence, that,
if it might be so, the evil might have an end in the apostates
alone, lest, getting abroad into other places, it should defile the
ears of the simple. But since Eusebius, now Bishop of Nico
media, thinking that the affairs of the Church depend upon
him, because, without receiving punishment, he hath forsaken
his See of Berytus and set eyes on that of Nicomedia, takes

SECT. XV.] THE ARIAN HERESY. 127
the lead of these apostates, and hath taken in hand to write to
all quarters, commending them, if perchance he may secretly
draw the ignorant into the worst heresy, — that which fights
against Christ, — I have thought it necessary to break silence,
as knowing that which is written in the law, and to narrate the
thing to all of you, so that ye may both know them that are
apostates, and the unhappy dogmas of then- heresy, and if
Eusebius writes, may pay no regard to him." After stating the
facts of the case,1 and setting forth the Apostohc Truth,
S. Alexander concludes thus : —
" But we do not think it strange. The case was the same
with Hymenseus and Philetus, and before them with Judas, who,
when he had been a follower of the Lord, afterwards became a
traitor and an apostate. And concerning these men themselves,
we have not been left untaught. But the Lord hath said before,
' Take heed that no man deceive you : For many shall come in
My Name, saying, I am Christ, and the time draweth near, and
shall deceive many : go not after them.' And Paul, who had
learnt these things from the Saviour, wrote, that in the last
days some shall apostatize from the faith, giving heed to seducing
spirits, and to doctrines of devils, turning themselves away
from the truth. Seeing then our Lord and Saviour Jesus
Christ hath signified concerning these things, both by Himself
and the Apostle, we, who have been hearers for ourselves of
their ungodly words, have accordingly delivered them over to an
anathema, and have declared them to be ahens from the Catholic
Church and the Faith. And we have set forth the matter to
your piety, beloved and honourable fellow ministers, that if any
of them come unto you, ye may not receive them, nor give heed
to Eusebius nor to any other that write to you on their behalf.
For we that are Christians ought to turn away from those that
speak or think anything against Christ, as enemies of God
and destroyers of souls, and not so much as bid them God speed,
1 Many writers on ecclesiastical supposition that Eusebius, after the
history place this letter far earlier in exposure of his character which this
the controversy, because, in giving the letter contains, would again have
names of those who had fallen away, written to Alexander on behalf of
S. Alexander says nothing of Pistus Arius, — which yet must be the case if
and the Mareotis. Undoubtedly, this we place the letter itself earlier.
is a difficulty, but not so great as the

128

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[book

Constantia
perverted by
Arius :
Pseudo-Council of
Bithynia :

Arius com
poses the
Thalia :

lest we be partakers of their iniquities, as Blessed John exhorted
us afore. Salute the brethren that are with you : they that are
with me salute you." This letter was signed by a large body of
Priests and Deacons, in token of their approval.
Arius, on his part, continued to receive letters of sympathy
from various Bishops, and to exhibit them for the encourage
ment of his partizans. He also acquired influence from another
source. Eusebius introduced him to the feeble-minded Con
stantia ; and the heretic had address to win her entirely to his
sentiments. Another triumph awaited him. Eusebius assembled
a Provincial Council of Bithynia, and appears formally to have
admitted Arius to the Communion of the Church. Authorized by
this false synod, the Metropolitan, after the example of Alex
ander, despatched letters on all sides (as indeed in a less
degree he had hitherto done1) : one of these, to Paulinus of Tyre,
is preserved by Theodoret.2 In this he calls on that Bishop, as
one possessed of great influence, to keep silence no longer, but
openly to assert what he privately acknowledged to be the truth.
It was at this time that Arius composed that infamous work,
his Thalia : — a work which must have proved to all earnest-
minded men, that God had given him over to a reprobate mind.
It was an exposition of his principles written in the style and
verse of Sotades, one of the most immoral of heathen poets.
The airs, the measure, the whole effect of the verse inspired
horror and disgust to the better part of the heathens themselves ;
and Pagans, who even professed no extraordinary purity, shrank
from the writings of Sotades. And this was the pattern whom a
Christian Priest, in treating of the most exalted doctrines of the
faith, professed to follow ; these the ideas which he desired to
associate with arguments concerning the sublimest mysteries of
religion ! Of all the writings of Arius, this inspired the
faithful with the deepest loathing.
Nevertheless, George, a Priest and philosopher of Alexandria,3
who then happened to be spending some time at Nicomedia,
endeavoured to interfere on behalf of Arius, and wrote to his

1 For S. Alexander, in his encyclic
Epistle, mentions the letters of Euse
bius, as we have seen. But had that
Epistle been written subsequently to

the Council of Bithynia, — some notice
would surely have been taken of it.
2 Theodoret, H. E. i. 6.
3 Philostorgius, H. E. viii. 17.

SECT. XV.] THE' ARIAN HERESY. 129
Bishop, requestmg that he might be re-admitted to Communion.
The only consequence was that this man, whom S. Athanasius
terms the most wicked of the Arians. was himself deposed by George
' x •* deposed :
Alexander from the Priesthood. This loss, as we shall see, was
soon counterbalanced by the favour of his new friends. Befused
admittance into the Clergy of Antioch by S. Eustathius, then
Bishop of that See, he obtained it on the deposition of that Saint,
and was shortly afterwards elevated to the See of Laodicea.
From whatever reason, Arius preferred a residence in Palestine
to one at Nicomedia. He accordingly went into that country,
and presented a petition to three of the Bishops on whose good
will he could count, — Paulinus of Tyre, Eusebius of Caesarea,
Patrophilus of Scythopohs, — of an almost unprecedented nature.
He requested that he might be allowed to assemble his own
followers for the Divine Offices, as he had done when Parish
Priest at Alexandria. The Prelates met to consider the demand, Pseudo-Council of
and agreed to it. It is wonderful that they could be blind to Palestine :
the inconsistency of their own conduct : they would not com
municate with one whom S. Alexander had, wrongfully in their
opinion, pronounced a heretic ; but they allowed him to add
schism to heresy, and that in their own Dioceses. It was now
that Arius, finding himself exempted by ecclesiastical authority,
such as it was, from all jurisdiction whatever, took upon himself
to alter the Doxology to a form, wliich, containing in itself
nothing contrary to the Cathohc Faith, yet allowed of an hereti
cal interpretation: — Glory be to the Father, through the Son,
in the Holy Ghost. He was anxious also to change the formula
of Baptism ; but this appeared, for the present, too hazardous
an enterprize.
The various collections of letters made respectively by Arius
and Alexander seemed to answer no further end than that of
exciting emulation, and increasing controversy. Alexander,
probably by the advice of Athanasius, whom he consulted in all
things, devised another plan. He drew up a Confession of Tome of s.
Faith, or, as it is generally termed, a Tome,1 which he dispatched exander'
1 This Tome is by some writers con- Benedictine Editors in their Life of S.
sidered identical with the encyclic Athanasius, support this opinion ; but
letter, which we have before men- it does not seem to have even a plau-
tioned. Baronius (318, lxvii.), and the sible foundation, anymore than that

130 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
I
to all quarters, and requested the signatures of the various
Bishops. It was signed by the whole of his own Diocese,
which contained, as we have seen, about one hundred Prelates ;
by those of Cappadocia, in number about fifteen ; of Lycia, in
number about thirty-two ; of Pamphylia, in number about
thirty-seven ; of Asia Proper, about forty-three ; and others.
Thus we cannot imagine the whole number of signatures to
have been less than two hundred and fifty.
When affairs had attained this condition, Alexander wrote
the other Epistle which we have mentioned as still extant.
It is addressed to S. Alexander of Byzantium, who was not
only an unshaken champion of orthodoxy, but appears to have
been the tried friend of his namesake. This is the first commu-
Epistie to s. nication that we find between the Churches of Alexandria and
of ' Constantinople, afterwards so closely to be linked together ; nor
Byzantium : . .,...., n i ¦ i
was it from any superior dignity in the latter See, but simply
from the venerable character of the Prelate, that Alexander con
sulted him in this emergency. According to some,1 the Bishop
of Byzantium was but the second that had governed that See : —
others, but perhaps with less probability, make him the fifth.2
a.d. 323.* The Epistle is of great length ; and complains bitterly of the
violence of the Arians. Then, as dming the whole course of
that heresy, its supporters seem to have relied on female influ
ence for the propagation of their dogmas ; the busy intermeddling
of Valesius, that the Tome and the satisfactorily. This is Tillemont's
letter which mentions it are identical. reasoning (vi. i. 478, note 6), and it
A more difficult question is the date of seems very just.
the Epistle to Alexander of Con- ] Conf. Chron. Pasch. — ttjs iy
stantinople. Valesius considers it to Bu^avTiip eKKX-qaias riyeiTat irpunos
have been written before the residence VlT]Tpo<pavr)s, with Socrat. H. E. i. 37
of Arius at Nicomedia, because it says (p.71 ,27), 'AXe^avSpos . . . M.t)t po<pdvr\v
nothing of Eusebius ; but not to men- ird\ai SiaSe^du.eyos .
tion that this would involve the diffi- 2 g0 Simeon Metaphrastes in his
culty of the Tome having been written Annals. For the Catalogue of Pseudo
before the encyclic epistle, the Bishop Dorotheus of Tyre, giving a list of
of Alexandria, in his letter to Alex- twenty-six Bishops between S. Andrew
ander, speaks of three Syrian Bishops and S. Alexander, is a mere forgery.
as favouring Arius. If we apply this Le Quien, i. 205, 6.
to the permission given him by Euse- Sozomen, i. 15. (p. 33. 5.)
bius of Caesarea, Patrophilus, and * We follow, in this date, the
Paulinus, to hold schismatic assem- Benedictine Editors of S. Athanasius.
blies, the whole chronology fits in Tillemont prefers the date 321, be-

SECT. XV.] THE ARIAN HERESY. 131
spirit of the young women whom they had perverted to heresy at
Alexandria, gave great occasion to the heathen to blaspheme.
He complains of the reception of the Arian clerks, by some Pre
lates, contrary to the Apostolic Canon, into the Church ; and
calls it a grievous blot on the offenders. This Canon is pro
bably the Sixteenth, which forbids the reception of a deposed
Clerk, as a Clerk, in another Diocese.1 After a short narration
of this sort, which infers that his correspondent was already
acquainted with the general features of the case, Alexander pro
ceeds to a confutation of the Arian theory, and doubtless drew
largely on the almost inspired genius of his Deacon. He
concludes his refutation thus :
" This we teach ; this we preach ; — these are the Apostolic
dogmas of the Church, for which we are ready even to lay down
our fives, making small account of them that would compel us to
forswear them, even though they would force us by torture, and
not turning away from the hope that is in them. Which things
seeing that Arius and Achillas opposed, and they that with them
are adversaries of the Truth, they have been cast out of the
Church, as enemies to our pious doctrine, according as Blessed
Paul saith, If any preach unto you another Gospel than that ye
have received, though he feign himself an Angel from Heaven,
Let him be anathema."
He then proceeds to the subject of the Tome, to which he
requests the signature of Alexander ; and mentions that together
with it he had sent by the same messenger, Apion, a Deacon of
cause he understands Alexander's ex- remain without any historical notice
pression about the Arians, Tobs of Arianism ; — a thing which in the
Sicvypiv tjiuv iv elpr)vri 4ireyelpavTas heat of the controversy is hardly pos-
to prove that the letter must have sible. This he owns : but supposes
been written in time of peace, that that it may be accounted for by the
is, before the persecution of Licinius, persecution allaying the controversy :
or,atlatest,in321. But the words need apersecution which, as he owns, " n'a
only imply that, in a previous time of jamais este tout-a-fait violente, et le
peace, the Arians had done so. Or, fut peutestre encore moins en Egypte. "
even in Tillemont's sense, if we under- (vii. 477. note 6.)
stand the persecution of that in Egypt, • Beveridge applies it at one time to
that province, in being so distant from this Canon, wherein he agrees with
the court, might have remained quiet Petrus de Marca and others, and is
long after the commencement of the probably right ; — at another (Vind.
general persecution. — On Tillemont's Can. Apost. i. 13.) to the Twelfth. See
hypothesis, three years, 321 — 324, Reading's note, (Theodor. p. ii.not. a.)
K.2

132 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
Alexandria, copies of some of the letters he had received from
other Prelates. We cannot doubt how this Epistle was received
by the holy Bishop to whom it was addressed. Of the other
seventy persons to whom Alexander wrote on the same subject,
we only know S. Sylvester1 of Rome, S. Macarius of Jerusalem,
Asclepas of Gaza, Longinus of Ascalon, Macrinus of Jamnina,
and Zeno, who appears to have been ex-Bishop of Tyre.
Towards the close of this Epistle, Alexander mentions that the
Arians, as much as in them lay, had excited persecution against
the Church in time of peace.
Persecution We must now say a few words on the persecution of Licinius.
of Licinius: X n . r. ¦
It seems to have been commenced, as much out of pique at the
superior power of Constantine, as from any other cause : and it
was carried on with more or less vigour, principally against the
Bishops, but never with any great degree of ferocity, for about
seven years. Its most illustrious Martyr in Egypt was S.
Donatus,2 Bishop of Thmuis, and the successor of the Martyr
S. Phileas. A native of some insignificant town in Istria, he
went to Aquileia for the purpose of evangelizing the surrounding
country : — when the persecution of Diocletian grew violent, he
retired into Dalmatia, and led an eremitical life on the summit
of a high mountain. Having confessed before Diocletian him
self, and having by his exemplary courage converted Macarius
and Theodorus, two of the bystanders, he, in company with
them, sailed to Egypt. Happening to pass through Thmuis,
probably on his way to the Mountain of S. Antony, he was
elected Bishop of that See, and governed it for several years,
raising Macarius to the Priesthood, and Theodorus to the
1 As Baronius (318. lix.) takes all 2 His Acts are in Bollandus, under
due care to point out. Pope Liberius, May 22 : but are tricked out with
in his letter to Constantine, (printed imaginary incidents and conversations,
in Biblioth. Sanct. Tom. ix.) speaks of in the tastes of the Greek Martyrolo-
this letter as still existing. The Cardi- gists. Le Quien (ii. 539) professes to
nal a little strains facts when he says, abstract them, but is very inaccurate.
"Constat imprimis eundem Alexan- The year in which S. Donatus suffered
drum de iis que ab ipso gesta essent ad- is quite uncertain, and there seems no
versus Arium scripsisse literas ad pri- reason for believing with Cardonus,
mariae sedis Episcopum, &c."— there (Comment. Praev. § 2,) that it was so
beingno authority either for or against early as A. D. 316.
the statement. The other names are
known from S. Epiphanius, Haer. 69.

SECT. XV.] THE ARIAN HERESY. 133
Diaconate. They finished their course gloriously under Lici- martyrdom
nius, being cut piecemeal ; a method of execution which, as tius, kaca."
Eusebius informs us,1 was not unusual in this persecution. Theodorus.
Justly enraged at the injuries inflicted by Licinius, both on
his religion and on his empire, Constantine marched against
him. The armies met at Adrianople : Pagans and Christians
alike owned the supernatural terror which the Labarum struck
into its opponents. — Licinius left more than thirty thousand overthrows0
men on the field of battle, and retreated towards Asia. At
Chalcedon a second and more decisive engagement was fought :
Licinius was totally defeated and taken prisoner : the conqueror
spared his life, but sent him to Thessalonica : and there, as his
restless spirit urged him on to fresh attempts at agitation, he
was strangled in the course of the succeeding year.
Constantine, thus become Master of the world, learnt with becomes
deep sorrow the distracted state of the East. But, unhappily, sole Em-
Eusebius of Nicomedia, far from being overwhelmed in the ruin
of his patron Licinius, obtained equal, if not greater influence
over the mind of the new Emperor. Capricious almost to
imbecility by nature, elated by his rapid and extraordinary rise,
naturally regarded with the greatest deference by the Prelates of
that Church wliich he had saved from persecution, and believing
himself, though a mere catechumen, as qualified to be the
supreme moderator of ecclesiastical, as well as civil, affairs,
Constantine presented the character most exactly suited to the
insidious attacks of such a master of finesse as Eusebius. It
was easy to represent to the Emperor that the controversy at
Alexandria had arisen from the discussion of an unimportant
question, which ought never to have been mooted, or, when
unfortunately raised, to have been instantly quashed ; — that a receives a
frivolous distinction had lighted up discord throughout the sio^oTthT"
Earth, had divided families, and separated friends: — and that putes from
the only remedy lay in compelling the authors of the controversy
to reconciliation. Constantine fell into the snare : — and he
wrote, or it were more true to say, suffered Eusebius to write in
his name, the. disgraceful epistle, which Eusebius the Historian
has from his hatred to Cathohc Doctrine, taken pleasure in pre-
1 Euseb. Vit. Constant, ii. 2.

134

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[BOOK

writes to
Alexander
and Arius,

and
dispatches
the letter
by Hosius,
of Cordova;

serving to us whole, if, indeed, he have not, contrary to his
profession, mutilated and corrupted it.1
It is addressed simply " to Alexander and Arius " ; and its
whole tenor is based on this one notion, — that if Arius had been
somewhat too pertinacious in refusing, Alexander had been
tyrannical in exacting the profession of an unimportant dogma ;
that such disputes might be beneficial as exercises of subtlety,
and mediums of oratorical display, but that when discussed by
the vulgar, incapable of curious distinctions and accurate defini
tions, they became highly injurious and perilous : that no
essential part of the Christian Law was at stake, no new dogma
in the worship of God had been introduced : that philosophers
of different sects lived in friendly communication, — much more
should the teachers of Christianity agree to differ : that they who
should be the first in binding then' people together in peace,
were the authors of innumerable and interminable discussions.
" Restore to me," concludes the Emperor, " quiet days, and
nights void of care : that henceforward I may have the joy of
Pure Light, and the gladness of a quiet life. This if I gain not,
I must needs lament, and be dissolved in tears, and go heavily
for the remainder of my days. For when the people of God,
my fellow servants, are divided by unjust and harmful conten
tion, how can I be of unmoved soul ? . . . . Open to me,
by your reconciliation, the way to the East, which ye have closed
by your contentions : and allow me speedily to behold your
selves and all other people at union, so that I may be enabled,
with the unanimous accordance of every mouth, to return thanks
to God for the common concord and liberty of all."
To this effect wrote Eusebius of Nicodemia : thus openly did
he declare the dispute to be a mere strife of words which involved
the question, whether the Saviour were a mere creature, or
Very God of Very God. The state of Arius himself, who
boldly accused the Catholics of idolatry, were surely enviable, in
comparison with that of this Bishop.
The messenger who was entrusted with the Royal Letter was
Hosius, Bishop of Cordova, a Prelate who was destined to act a
foremost part in the troublous times that followed ; — and one
who, had he not lived too long for his own fame, might have
1 See Baronius's remarks on the subject, 318. xc.

SECT. XV.] THE ARIAN HERESY. 135
held the second place among the Saints that suffered in the
Arian persecution. He was now almost seventy years of age,
so that he had not only stood firm during the persecution of
Maximian, which raged with peculiar fury in Spain, but must
have well remembered that of Aurelian. How Eusebius could
suggest or consent to the nomination of such a Commissioner,
it is difficult to say : unless the great age, well known sanctity, a.d., 324,*
• • i -i i -i-i ii- December.or
and tried prudence of Hosius, rendered the Emperor s choice1 too a-d- 325,
manifestly proper to be gainsaid. He was also charged with
an inquiry, as it would appear,2 into the conduct of the Mele
tians and Coluthians ; and was to use his influence in composing
the long continued disputes concerning the proper time of the
celebration of Easter.3
On the arrival of Hosius, a Council was held at Alexandria, Alexandria:
the acts of which have unfortunately perished. It only appears condemned.
that the heresy both of Arius, and, as the natural consequence,
of Sabellius, were thoroughly sifted ; — that the word Consub
stantial was formally approved ; — that Arius was excommuni
cated afresh ; that the Meletians were condemned anew ; — and
that Coluthus and his partisans were summoned before the
Synod. His assumed power of ordination was derided as an
unheard of novelty : — those on whom he had laid hands, (and
among them, the afterwards notorious Ischyras,) were reduced
to the rank of laymen ; but both the schismatic and the greater
part of his followers were, on their recantation, admitted to the
Communion of the Church. How, as we have elsewhere said, ™{c*nt 

f Coluthus.

1 It is really melancholy, as shewing hardly be placed before the end of
how nnfair a controversial spirit will 324, because the battle of Adrianople
render the best men, to read Baro- was only fought in July ; — then fol-
nius's account (319. xxvij of the lowed that near Chalcedon ; and the
legation of Hosius by S. Sylvester necessary settlement of the Empire
of Rome to Alexandria ; — a supposi- could hardly have given Eusebius time
tion for which there is absolutely not to acquire an ascendancy over the Em-
the slightest authority, except the peror's mind, in that same year. —
Historian's own " satis significatum Nor can it be later than February,
mdetur." because Constantine, after having
2 Euseb.Vit. Constant. Lib. ii. Conf. written to S. Alexander, went to
capp. 62, 63. Thessalonica, where he already was
3 Sozomen. H. E. I. 16. on the 18th of March, and because
* Pagi in Baron. 319. iv. Tille- of the numerous events that occurred
mont places it (vi. 1. 385) a year between it and the Synod of Nicsea.
earlier. The mission of Hosius can

136 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK. I.
could the Council have come to such a determination on the
Orders conferred by Coluthus, if within the memory of 'living
men, the Bishop of Alexandria had received no other ordination ?
The Arians, throughout Egypt and the Thebais, on the result
of the Council being known, joined by the Meletians, committed
Arian the wildest acts of fury. They insulted the Catholics; they cast
outbreaks : .. „ . Z.
stones at the statues of the Emperor ; — every petty town was
filled with controversial disputes. The contemporary Fathers
give a lively picture of the popular interest, and fearful irreve
rence displayed on the question. On asking for the necessities
of life in the inn, in the bath, at the shop of the baker or that
of the shoemaker, the inquirer, instead of receiving the reply he
expected, was met with the answer, " Great is the Only-Begotten,
but greater is He That begot." Women were more especially
active in propagating the new sentiments; and the female
disciples of Arius were, in particular, the curse of Alexandria.
Arius, on this, addressed a letter to Constantine, complaining
of his unjust excommunication ; and the Emperor replied by an
Epistle, not indeed without its force of argument and vigour of
expression, but utterly unworthy of the author and the occasion,
inasmuch as it condescends to play on the name and to ridicule
the person of the heretic.1 It concluded with an invitation to
Arius to plead his own cause at court. This letter was brought
to Alexandria by the Public Couriers, Syncletius and Gaudentius,2
and was fixed in the public places of this and the other prin
cipal cities of the Empire. Arius, however, did not lose courage,
but presented himself personally to Constantine, on whom, though
he concealed the poison of his heresy, he was not, at that time,
able to make a favourable impression.
At length, wearied out with disputes, and urged by the
authority of Alexander and Hosius, Constantine summoned an
convocation CEcumenical Council, at the city of Nicaea in Bithynia, for the
ciiofeNi°^ fourteenth day of June,3 a.d. 325.
1 Gelasius, Hist. Cone. Nic. iii. 1. much to be said. It is most probable
2 Baronius, 319. xxi. that the Council, for whatever day it
3 It would lead us too far from our might have been convoked, was not
immediate subject to discuss its opened till June 19. Tillemont, vi. 3.
date, for and against which there is 912. Note 1.

SECT. XVI.] THE OECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF NICiEA. 137

SECTION XVI.
THE GREAT AND (ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF NICAEA.
If, on commencing the relation of an arduous war, it be the
practice of profane historians to number the contending chief
tains, to characterize their various constitutions of mind, to
catalogue their most illustrious actions, and thus to bring them
forth on the field of battle, — much more, about to enter on the
most fearful struggle in which the Church was ever engaged,
and to write of its august opening in the ever memorable
Council of Nicaea, may we be allowed to pause for a moment on
the principal Prelates who there assembled, and on the noble The Father:
n.sscrnl")l g
deeds of this great host of the King of Kings. Among these at Nicaja :
"three hundred and eighteen trained servants"1 of the True
Abraham, were men who carried about with them the glorious
marks of Confession in the Tenth Persecution, — men on whom dis
tant Churches had hung as Columns of the One Faith, — men, in
whom the Apostolic gifts still dwelt in all their pristine vigour, —
men, who had not onlythe power of binding and loosing inHeaven,
but of healing diseases, and of raising the dead, on earth. They
gathered from every province of the known world, an exceeding
great army of Prelates, an innumerable multitude of Priests and
Deacons; they came to compare the Creeds taught in their
Churches by the Apostolic founders of each, and to bear witness
to the Truth of the same Holy Ghost That spoke by all ; —
they came to invest traditional faith with infalhble words, and to
rear an everlasting bulwark between the Church and heresy : —
they assembled from Italy and Spain, and Africa, and the Goths,
and Palestine, and Cappadocia, and Isauria, and Egypt, and
Mesopotamia, and the Pentapolis ; the Euphrates and the
Guadalquiver, the Tiber and the Nile, the Danube and the
Orontes, sent forth their champions for the Verity of the
1 Genesis xiv. 14.

138 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
names of Catholic Creed, and the Glory of the Consubstantial. There
the principal -n n ¦
Bishops. was Is. Macarius of Jerusalem, illustrious for many miracles:
there was S. Eustathius of Antioch, who had raised a dead man
to life : there was S. James of Nisibis, who by the power of
his intercession routed Sapor and all the flower of the Persian
host ; there was S. Leontius of Caesarea, in Cappadocia, " the
equal of the Angels," and the spiritual Father of many Martyrs ;
S. Hypatius of Gangra, who himself attained the Crown of
Martyrdom, and breathed out his spirit in a petition for his
murderers ; S. Paul of Neocaesarea, who had been mutilated in
the persecution of Licinius ; S. Alexander of Constantinople,
at whose supplication Divine Vengeance overwhelmed Arius ; S.
Nicasius of Die,1 the only delegate from the ever orthodox
Gaul ; Protogenes of Sardica, the bulwark of the Dacian
Church ; S. Meletius of Sebastopolis, who fought his good fight
in Armenia; S. Spiridion of Tremithus, the glory of Cyprus;
S. Achilleus of Larissa, the Athanasius of Thessaly ; S. Gela
sius of Salamis, who had been all but a Martyr ; and multi
tudes of other Prelates, whose names, less famous in the Church
Militant, were doubtless not the less surely written in the
Book of Life.
s.Aiexander In such an august assembly, then, did S. Alexander, with
Prelates: twenty of his Prelates,2 appear. Of these the most famous
were S. Potamon of Heraclea, who had lost an eye under
1 See Tillemont, vi. 3. 687. who played a distinguished part in the
2 "We reserve a list of these Prelates Synod; (Socrat. H. E. i. 18); Ty-
for a note : — Harpocration of Naucra- rannus of Antinoe, who appears to
tis, (the birthplace of Athenaeus) ; have been originally a Meletian ;
Atlas of Schedia, — a city a little to the Volusianus of Lycopolis, who had
East of Alexandria ; — in the list of been consecrated in the place of Mele-
signatures, it is by mistake placed in tius ; Titus of Paraetonium; Serapion,
Thebais; Caius of Phthenoth, (which probably of Antiphrae ; — all these
gave its name to abranch of the Nile ;) were Catholics :— Dathes of Berenice ;
Dorotheus of Pelusium ; Caius of Zephyrius of Barce ; Secundus of
Thmuis, the successor of S. Phileas Teuchiri, besides the ex-Bishops, Se-
and S. Donatus ; Darius of Rhinoco- cundus of Ptolemais, and Theonas of
rura, or Farma, the boundary city of Marmarica, Arians. In these names,
Asia and Africa ; Philip of Panephy- we have followed Le Quien's autho-
sus ; Alberion of Pharbaethus ; Ada- rity : who gives them partly conjectur-
mantius of Cynopolis the lower ; ally, partly from Arabic MSS., in the
Antiochus of Memphis ; Harpocra- Royal Library at Paris.
tion of Cynopolis in Heptanomus,

SECT. XVI.] THE OECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF NICjEA. 139
Maximin, and whom we shall see hereafter a faithful Martyr,
under Constantius ; — and S. Paphnutius, from the Thebais, so
renowned for his Confession and Sanctity. But of all that went
from the Diocese of Alexandria, S. Athanasius, at that great crisis,
stood foremost. Among the Egyptian Prelates were three, Secun
dus, Zephyrius, and Dathes, who were infected with Arianism ;
they were all from Libya, a proof how great was the influence
that Arius, Secundus and Theonas had possessed in their own
neighbourhood. The Egyptian Bishops, as all the other Fathers,
were furnished with pubhc conveyances, and had every expense
paid, by a rescript of the Emperor issued for that purpose.
It is evidently beyond our proposed scheme to write more at
length of the proceedings at Nicaea, than may be necessary for
the perfect understanding of the affairs of that Church whose
history we have taken in hand to relate. The condemnations of
Arius and Meletius are essential to that end; on the other
regulations of the Council we shall dwell with extreme brevity.
S. Sylvester, then fining the Chair of Rome, sent two Priests,
Vitus, otherwise called Viton, and Vincent, as his Legates to the Legates
Council; being unable, through his great age and infirmities, to be
present in person. It thus fell to S. Alexander of Alexandria to
preside : but he, doubtless, was unwilling to sit as judge where he
was both the chief accuser and the principal witness. On this,
the right of precedence devolved on S. Eustathius of Antioch; and s. Eusta-
he it was, in all probability, who did accordingly preside. It has Antioch,
often been asserted, that Hosius, as one of the Pope's Legates,
filled that post : but it seems almost certain, that this venerable
Prelate was not a Legate from Rome1 : and the arguments for
1 We wish to be as far as possible he should have been omitted ! — And
from being influenced, in a statement should it be replied, (we know not
like the above, by any controversial that it ever has been) that the fall of
view. The only authority for the Hosius might have invalidated his tes-
Legantine office of Hosius is Gelasius ; timony, we answer that Vincent, one
whereas for the fact of the legation of of the Priests, was afterwards, in all
the Priests, we have the testimonies probability, the famous Vincent of
of Eusebius, Theodoret, and Sozomen. Capua: so that he should have been
Again, S. Julius of Rome speaks of excluded for a similar reason. Baro-
his Priests that had assisted at the nius is forced, for lack of a better
Council, and had borne witness to the argument, to rely on the supposititious
orthodoxy of Marcellus of Ancyra. letter of the Nicene Fathers to S.
Strange, had Hosius been legate, that Sylvester : a letter which, notwith-

140 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
his presidency, though strong, are not overpowering. That he
was the life and soul of the Council, none denies ; at the same
time, it would be a painful reflection that the formal head of
this great Synod had, at a later period, fallen away from the
Faith of which he was then the principal support.
But if, in this august assembly, the numbers of the Catholics
were far superior to those of their adversaries, the latter formed a
well arranged phalanx, wanting neither courage nor art, strong
in the favour of court parasites and eunuchs of the bedchamber,
Names ofthe troubled with no scruples, and hesitating at no degradation. Of
principal x ° ° .
Arian these, who numbered seventeen or eighteen, Eusebius of Nico-
BlShops : ' .
media occupied the first place ; Eusebius of Caesarea the Eccle
siastical Historian, Paulinus of Tyre, Aetius of Lydda, the two
excommunicated Libyan Bishops, Secundus and Theonas, pos
sessed great influence ; while Menophantus of Ephesus, as
at that time next in rank to the See of Antioch, and Theognius,
as Bishop of the city in which the Council were assembled, must
have possessed an importance to which their talents and
reputation do not seem to have entitled them.
The Council was opened on the nineteenth day of June,1 the
ufe council: Emperor being absent. For the first fortnight, the Bishops
standing the moderation of Tillemont's of Antioch was not present, and he of
censure, is a gross, clumsy, and pal- Alexandria was a party in the cause.
pable forgery. But this is not all. In favour of the presidency of S. Eus-
The superscription of that letter is, tathius, we may observe, 1. That John
Beatissimo Papae — Hosius  of Antioch, (who ought to have had
Macarius. . . . Victor [i. e. Vitus] means of knowing,) writing to S.
et Vincentius. This would prove Proclus, calls him the first of the
that, ifHosius were legate, S. Macarius Nicene Fathers. 2. Facundus names
was so too. Baronius omits his name ; him the first in the Council. 3. It
and this is also pointed out by Tille- would appear from Theodoret, that he
mont. The latter, with Launoy and was the Bishop who sat on the Em-
others, considers the Legantine com- peror's right hand, and addressed him
mission of Hosius as untenable. — But in the name of the Bishops. 4. Nice-
it is a different question, whether he phorus entitles him Coryphaeus of the
were not President. The authorities Fathers of Nicaea. We confess that
for this seem to be : 1. The fact that these latter arguments appear to us to
in the signatures of the Nicene Fa- prevail. (A great part of this note is
thers, and in Socrates, his name from Tillemont, vi. 3. 675. & 920.)
appears first. 2. That S. Athanasius 1 We are not concerned here to dis-
calls him the head of all the Councils. cuss this date. Conf. Pagi, Critice,
3. That he undoubtedly presided at 325. iii. & vii. Tillemont, vi. 3.912:
Sardica. Here, however, the Bishop and Valesius, in Socrat.

SECT. XVI.] THE (ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF NICjEA. 141
held frequent meetings in the principal church of the city, for
the purpose of hearing, from the mouth of Arius himself, the
doctrines which had thus disturbed the peace of the Church.
The heretic, standing as it were at bay, concealed nothing : he
openly declared that the Son of God had been created from
nothing : that He was capable of holiness and sin, and had, of
His own free will, preferred holiness ; and that, in the purest
sense of the word, He was a creature and a work of the Father.
At these blasphemies, the greater part of the Prelates stopped
their ears; but the Eusebians were instant that the doctrine
should be examined : if new, it might be supported ; if strange,
explained. The Confessors as loudly exclaimed that the ancient
tradition should, without re-examination, be maintained and
asserted. In the midst of these disputes, Constantine, who had been arrival of
. t i • • • Constan-
celebrating at Nicomedia the anniversary of his first victory over tine :
Licinius, arrived at Nicaea. His entry was made on the eve of
the day which had been appointed for the solemn session of the
Council. Some of the Bishops, influenced probably by Arian
wiles, repaired to the Emperor, and presented memorials on
injustices alleged to have been committed by each other ; — and
Constantine, retaining them in his possession, promised to give
them his attention.
The appointed day having arrived, the Fathers assembled in
the great hall of the Palace, where seats had been arranged,
correspondent with the number of the Prelates. They took
their places, and waited in silence for the entry of the Emperor.
As many of the Bishops were little skilled in human learning,
and entirely unacquainted with the rules of controversy, some
learned men, as well Priests as Laics, were present to render
their assistance.
The Emperor entered, in his robe of purple, studded with he meets the
• , t m • Fathers in
precious stones : his retinue consisted of a few unarmed Chris- session.
tians : the assembly rose as one man : Constantine blushed and,
passing up the hall, stood before a httle throne prepared for him
at its higher end. The Bishops made signs to him to seat him
self; and when he had done so, they all took their places.
Eustathius of Antioch, who occupied the highest seat on the
Emperor's right hand, then rose, and addressed the Council in

142 patriarchate of Alexandria. [book i.
a short congratulatory speech1 ; the Emperor replied by express
ing his joy at meeting so large an assembly, and his hope that
their deliberations would lead to unanimity. He spoke in
Latin; and an interpreter translated his words into Greek,
which was the native language of the greater part of the
Fathers. The progress which was., made in each of the sessions held
after the arrival of Constantine is quite unknown to us ; and
can only be discovered if researches in Oriental Monasteries
should bring any contemporary history of the Council to light.
The first subject brought under consideration, was the heresy
of Arius. The Cathohc Bishops demanded of his supporters an
Disputes account both of their principles, and of the reasons which had
Arian e led them to embrace their present views ; the heretics, in endea-
18 ops' vouring to answer, disagreed as much among themselves, as
they did with the orthodox. The Emperor paid great attention
to the arguments on both sides : he addressed the disputants in
Greek, which he spoke with tolerable ease, moderating their
eagerness, and endeavouring to his utmost ability to promote
union. S. Athanasius, in all these disputes, signahzed himself
as the most powerful champion against the Eusebians; — and
thereby attracted that implacable hatred on their part, which
intrigues of ceased not to pursue him to the end of his days. Eusebius of
Nicomedia: Nicomedia, finding that if Alius were condemned, his own
deposition might very possibly follow, applied himself to win
Constantine through some of his Court favourites. The scheme
failed, and the Bishop himself was exposed to the horror and indig-
nationof the Council by the production of a letter in which he said,
intending a reductio ad absurdum, — If it be asserted that Jesus
Christ is Very and Uncreated Son of God, it is almost the same
thing as asserting that He is Consubstantial with the Father. The
letter was torn in pieces by the Council, in token of abhorrence.
Nor did Eusebius of Caesarea fare better. He composed a
Creed, which he endeavoured to pass off as the true sentiments
of his party ; and which he affirms to have been received with
applause by the Council, and merely rejected because it did not
employ the Word Consubstantial. But this falsehood is worthy
1 Conf. Bar. 325. lvi. Euseb. Vit. Const, iii. 11. Theodoret, H. E. i. 6.
Tillemont, vi. 3. 920.

SECT. XVI.] THE OECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF NICEA. 143
of its author. For the fact is, that it was rejected with disgust,
as an attempt to condemn the grosser expressions, while it
maintained the doctrine of Arius. This Creed ran as follows.1 creed of
" We believe in One God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all caesarea :
things, visible and invisible : And in One Lord Jesus Christ,
the Word of God, God of God, Light of Light, Life of Life,
the Only Begotten Son, the First-Born of every creature:
[begotten of the Father before all worlds, by Whom all things
were made :2] Who for our salvation took flesh and had His con
versation among men : and suffered and rose again the third
day, and ascended to the Father; and shall come again with
glory to judge i the quick and dead. And we believe in the
Holy Ghost. Believing that each of These are and subsist :
the Father Very Father, the Son Very Son, the Holy
Ghost Very Holy Ghost : as our Lord, sending forth His
Disciples to preach, said, Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing
them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
Holy Ghost. Concerning which we also affirm that these
things thus are, and that we thus beheve, and have ever thus
held, and will constantly remain in this faith till death,
anathematising every godless heresy."
It was therefore necessary to proceed to some more Catholic its rejection:
exposition of the Faith.
The Fathers first advanced as the most simple proposition :
" The Word is God." The Arians agreed ; so, they said, after
a certain sort are all men : for it is written, All things are of
God. To press the matter still more closely, the Council next
asserted that the Son was the Virtue, the Wisdom, the Eternal
Image of the Father : like Him in all things, immutable, eter
nally subsistent in Him. The Arians, by emphasising certain
words of this statement, declared their willingness to subscribe
to it. He is the fmage of the Father : for it is written that chicanery of
man was«made in His image : He is in Him : for it is written ; wans"se"
1 Theodoret, H. E. i. 12. We may facts are so universally known, as
remark that, in this section, where we because we neither could add, nor
are not writing of the immediate sub- could hope to add, any thing to what
ject of our history, we have not Baronius, Pagi, Tillemont, and Fleury
thought it necessary to give along list have written on the subject.
of quotations, — as well because the 5 This clause is probably spurious.

144 patriarchate of Alexandria. [book i.
in Him we five and move ; eternally, or always, in Him : for it
, is written, " for we which live are always " ; the Virtue and
Power of God, for we are told of many such. The Fathers
exclaimed, He is Very God. He is so, replied the Arians ; if
He has been verily so made, verily He so is.
adoption of Then the Council, purposing to leave no subterfuge, said : —
tteHomoa. The goN of GoD is CONSUBSTANTIAL with the Father.
And here the Arians would not follow. They would not
affirm that He is not only similar, but inseparable, not only like,
but the same ; that that may be predicated of Him with respect
to the Father, which can be predicated of no creature.
And doubtless this word was the greater affliction to the
Arians, because it was, as it were, a sword borrowed from their
own armoury. If the Son be as the Catholics would have Him,
they had said, He must be Consubstantial with the Father.
He must be, the Fathers would seem to reply : — and so He is.
Their opponents loudly clamoured against the term. One thing,
obections ^hey sal0-> can ^e consubstantial to another only in three ways.
Eushbians ¦ Either by production, as a plant and its root : by procession, as
a child and its father : by division, as the several pieces of a
broken mass. The Cathohcs explained that the word was to be
taken in a divine and heavenly sense, and not according to the
gross meaning which the Arians put upon it. The next shift of
the heretics was the assertion, that the term had been condemned
in the Council of Antioch, holden against Paul of Samosata. For
this very reason, replied the faithful, that it had been applied in
a gross and earthly manner. Lastly, the Eusebians objected
that it was not a Scriptural word. The orthodox answered, that
neither were many terms employed by the Arians themselves ;
and that the word (which, indeed, Eusebius himself confesses)
had been employed by several of the most eminent Doctors of
the Church. Paying, therefore, no attention to these represen
tations, the Council proceeded to draw up a Symbol of Faith.
It would appear that this task was entrusted to a committee, of
which Hosius of Cordova acted as chairman ; it is certain that
S. Athanasius also had a hand in it, and we probably shall not
err, in imagining S. Alexander, who had written so much and so
well on the subject, and who is known to have had so
much authority in the Synod, to have been one of its

SECT. XVI.] THE ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF NICEA. 145
framers. It was copied out and read by S. Hermogenes, after
wards Bishop of Caesarea, in Cappadocia : which would lead to
the supposition that S. Leontius, the then Bishop of that See,
was also one of the framers of the Creed.
Thus, then, spoke the Church.
We believe in One God, the Father Almighty, Maker Thecreedof Niciea.
of all Things, visible and invisible :
And in One Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son
of God, begotten of the Father, that is, of the substance
of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, Very God of
Very God, begotten, not made, Consubstantial with the
Father : by Whom all things were made, both in Hea
ven and on Earth : Who for us men and for our salvation
CAME DOWN, AND WAS INCARNATE, AND WAS MADE MAN : He
suffered, and rose again the third day, and ascended
into Heaven : and shall come again to judge the quick
and the dead.
And we believe in the Holy Ghost.
And for them that say, concerning the Son of God,
There was a time when He was not, and, He was not be
fore He was produced, and, He was produced from things
THAT ARE NOT, AND, He IS OF ANOTHER SUBSTANCE OR ESSENCE,
or created, or subject to conversion or mutation, the
Catholic and Apostolic Church saith, Let them be
anathema.
The creed of Nicaea was at once embraced by a very large The Arians
proportion of the assembled Fathers. Seventeen alone dis
sented, and these urged all the objections they could raise
against the adoption of the term Consubstantial. In fine,
however, all gave way excepting five ; Eusebius of Nicomedia,
Theognius of Nicaea, Maris of Chalcedon, and the Libyan
Prelates, Secundus and Theonas. The three former used every
effort both in the Council, and with the Emperor, to avoid
signature. Nothing, however, availed them : and they found
themselves driven to a choice between subscription and exile.
On this, Maris reluctantly put his name to the document : craft of
, Eusebius
Eusebius and Theognius are reputed, on Arian1 authority, to an? The0-
1 There seems no ground for reject- this point, as if he had invented the
ing the testimony of Philostorgius on tale for the purpose of shielding Euse-
L

146 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
have inscribed an iota in the komoiision so as to term the Son
of God iEquisubstantial, instead of Consubstantial : Eusebius
moreover declaring, that he subscribed the Creed but not the
anathema. Secundus and Theonas alone had courage and
honesty to stand firm in their sentiments. The Council con
demned them with Arius, and together with them, Euzoius and
Pistus, who were afterwards respectively intruded by the here
tical faction, into the thrones of Antioch and Alexandria. They,
as well as the heresiarch, were banished by the decree of the
Emperor, into the province of Illyria. Here, though deposed,
they persisted, it would seem, in exercising Episcopal functions ;
at least we find that Pope S. Julius refused ordination conferred
by Secundus as invalid.
Decision S. Alexander next brought before the Fathers the schism of
the Meletian Meletius : — and it is difficult to account for the lenity with which
the Council treated its originator. Perhaps it was feared that
harshness might induce the Meletians to throw themselves unre
servedly unto the party of the Arians, with whom they had
already formed a connexion ; perhaps Alexander himself was
not unwilling, having been compelled to proceed with the
greatest vigour against the Arians, and thereby having incurred
the imputation of acting from personal motives, to shew, in a
point where moderation might more safely be employed, that
he was willing to sacrifice all things for the sake of peace, truth
alone excepted. Another reason has been suggested in the
excessive eagerness of Constantine himself to compose differ
ences. However this may be, Meletius was received to Commu
nion, and permitted to retain the title of Bishop : while he was
forbidden for the future to exercise any episcopal functions, and
another Prelate was given to the Church of Lycopolis, if indeed,
a Catholic had not been ordained there previously. As to
those whom he had consecrated, they were to be received into the
Church by imposition of hands, and to continue in that rank, to
which he had elevated them : though they were to yield prece
dence to such as had been canonically ordained by Alexander. In
case of the death of any of those Prelates who had remained in
bius from a charge of inconsistency effect this end ; — and the stratagem
and vacillation. A much easier me- is quite in keeping with the character
thod might surely have been found to of Eusebius.

SECT. XVI.] THE OECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF NICiEA. 147
the Communion of the Church, his place might be supplied by
one of those who had been consecrated by Meletius, at the
choice of the people, and by the confirmation of the Bishop of
Alexandria. To prevent the possibility of any collusion, Mele
tius was ordered to present a fist of those whom he had elevated
to any ecclesiastical office. On his return to Alexandria, he
complied with the injunction : and gave in the names of twenty-
eight Bishops,1 besides eight Priests or Deacons.
The event, as we shall see, proved the lenity of the Council
to have been much misplaced; and the terms in which S.
Athanasius speaks of it, prove clearly his opinion of the ill-
judged character of the measure.
Thus far is the Council of Nicaea intimtely connected with The Paschai
the welfare ofthe Alexandrian Church. With its decision ofthe ques '°n'
question about Easter, we are no further concerned than to re
mark, that it was now made the office of the Bishop of Alexan
dria to give notice of the true day to his brother of Rome, and
by his means, to the whole Cathohc Church.
Of the twenty celebrated Canons of Nicaea, one only concerns
the Church of Alexandria. The Sixth Canon provides for the
observation of the ancient customs in Egypt, Libya, and Penta
pohs ; confirming to the Bishop of Alexandria his right of alone
ordaining Bishops in those provinces. But we must not omit
mention of the manner in which S. Paphnutius, the Egyptian
Bishop of whom we have before spoken, distinguished himself in
the debate on the celibacy of the clergy. In the consideration of
the Third Canon, which forbade the clergy to retain the practice
prevalent in some places, of having women, known by the title
of subintroduced, to manage their domestic affairs, and hmiting
those who might dwell in the same house, to mothers, aunts,
or sisters, some of the Fathers were desirous of ordaining that
any Clerk married before his ordination must after it observe
continence. S. Paphnutius opposed this, and as he himself was
unmarried, and of notoriously pure life, his opinion had great
weight. " The Church had advanced," he said, " that none s. Paphnu-
could marry after the reception of Holy Orders : let that suffice ;
to press the matter further would rather tend to immorality than
1 The names are preserved by S. Apol. i. 789. (Ed. Paris. 1627.)
Athanasius, Ad Imperator Constant.
L2

148 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
to chastity. S. Paul had declared that marriage was honourable
in all ; and the liberty received from our fathers should be left
to our posterity." This opinion prevailed.
The synodal letter of the Nicene Council, recapitulating its
proceedings, was addressed to the Churches of Egypt, Libya, and
Pentapolis, in the first place, and in them to all Cathohc
Churches. The principal Bishops were ordered to make known
the decrees of the Council to the Prelates in their various
countries ; so that while the news of the triumph of the Faith
was propagated by Osius to Spain, France, and Britain, it was
at the same time announced by means of John, Bishop of Persia,
to the Faithful as far as Malabar and the borders of China.
The Council was terminated on the twenty-fifth of August ;
ou which day Constantine gave a banquet to the Bishops, in
honour of its conclusion, and of the commencement of the
twentieth year of his reign, having deferred the latter ceremony
for a month, that the two might coincide. Eusebius of Caesarea
pronounced a panegyric on Constantine : and the feast which
followed was one that might become such guests on such an
occasion. The Emperor dismissed the Prelates with magnificent
presents, and earnest exhortations to peace and unity.
The Eastern Church commemorates the Fathers of Nicaea ;
the Western Church has not followed its example.
Arabic ca- We must now say something on those Ecclesiastical laws,
Nicaia: their commonly known by the name ofthe Arabic Canons of Nicaea ,2
authority. j j
and considered by the Eastern Church authoritative. Isidore
Mercator is the first Western author who mentions them ; and
he appears never to have seen them, merely saying that he had
heard of other Canons of Nicaea in the Eastern Church, which
were of considerable length, and superior in size to the four
Gospels. The Crusaders seem to have known nothing of them :
nor were they accessible to Europeans till edited as genuine in the
seventeenth century. Now, while on the one hand, it is absurd
to receive them as the work of the Nicene Fathers, as the
Orientals do, and as even some members2 of the Roman Church
have done, affirming that they took three years to compose, it is

1 Renaudot, pp. 73, 74.
2 As for example, Turrianus and Abraham Echellensis.

SECT. XVI.] THE (ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF NICAEA. 149
equally wrong to call them false and supposititious, and to
esteem them utterly valueless. For all the Oriental Churches,
as well Orthodox as Nestorian and Jacobite, are agreed in
receiving them, and have done so for more than a thousand
years ; and they are even held good in law, in those cases where
by a special privilege of the Sultans or the Caliphs, the Patri
archs or the Bishops are allowed to act as temporal judges.
They are, in fact, an Arabic version of the whole body of the
ancient Ecclesiastical Canons, attributed by mistake to the Coun
cil of Nicaea. And this was not an uncommon error. So we
find Pope S. Innocent quoting, by mistake, a Canon of Sardica
for one of Nicaea, in his controversy with the African Bishops
respecting the right of appeal to Rome. That there was such a
collection of Canons is evident from many writers, but more
especially from Photius. They were first received by the Eastern
Catholics, and from them borrowed by the Jacobites and Nesto-
rians, as one simple fact proves. The forty-third Canon is
merely a repetition of the last of the Council of Ephesus, the
fifty-third of the second of Chalcedon. The Nestorians, there
fore, had they known its origin, would not have received the for
mer, nor the Jacobites the latter. The compilation was proba
bly made shortly after the rise of the Mahometan Empire, and it
consists of three parts. The first contains, in differing MSS., 80,
83, or 84 Canons ; the second comprises 33 or 34 ; the third,
entitled the Canons of the Emperors, embraces a variety of
extracts from the Digests, Novels, and Constitutions of the later
Emperors. And it is remarkable, that though some of these
Emperors are, of course, by the Nestorians and Jacobites
accounted heretical, those laws were by all the differing sects,
as well as by the Catholic Church in the East, considered
authoritative. It is hardly worth while to note the extraordinary traditions1 oriental
of certain Jacobite writers concerning the 2048 Bishops, whom the council.
they affirm to have met at Nicaea; of whom, they say, 318 only
maintained the Consubstantiality of the Son. Yet these wild
1 Makrizi's account, 115, — 136, length submitted to the Emperor, and
where he makes the Fathers of Nicaea the 318 that sided with him, is equally
to have been split up into every pos- extravagant and amusing.
sible kind of belief, and to have at

150 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
fables, adopted from Mahometan authors, have actually been
appealed to by a Socinian author of the seventeenth century, in
defence of the blasphemies of that sect.
The first employment of S. Alexander, on his return to Egypt,1
was to compose the Meletian schism. Meletius, after having
given in the required catalogue of his ecclesiastics, retired to
Lycopohs, where, as some will have it, he ended his days in the
continu- Unity of the Church. But some of his followers were more
ance or the J
schism"1 obstinate ; and the Bishop of Alexandria found himself chiefly
thwarted by three persons : John Arcaph,2 Bishop of Memphis,
Callinicus of Pelusium, and Paphnutius, an anchoret, who had
obtained an excellent reputation for piety among his own parti
sans. These men betook themselves to Byzantium, intending
to prefer a petition to the Emperor that they might be allowed
to hold separate assemblies, on account, as they protested, of the
harshness of Alexander.3 But Constantine, probably irritated
at the ill-success of his conciliatory measures, would not so
much as see them. They still, however, followed the Court :
until, at Nicomedia, Eusebius, glad of any opportunity to harass
his great opponent, espoused their cause, and presented them to
the Emperor. But the interview procured them nothing beyond
the reproaches of Constantine.* These attempts, however, in
duced Alexander to despatch Athanasius to Court : and the
latter, acquainted with the declining health of his Bishop,5 and
foreseeing that the Church of Alexandria had already set its eyes
on himself, was not unwilhng to charge himself with the embassy,
and thus to escape from the honour of the Episcopate.
1 He does not seem to have left lie,) but who, at all events, was a
Nicaea immediately. For the Coptic leading man among the Meletians, was
and Ethiopic Calendars celebrate the the same with John Arcaph, of whom
three hundred and eighteen Fathers we shall have more to tell hereafter.
on November 5 : not improbably, 3 S. Epiphan. Haer. 68.
as Sollerius remarks, p. 38 A., the 4 Euseb. Vit. Const, iii. 23.
day of the publication of its letters to 6 This seems the best way of recon-
the Church of Alexandria. ciling the account of S. Epiphanius, that
2 At least it seems probable, as Baro- Athanasius was sent to Court by Alex-
niusobserves, 332. i., that the Johnwho ander, with that of Sozomen, that he
had been named by Meletius, as Sozo- retired of his own accord into some
men asserts, the chief of his party, obscure retreat. That he also did this,
(though this seems fatally subversive of on nis return from Constantine, is
the report that Meletius died a Catho- certain.

SECT. XVI.] PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. 151
Five months after the Council, Alexander was seized with a s. Alexander
mortal disease. As his clergy stood around him, he called for Athanasius
Athanasius. One of the same name, probably he who had sor.
signed the condemnation of Arius together with his more cele
brated namesake, stepped forward, but the dying Prelate took
no notice of him, and thus shewed that it was another to whom
he referred. In a few moments he again called for Athanasius,
and repeated his name several times : when no one replied,
" Athanasius," said he, " you think to save yourself by flight,
but flight will not avail you." And shortly afterwards, this and dies
" loud voiced preacher of the Faith," — so Theodoret calls him — 326.*
was gathered to his fathers, after an Episcopate of fourteen
years. A comparison naturally suggests itself between Dionysius
and Alexander, the most illustrious among the Antenicene
Bishops of Alexandria, as Athanasius and Cyril were among
those who subsequently filled that throne. That in learning,
talent, power, and influence with the Church at large, Alexander
. „ . --,. . ti* Comparison
was interior to Dionysius, none can deny : at the same time, of s. riiony-
if he defended the truth less powerfully, he also never gave a Alexander.
handle to a charge of heresy, except from heretics. Both emi
nently possessed a mild and conciliating spirit : but in Diony
sius it was tempered by firmness and decision, in Alexander it
sometimes seems almost to have degenerated into irresolution.
The former, under God, relied entirely on his own resources in
dealing with enemies ; the latter evidently depended on those of
his greater deacon. Finally, if Dionysius had the honour of
confessing Christ in two persecutions, it may be doubted if the

* The day of S. Alexander's death render that day very probable : but
is not certain. S. Athanasius tells us this involves an insuperable difficulty,
that he died less than five months after which we shall notice in its place,
the Council : ofotw ydp irevre p.TJves trap- concerning the Episcopate of S. Atha-
t\K8ov, Kai b pXv p.aKaplrr)S 'AXQavSpos nasius. On the whole, the day given
tst e\evTi)Kev. Apolog. ii. (i. 777 D.) by the Roman Martyrology, February
The Chronicon Orientale, however, fixes 26th, seems as likely as any other.
his decease on Monday, April 1 7 :— Strangely enough, S. Alexander is not
which would mark the year as 327. The commemorated in the Menology ; in
Chronicon Alexandrinum also names the Ethiopic or Coptic Calendars he is
Monday, but makes the day to have named on Ap. 17.
been the 18th. Tins would seem to

152 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
real sufferings that Alexander underwent for His name were not
the greater ; if the weariness and harassing nature of his Epis
tles to all parts of the Church, the bitter opposition he received
from enemies, the lukewarm support afforded him by friends, did
not more than counterbalance the exile of Valorri, and the
plague and famine at Alexandria.1

SECTION XVII.

CONVERSION OF ETHIOPIA.
sius the13" To write the life of S. Athanasius, as it ought to be written, is
patr. xx! to write during the period when he flourished, the history of the
a.m.' 42. ' whole Catholic Church. It is plain that our limits must confine
us to a concise sketch of his actions and his sufferings : for we
are less concerned with him in this work, as the great champion
whom it pleased God to raise up in defence of the Faith, than
as the persecuted, and finally triumphant, Bishop of Alexandria.
It is said by Rufinus, and the story has been repeated by
Sozomen,2 that he had been early attached to the service of the
Church, and that from the following occurrence. Alexander hap
pening, on the feast of S. Peter the Martyr, to look from a win
dow of his house towards the sea-shore, saw him, in company
with other children of his own age, amusing himself by a game,
in which one of them personated the Bishop, the rest his congre
gation : Athanasius supported the former character. Alexander
1 Makrizi, § 138, has a singular story diers of Alimam-al-moez-ledin-AUah-
about Alexander, which is not con- ibn-Tamim Mad.
firmed by Eutychius. There was a
solemn Feast of Saturn at Alexandria, 2 The great difficulty of this account
on the 12th day of Hetur (= Nov. 6.) is the question of dates. As S. Peter
This he persuaded the people to change suffered November 26, 311, the earliest
into a Festival in honour of S. Michael, period at which the event could be
retaining most of the ancient ceremo- fixed would be the same day in the
nial. The Temple itself was dedicated following year. We can hardly allow
under the invocation of the Archangel, S. Athanasius to have then been more
and stood till it was destroyed, in the than twelve years old. And yet, in
358th year of the Hegira, by the sol- this case, he would have been conse-

SECT. XVII.] CONVERSION OF ETHIOPIA. 153
sent some of his ecclesiastics, whom he was about that day to
entertain at dinner, to stop the game, and from their and his
-own interrogatories, he learnt that Athanasius had already bap
tized several of his play-fellows in the sea. Alexander, the
above named historians further affirm, considered this Baptism
valid, and thenceforth, pleased with the bearing of the young
Athanasius, took him under his especial protection, and in pro
cess of time made him his Archdeacon. But the story is, to say
the least, very doubtful.
The dying words of Alexander had left no doubt that he re
commended Athanasius as his successor : and his wishes met
with general acquiescence. As the Deacon, however, was still
absent, the Meletians intruded a creature of their own named
Theonas,1 into the vacant See ; but he died at the end of three
months ; and when S. Athanasius returned, and was forced from
the retirement to which his modesty had caused him to retreat,
he was pointed out by popular clamour for the Evangelical
Throne. A large number of Prelates from different parts of
Egypt were assembled for the purpose of giving a successor to
Alexander, when the shouts of the multitude hardly seemed
to allow them a choice. " Give us Athanasius ! the true Chris
tian, the ascetic, the true Bishop ! We will have none but
Athanasius ! The Prelates shall not depart till they have
elected Athanasius ! " 2 Glad to comply at once with their own
judgment, the late Bishop's recommendation, and the popular
clamour, the Fathers pronounced Athanasius to be him on
whom their votes had fallen.
An important accession was made in the beginning of the Epis
copate of the new Bishop, to the territorial extent of the Church
of Alexandria.3 A philosopher named Meropius undertook a
crated at the age of six-and-twenty, — a ' S. Epiphan. Haer. 68. And see
circumstance which must have been the Benedictine Editors' Life, 326. ii.
brought forward against him by some 2 S. Athanas. Apol. cont. Arian. 6.
of his opponents. And the whole tale 3 Rufinus, i. 9. Socrates, H. E. i. 19.
seems to involve a time of settled and Theodoret, H. E. i. 23. Sozomen, H.
continued peace : which a year after the E. ii. 23. It is plain, therefore, that
death of S. Peter could hardly have Procopius is in error, when he says,
been. If this difficulty could be solved, (Lib. i. de Bello Pers.) that the Ethio-
or if it can be thought not absolutely pians, or, as he calls them Axumites,
fatal to the story, there seems no other were not converted till the time of
reason for rejecting it. Justinian.

154 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
journey into Ethiopia, partly with the view of satisfying his
curiosity, partly with the desire of enriching himself by the
productions of that country : and he was accompanied by two
young relations, Edesius and Frumentius. On his return, the
vessel foundered in a part of the Red Sea, and the men were, as
the barbarous custom of the Ethiopians then was, cut to pieces
on making their escape. The two youths were alone spared,
and being presented for slaves to the king of the country, be
came, from their good temper and talents, favourites at court.
Frumentius in particular, was made secretary to the king, who
dying not long after, left his queen and two young children,
Abreha and Atzbeha, unprotected. The former besought the two
Christians not to take advantage of the liberty to which the
Monarch on his death-bed had restored them, but to assist
her in managing the affairs of the kingdom, until her sons
should attain a riper age. Frumentius, thus invested, as the
more able of the two, with the character of Regent, endeavoured
by all the means in his power to propagate the knowledge of
Christianity : he invited foreign merchants to open a traffic with
Abyssinia, and gave both the sites and the materials for the erec
tion of churches. Thus the Faith made great progress during
the term of his government ; and he gave in a faithful account of
his expenditure and proceedings when the young princes were
considered of sufficient age to administer themselves the affairs
of state. The queen and her sons would gladly have longer
availed themselves of the service of their former captives, but
they were bent on leaving Abyssinia. Edesius repaired to Tyre,
his native place ; but Frumentius, whose heart was more in the
work, hastened to Alexandria, and recounted to S. Athanasius
the whole series of events. A Council of Bishops was sitting at
the time ; and the Archbishop, on their recommendation that a
Prelate should be appointed for Abyssinia, looked on Frumen
tius and said, in the words of Pharaoh to Joseph, " Can we find
such an one as this is, a man in whom the Spirit of God is ? "
He therefore consecrated him first Bishop of Axum, and recom
mended him to the Grace of God in returning to the scene of
his labours.
It is a question of as much difficulty as interest, to determine
the condition of the Ethiopians, at the time of the mission of

SECT. XVII.] CONVERSION OF ETHIOPIA. 155
Frumentius. That this people has always retained a strong
partiality for Jewish rites, is an undoubted fact : — the practice
of circumcision has never been dropped. The only question is,
how far the Ethiopic tradition of the origin of this disposition
has any foundation whatever in truth.
The Queen of Sheba, who came to Jerusalem, attracted by
the wisdom of Solomon, is by Ethiopic writers affirmed to have
reigned over their own country.1 They name her Makeda; and
report that, on her return, she became, by Solomon, the mother
of a son, whom she named Menilehec, but who was by his
father, under whom he received his education, called David.
On attaining to manhood this prince was accompanied by
several of the Jewish nobility to his own country ; — and from
him descended the fine of Salomonaean kings. In the time of
Bazen, the twenty-fourth of these monarchs, our Lord was
born : and thirteen of his successors wielded the Ethiopic
sceptre before the arrival of Frumentius. When he returned
with Episcopal jurisdiction, Abreha and Atzbeha were still
joint monarchs : and for their docility in profiting by the
instructions of the Missionary, and their zeal in propagating the
Faith, they were added, by their grateful people, to the catalogue
of the Saints.2 There seems no reason for believing that the
Gospel had been previously preached in Ethiopia ; or, if it had
been, that it ever took root.
1 It would be hopeless to enter into dition, the sacred dances, the royal
the dispute as to what country is motto, — "The Lion of the tribe of
really intended by Sheba. The ques- Judah hath conquered," the mystical
tion is discussed, but not satisfactorily, ark, the intercourse between the Jews
by Ludolf, Hist. Ethiop. ii 3. ; and and Ethiopians, evinced, for instance,
by Tellez, Tratado do que fizerao os by the journey of the Eunuch of Can-
Padre* da Companhia de Jesus i., 25. dace to Jerusalem, do seem to point
In favour of the claims of Ethiopia are in that direction.
Origen and S. Augustine : of those of
Arabia, Justin, S. Cyprian, S. Epi- 2 This Festival is on the fourth of
phanius, S. Cyril of Alexandria ; and, Baba (= October 1). Frumentius is
among the moderns, Baronius, Soarez, commemorated on the eighteenth of
and most ably of all, Pineda. In be- Chiahac (=December 14), on the
half of the former it may be urged twenty-sixth of Abib (= July 20), and
that, though the rite of circumcision on the twenty-third of Tot (= Sept.
may have been introduced in a different 20). By the Ethiopians he is gene-
manner, and varies from that of the rally named Salama, but also Fremo-
Jews, inasmuch as both sexes are sub- natos : and from him the Town of
jected to it, still the universal tra- Fremona takes its name.

156 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
The Church founded by S. Frumentius,1 Apostle of Abyssinia,
exists, though in a miserably degraded and heretical state, at this
day : and it may not be improper to say a few words with respect
to its constitution, in reference to the Mother Church of Alex
andria.2 The Bishop of Axum is often called Patriarch of Ethiopia,
but this title is wrongly apphed : his proper jurisdiction is that
of a Metropolitan, but there are some peculiar limits to his power.
He is never a native of Ethiopia, but an Egyptian : his nomina
tion and consecration rests with the Bishop of Alexandria alone;
and he has the right of consecrating Bishops, so that the whole
number in his province do not exceed seven.3 This, as the event
proved, was a most unwise regulation ; it was apparently adopted
at first by the jealousy of Alexandria, lest Axum should consti
tute itself a Patriarchate. As twelve Bishops were canonically
required for the consecration of a Patriarch, the limitation to
seven entirely obviated this danger ; but it has caused two great
evils ; it has prevented the spread of the Gospel in Africa, and
has been the occasion of the heresy of the Abyssinian Church.
Two years must necessarily elapse before a vacancy can be sup
plied, because of the length of the journey, and the period
required by the new Metropohtan for acquainting himself with
1 There is a difficulty as to the date that traveller, but followed him soon
of the Mission of S. Frumentius. Me- after his departure.
ropius is said to have travelled in imi- 2 Renalldot) Dissert singular. de
tation of the philosopher Metrodorus. patriarch- Alex_ § cvm_
But Metrodorus could not have re
turned before 324; because- he found 3 The forty-second of the Arabic
Constantine at Byzantium, in which Canons of Nicaea forbids the Ethiopians
place the Emperor could not be, till to ordain themselves a Patriarch : or
master of the East. Some persons that any one of their own doctors
have, therefore, thrown the ordination should be appointed to the office :
of Frumentius as late as 335, to give " because they are under the power
time, after 324, for the voyage and of the Patriarch of Alexandria, whose
death of Meropius, and the tutelage of duty it is to appoint over them a
the young princes by his pupil. On the Catholic, who is inferior to the Patri-
contrary, all ecclesiastical historians arch." We learn from the kindness
affirm the consecration of Frumentius of a Coptic Priest at Alexandria, that
to have taken place at the very begin- the various ecclesiastical dignities are
ning of the Episcopate of Athanasius. thus expressed :— the Patriarch by the
Without having recourse to the hypo- number 7 ; the Catholic or Metran of
thesis of a double journey of Metrodo- Abyssinia, by 6 ; an Ordinary Bishop,
rus, it is enough to suppose that by 5; a Priest, by 4 ; a Deacon, by 3 ;'
Meropius did not wait for the return of a Sub-Deacon, by 2 ; a Reader, by l'.

SECT. XVIII.] ATHANASIUS FALSELY ACCUSED. 157
the Ethiopic and Amharic; the former the language employed in
the offices of the Church, the latter that commonly spoken. No
dues or offerings are expected by the See of Alexandria from
Ethiopia, but it is usual on the death of the Metropohtan that
the king and nobles should accompany their letters requesting
the consecration of his successor, with suitable presents. In
an (Ecumenical Council, the Metropolitan of Axum would claim
the twelfth place.
The neighbouring Church of Nubia, the origin of which is
involved in great obscurity, is not subject to the See of Axum.
It depends entirely on Alexandria : from which it not only
receives its Metropohtan but also all its Bishops.

SECTION XVIII.
ATHANASIUS FALSELY ACCUSED CONCERNING ISCHYRAS AND
ARSENIUS.
The Meletians, by their artifices and restlessness, continuing to
excite disturbances throughout the Diocese of Alexandria, and
having now so completely cast in their lot with the Arians, that
the names were used almost promiscuously, Athanasius resolved
on a visitation of the Thebais, where these schismatics princi
pally abounded. He embarked on the Nile, and pursued his s.Athana.
course as far as Syene,1 the boundary of Egypt and the Dicecese hfcMoceU.
of Ethiopia. As he was passing Tabennesis, Pachomius, to whom
his piety, his age, and his miracles assigned the first place among
the ascetics of those parts, came forth to meet him with a large band
of monks. Serapion, Bishop of Tentyra,2 would have pointed him
out to Athanasius, and recommended him for the priesthood : but
the humility of Pachomius induced him to hide himself in the
throng, until the Bishop's vessel had passed by. Then he as-
1 Vit. S. Pachomii, Bolland. May pion is also named Saprion, and
14_ Aprion, and is by some supposed the
2 Tentyra is also called Tentyris, same with Aprianus, who was at the
and by the Arabians, Dendera. Sera- Council of Sardica.

158 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
sured the by-standers that it had been revealed to him how
Athanasius was ordained a great fight of the Church, and
should suffer many things for the Name of Christ.
a.d. 328. Eusebius and Theognius had, for communicating with' the
Eusebius in Arians, been banished by Constantine, but they now found
means to return to their Sees, and to appease the anger of the
Emperor. Having ejected Amphion and Chrestus, the legiti
mate Prelates of Nicomedia and Nicaea, they were at leisure to
bend all their efforts for the re-estabhshment of Arius, who had
already returned from exile, at Alexandria. They then accom
plished the overthrow of Eustathius of Antioch, on a false charge
of adultery ; and next endeavoured to intrude Eusebius the
historian into the vacant chair. The people flew to arms; and, as
the multitude were almost equally divided, the consequences
might have been serious, had not the civil power promptly inter
fered. Eusebius, however, though he was the deadly enemy of
the Homoiision, had no mind to become a confessor for his
a.d. 330. creed : and one or two Arians of less note were successively in
truded into the See. Asclepas of Gaza, and Eutropius of
Hadrianople next fell before the wiles of the heretics, and a way
was thus, it was hoped, made clear for the return of Arius.
Arrangements having been made with the Meletians for the
furtherance of the scheme, Eusebius wrote to Athanasius, urging
him, in the gentlest language he could employ, to receive Arius
he writes to to his Communion. At the same time, the messenger who
carried the epistle, had it in charge to add menaces to persua
sions. Athanasius disregarded both equally : Eusebius, undis-
couraged, wrote a second time to the same effect, and persuaded
Constantine to dispatch an angry mandate for the reception of
Arius. But these efforts were, for the present, in vain : Athana
sius persuaded the Emperor to acquiesce in his view, and clearly
proved that union between himself and his excommunicated
Priest was impossible.
On this, the Eusebians, who had probably thought that the-
greatest opposition would come from Asia, and from the elder
Prelates, found that though in the Dicecese of Antioch they were
carrying matters with a high hand, they could only attain the
summit* of their wishes by the overthrow of Athanasius. The
Meletians were apprised that the time for action had arrived.

Athanasius.

SECT. XVIII.] ATHANASIUS FALSELY ACCUSED. 159
They were at a loss for some time to discover a specious subject Athanasius
of accusation ; at length they dispatched three of their leading theiMe-y
men, Ision, Eudaemon, and Calhnicus, who appear to have been
in the number of the Bishops consecrated by Meletius, to Nico
media, for the purpose of bringing a charge before Constantine, to
the effect that Athanasius had imposed on the Egyptians an unac
customed tribute of linen vestments for the Church of Alexandria.
Providentially, two Priests of Athanasius's, Apis and Macarius, a.d. 331,
were then at Court ; and by them the falsehood of the accusa
tion was made clearly manifest. Constantine, in a letter to
Alexandria, condemned the attempt, and requested S. Athana- and acqnit.
sius to visit him. The Prelate obeyed, and was received with ted"
great honour.
Eusebius had been prudent enough to retain the Meletian
envoys : and they now, at his instigation, brought forward two
new accusations. The one was, that the Bishop of Alexandria
had sent a chest of gold to Philumenus, an aspirant to the
purple, of whom we have no other account ; the other, which
attained far greater celebrity, was the famous history of Ischy
ras, and the broken Chahce. On this we must dwell at length.1
In the Mareotis, which formed the proper Diocese of Alexan
dria, was a hamlet called the Peace of Sacontarurum, the size of
which did not enable it to maintain a separate Church and
Priest. Ischyras, a man of notoriously bad character, who had History of
J > J ' Ischyras.
received pretended orders from Coluthus, as we have mentioned
above, thrust himself into the charge of this place, and hesitated
not to perform the most sacred offices of the Church. Not
more than seven persons formed his Communion ; and his own
father and mother remained firm Catholics. Informed by the
Priest, within whose parish the Peace lay, of these scandalous
proceedings, Athanasius despatched that Macarius, whom we
have just named as his vindicator, to summon Ischyras before him.
The Priest went; but as the offender was confined to his bed by
illness, he left a message for him with his father, charging him
to abstain from his sacrilegious attempt, and to intrude himself
no more on the ministry of the Church. Ischyras on his reco
very found himself unable to maintain the shadow of authority
1 S. Athanas. Apol. adv. Arian ii. (I. 781.)

160 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
he had hitherto exercised, and joined himself to the Meletians.
Under their auspices, a tale was invented for the purpose of
ruining Macarius, and blackening the character of the Bishop
by whom he was employed and trusted. Macarius, it was said,
arrived at Sacontarurum, at the moment when Ischyras was at
the Sacrifice : he threw down the altar, burnt the sacred books,
broke the chahce ; and (as tales never lose by repetition,) some
affirmed that he had overthrown the church. The story re
futed itself. There never had been a church at Sacontarurum :
Ischyras had employed for that purpose the house of an orphan
named Ision ; there never had been a Priest, and therefore never
any sacred vessels ; it was not on Sunday that Macarius visited
the place, and therefore (the inference is remarkable) the Com
munion could not have been in course of celebration. Constan
tine, who heard these accusations in a suburb of Nicomedia,
recognized this falsehood, and honourably dismissed Athanasius,
furnishing him with a letter to the Praefect of Alexandria, in
which the conduct of the Meletians was exposed, and the
Faithful were encouraged.
Ischyras, who had been led by pique and the influence of
others to propagate his calumny, now came to Athanasius, con-
ischyras fessed his crime, and with tears besought admission to the Corn-
confesses. u
munion of the Church.1 Athanasius called together the Parish
Priests of the Mareotis, with some Deacons, partly of that pro
vince, partly of Alexandria, and in their presence Ischyras gave a
written statement that what he had asserted was false, and that he
had been compelled to yield to the ill treatment of the Meletian
Bishops, Isaac of Cleopatris,2 Isaac of Latopohs,3 Heraclides of
Nicius. This document was attested by the Priests and Deacons
who were present: but it was not thought right to admit one who
had been involved in two schisms to immediate Communion. And
the event proved the prudence of the measure, for Ischyras re-
1 Apolog. ad Constant. Imp. i. 78 1 , 3 This is to be distinguished from the
D. city of the same name in Egyptus
2 It was a city near Arsinoe, and in Prima, and derived its name from the
Egyptus Prima: and this is the first oc- Latus, a fish described by Athenseus,
casion that we hear of it as a Bishop- vii. 17. It also, under the name of
ric. It is now called Sersene, and was Asna, was long a Jacobite See.
long the seat of a Jacobite Prelate.

SECT. XVIII.] ATHANASIUS FALSELY ACCUSED. 161
mained attached to the party of the Meletians. It appears that
notwithstanding the retractation of Ischyras himself, his parti-
zans persisted in declaring his charge well-founded, and even
invented additional circumstances, for the purpose of throwing
still greater odium on the Patriarch.
As, however, his deposition or banishment was in no way ad
vanced by these efforts, John Arcaph, the acknowledged leader
of the Meletians, bethought himself of another method of attack.1 Pretended
Arsenius, Bishop of Hypsele, one of the same party, was per- Arsenius ;
suaded, on the receipt of a sum of money, to retire into seclu
sion ; and the Meletian faction instantly gave out that he had
been murdered by Athanasius. To give the better colour to
their words, they invested their complaints with all the pathos
and eloquence that they could command. " At least," said they,
" if you have removed him from the world, deny us not the poor
consolation of paying a last tribute to his remains. Restore us
his body ; it is all that we can now ask, or that you can bestow.
You can no longer dread him as an enemy : if you did violence
to him in life, it is the part of a foe to respect the ashes of a
departed opponent." They carried about a dried hand in a box,
which they affirmed to be that of the Bishop ; and to have been
severed by Athanasius for magical purposes.
When some degree of odium had been excited against
the perpetrator of so foul a deed, they sent the hand to
the Emperor, demanding vengeance on Athanasius. Constan
tine wrote to his brother Dalmatius,2 committing the inquiry to
him. The latter summoned the accused and the accusers before AD. 332.
him. Athanasius had hitherto despised the accusation : but he
now discovered that it would be necessary to provide himself
with a sufficient defence. He therefore wrote to the Egyptian
Bishops, requesting them to examine into the matter, and to
discover whether Arsenius were dead, — and if so, to procure au
thentic information as to the time and manner of his decease, — or it is exposed.
alive, and in this case, where concealed. A Deacon was charged
by the Archbishop with the commission : and he pursued his
1 Apol. ad Constant. I. 782 D. nephew of Constantine. ButtheChro-
Theodoret, H. E. i. 28. Socrat. H. E. nicon Alexandrinum asserts that he was
t 27. Rufin. i. 15. his brother. The younger Dalmatius
2 Apol. ubi supra. This Dalmatius was now at Narbonne, attending the
is said by Socrates to have been the lectures of Exuperius.
M

162 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
researches to so good effect, as to discover that the Bishop as
serted to have been murdered was resident at the monastery of
Ptemencyrcis, in the Thebais. To Ptemencyrcis he accordingly
went ; but Arsenius was no longer there ; he had been sent by
Pinnes, the superior of the monastery, into Lower Egypt. The
Deacon seized on Pinnes and brought him to Alexandria : and
the officer there commanding the troops discovered, in a judicial
examination, that Arsenius had in truth been concealed at
Ptemencyrcis, in order to give a handle for the accusation of S.
Athanasius. Pinnes then wrote a letter to John Arcaph, then at
Antioch, and pressing the charge before Dalmatius, and advised
him to withdraw the accusation of murder, since all Egypt knew
that Arsenius was alive. This letter fortunately fell into the
hands of Athanasius.1 Still, the subject of the imposture was
not yet arrested. Diligent inquiry had discovered that he had
been at Alexandria, and was now at Tyre ; and at Tyre accord
ingly he was seized. He then resolutely denied himself to be
Arsenius ; but Paul, Bishop of Tyre, convicted him of falsehood.
The partial detection of this atrocious scheme confounded
the Meletians; and John their leader, and Arsenius himself,
requested to be re-admitted into the Communion of the Church,
promising all canonical obedience for the future to the See of
Alexandria.2 Undaunted by the ill success of his former plots,
Eusebius had, at the early part of 333, exerted his influence with
the Emperor to obtain the Convocation of a Council : and in
March, Constantine summoned one to be holden at Caesarea. At
this assembly, which did not meet till long after it was convoked,
council of little was done, and Athanasius and his Bishops refused to be
August, 334. present at it. Thenceforward Eusebius conceived that hatred of
the Egyptian Church which never afterwards forsook him.
While Athanasius was consoled and refreshed by a visit from
S. Antony, which, not to disturb the course of our history, we
shall relate at a more convenient time, Constantine was persuaded
to convoke another Council atTyre,judging that Athanasius might
possibly suspect Eusebius of Caesarea, of harbouring personal ill
will against him : while Paul of Tyre was open to no such charge.
' It is preserved by him, Apol. ii. 3. of the Council of Tyre: butthe testimony
5 Socrates (H. E. i. 29,) makes this of Athanasius himself is a far safer guide.
event to have happened during a session * Pagi. 334, ii.

SECT. XVIII.] ATHANASIUS FALSELY ACCUSED. 163
Sixty1 Bishops, for the most part Arians, were present, and
Constantine was the more glad of their meeting at this conjunc
ture, because he had just completed a large and magnificent a.d. 335.
church at Jerusalem, and wished its dedication to be solemnized
by a numerous concourse of Prelates. S. Athanasius, for a con
siderable space of time, refused to be present, knowing that the
President, Placillus, Bishop of Antioch, was one of his great ene- council of
mies ; and that the Count Flavius Dionysius, sent under pretence
of maintaining order, would be very willing to employ the secular
arm against him. The unhappy Macarius was dragged before
the Council, loaded with irons; and Athanasius was warned
that, if he did not appear of his own accord, force would be em
ployed in his case also. On this intimation he went, taking with
him forty-nine Egyptian Bishops, and among them the celebra
ted Paphnutius, whom we have before mentioned. Potammon,
another holy confessor, was also in the number.
On their arrival at Tyre, Athanasius was not allowed to take
his seat among the Bishops, but was treated as a criminal.2
" What ! " cried Potammon, addressing Eusebius of Caesarea, and s- Athana-
* t~J gins arrives
bursting into tears ; " What ! you too among the judges of
Athanasius ? You aud I were in prison together during the
persecution : I lost an eye in confessing Christ : how you es
caped unharmed, let your conscience tell." "What!" cried
Paphnutius to the Bishop of Jerusalem; "who would have
expected to find Maximus among these men ? Did we not each
of us suffer mutilation for our Lord ? and is one of us now to
occupy the seat of the scornful ? " Maximus, who had been de
ceived by misrepresentations, was then instructed in the real
nature of the Arian charges ; and to the end he continued firm in
the communion of Athanasius. Eusebius, on the contrary, in
stantly rose: "Judge," he said, " holy Fathers, what would be the
insolence of these Egyptians, were they our judges, who thus
insult us when theirs ! "
1 Tillemont (viii. 59,) argues very whom all were not Arians. We may
plausibly against this number given by perhaps imagine that the first session
Socrates, (i. 28,) because of the diffi- was attended by sixty Prelates : or that
culty of conceiving that S. Athanasius this number was more especially sum-
with fifty Bishops, should have been moned by the Emperor.
so unjustly condemned by sixty, of 2S.Epiphan.Ha3r.lxviii.7. (1.72!. D.)
M2

sius arrives.

164

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[BOOK

The Catho
lics protest.

Calumny
respectingthe ordina-
nation of
S. Athana
sius.

The Catholics, at the outset, excepted against thirteen1 of the
assembled Bishops as judges, on account of their violent and
undisguised hostility to Athanasius : but no regard was paid to
their remonstrances.
The first accusation brought forward was that concerning
Ischyras and the broken chahce; — but that, having been
satisfactorily answered, was for the present dismissed, to
make way for the following charge 2: that at the death of S.
Alexander there had been a considerable difference of opinion as
to the choice of a successor, and with respect to the Arian con
troversy ; that the Bishops of Egypt had bound themselves by
oath not to ordain to the vacant see, till these differences were
adjusted ; that notwithstanding, seven Prelates had in a clandes
tine manner consecrated Athanasius; that the latter, finding
many averse from his communion, committed great violence,
especially at the Feast of Easter ; and that many of the Faithful
at Alexandria viewed their Bishop with such sentiments of ab
horrence, as to abstain from worshipping in his Church. S.
Athanasius replied, that to give these charges a shadow of truth,
they should have been attested by at least one of the hundred
Bishops over whom he presided ; and satisfactorily proved that
he had been elected by the unanimous voice of the people, and
consecrated by an unusually large number of Bishops.
The Arians, in the mean time, were busy in inventing new
Athanasius. He was accused of having
violated a virgin consecrated to God,3 -and of having given her

S. Athana
sius accused ,
offomica- calumnies against S
tion :

1 They were, 1. Eusebius of Nico
media. 2. Eusebius of Caesarea. 3.
Narcissus of Neronias. 4. Theognius
of Nicaea. 5. Maris of Chalcedon.
6. Theodore of Heraclea. 7. Macedo
nius of Mopsuestia. 8. Ursacius of
Singidon. 9. Valens of Mursa. 10.
Patrophilus of Scythopolis. 11. Theo
philus, of whom nothing is known, and
who is believed by some to have been
the same with Theodore. 12. Placillus
of Antioch. 13. George of Laodicea.
2 Sozomen, H. E. ii. 17. And see
the very probable arrangement of the
events of the Council, given by the
Benedictine Editors, 335, 15.

3 Rutin, i. 17. Sozomen, ii. 25. But
it must be confessed that, whatever
Tillemont says to the contrary, this
story wants confirmation. It is never
mentioned by S. Athanasius himself :
nor does it appear to have been brought
forward at any of the Councils assem
bled in his favour : though a. more
striking proof of the maliceof the Euse-
bians could hardly be found. In short,
it has much the appearance of a Catho
lic fabrication, designed to make up
for the unjust condemnation, on similar
grounds, of S. Eustathius.

SECT. XVIII.] ATHANASIUS FALSELY ACCUSED. 165
money to bribe her silence. The woman was brought forward
in the midst of the Council, and with many signs of grief
repeated her story. Athanasius had concerted his defence
with Timothy, one of his priests; and when the tale of the
woman was finished, sat still, as if merely a spectator. Timothy,
on the contrary, replied, "You affirm then that I have been
guilty of violating your honour V " I do," replied the woman,
pointing him out with her finger, and adding the details of time Ms wum-
and place. Those of the Bishops who were impartial spectators,
could not refrain from laughing : Eusebius and his faction were
covered with confusion, and drove the accuser from the place,
in spite of the request of S. Athanasius that she might be
arrested, for the purpose of discovering the author of the calumny.
The Arians, furious at their repeated failures, now came to
that charge which was the most heinous, and which they thought
the best capable of proof, as not thinking that the discovery of
Arsenius before mentioned was capable of proof before the Synod.
They brought forward the severed hand of Arsenius, affirming that He is
he had been murdered by the Archbishop of Alexandria. A mur- ™th tne ,
^ x . murder of
mur of horror passed through the Council : when it was hushed, Arsenius.
S. Athanasius rose, and demanded if any of the Bishops then pre
sent had been acquainted with Arsenius. Many replied in the
affirmative. He then sent to his own house, and in a short time
a man, muffled from head to foot, was introduced into the hall
where the Council were assembled. "Look well," cried S. Atha- Arsenius is
nasius, uncovering his face, " and see if this be not that Arsenius Produced-
whom I am reported to have murdered." The Bishops were
astonished : those ignorant of the plot because they really believed
Arsenius to be dead; those implicated in it, because they
thought him at a distance. Athanasius, pursuing his advantage,
exhibited first one hand, then the other, of his supposed victim ;
thus completely exposing the groundlessness and malice of the
plot. The rage of the Eusebians at this discovery was so great,
that had it not been for the prompt interference of the secular
authorities, S. Athanasius would have been torn in pieces.1
They were not, however, to be so baffled. The Council, recurring
to the first charge, decided that the treatment of Ischyras could not
so well be judged at a distance from the spot, and appointed a
1 Theodoret, H. E. ii. 30.

166 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
deputation to visit Mareotis for the purpose of gaining such in
formation as personal examination might enable them to furnish.
commission Six of the most determined enemies of S. Athanasius, Macedonius,
of Inquiry
in the Mans, Theodorus, Theognius, Ursacius, and Valens, to whom Theo-
Mareotis: . . .
doret adds Narcissus, were appointed commissioners ; and the
Meletians had already dispatched four of their own body into
Egypt, to smooth the way, and to pack evidence. The Egyptian
Bishops protested in writing against the whole procedure.
Alexander of Thessalonica, who possessed influence with Fla-
vius Dionysius, addressed a letter to him of the same tenor, —
and, as it at first seemed, with some effect. The Prelates attached
to the True Faith did the same thing ; but the faction of Euse
bius prevailed, and the deputation set forth with a letter of
recommendation to the Prefect of Egypt, and a cohort of soldiers
for their safeguard. It is true that the Count cannot be charged
with injustice on this score ; for, on the complaint of Athanasius
and his friends, who were afraid that an iniquitous choice would
be made, he wrote to the Council, urging all fairness, and re
minding them that truth, not condemnation, was the object of
the inquiry. But, by referring the selection to a Committee, the
Eusebians contrived to choose the commission as we have stated.
On this the Egyptian Bishops, to the number of forty-nine,
drew up a memorial to Dionysius, pointing out the visible injus
tice of the late proceeding, and calling on him to put a stop to
it. They also apphed to Alexander of Thessalonica, one of the
oldest Prelates in the Church ; and he, who possessed great in
fluence with the Count, addressed a letter to him in behalf of
Athanasius, which the latter has preserved. Dionysius again
interfered by a letter to the Commission : but no attention was
paid, and probably he did not wish that any should be paid, to
his remonstrance. Thus convinced that no justice could be ex
pected at Tyre, the Bishops signed an Act of Protest, and, it
would seem, also appealed to the Emperor.
In Egypt, however, things went on very differently. The
deputies found a most willing coadjutor in Philagrius, the pre
fect, who, being an apostate from the Faith, and a man of bad
character, bore a particular hatred to S. Athanasius ; he not only
gave the commissioners all the assistance in his power, but
himself accompanied them into Mareotis. Arrived there, they

SECT. XVIII.] ATHANASIUS FALSELY ACCUSED. 167
evidently shewed that they had already prejudged the cause.
They lodged at the house of Ischyras ; the tendency of the in
quiry all was one way : and they would not allow copies to be their paipa-
taken of the testimony. The Priests and Deacons of Alexandria
drew up a firm but moderate protest ; they stated that Macarius The clergy
ii • ' ,. of Alexan-
ought to have been brought into Egypt, as his accuser was dria
there ; they claimed the right of themselves being present at the
inquiry, and called all impartial persons to witness that the
refusal of this claim rendered the whole conduct of the com
mission in a high degree suspicious.
The Priests and Deacons of Mareotis protested in a similar and Mareo-
¦ tis protest.
manner. Ischyras, they said, had never been a priest ; he had
never possessed a church; complaints had never been made
against S. Athanasius by any Cathohc ; they themselves had
claimed to be present in the course of the investigation, and had
been refused. The former paper was signed by sixteen Priests1
and five Deacons ; the latter by fifteen of each. So that here,
in the immediate vicinity of Alexandria, were fifty-one of the
Cathohc clergy bearing testimony in favour of their Bishop : and
not one who in any way appealed against him, or brought for
ward any statement prejudicial to his character. Jews, Cate
chumens, and Pagans, were openly admitted and encouraged to
give evidence : the most palpable discrepancies were overlooked,
as when some of the Catechumens professed themselves to have
been present at the irruption of Macarius, while Ischyras all
along declared that when the Chalice had been broken, he had
already commenced the Sacrifice : if so, the Catechumens would
of course have departed. To these facts, however, the Commis
sioners paid no sort of heed. On their return to Alexandria,
they openly persecuted the Cathohcs, and encouraged the heathen
soldiery to every kind of insult against them, more especially violences at
against the Consecrated Virgins.
On arriving at Tyre, they gave in their report2 : and S.
Athanasius being no longer there, (for he had thought it neces
sary to his safety to hasten to Constantinople,) sentence of depo- S- Athana-
tion was pronounced against him. John the Meletian and his ^osed :
1 Among the Priests, the name of person whom we have twice had occa-
Athanasius occurs : probably the same sion to notice.
2 Sozomen, H. E. ii., 25.

168 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
party were received into Communion ; Ischyras was raised to the
Episcopate l ; and a grant obtained from the public treasury
to rebuild the church which Athanasius was asserted to have
demolished. The village thus, contrary to the Canons, erected
into a See, was as we have said so small, that it never had up to
that time possessed even a parish church.
The Bishops were about to receive Arius into their Communion,
when a message was received from the Emperor, commanding
them to hasten to Jerusalem, where the Church of the Holy
Sepulchre was now complete. Athanasius, in the mean time,
remained at Constantinople, where the Bishop, Alexander,
was a pillar of the orthodox doctrine. After the solemnities
of the dedication, the Council of Tyre was continued, and Arius,
on giving in a new, but equally unsound, profession of his Faith,
was received into the Communion of the Church.
The Emperor returned to Constantinople, and on entering the
s. Athana- city, was astonished by the appearance of Athanasius,1 who
at Constan- . . ... . i ¦ t i i i
tinopie : threw himself at his feet, recounting the injustice which he had
suffered, and praying for protection. Constantine did not at
first recognize him, and was for some time unwilling to have any
communication with a man whom he regarded as justly con
demned by a Council. Athanasius called God to judge between
himself and his accusers, whom he adjured the Emperor to set
face to face before him, and Constantine yielded. The Bishops,
yet sitting in Council of Jerusalem, were summoned to Constan
tinople. The messengers who bore the summons, found them
about to condemn Marcellus of Ancyra, a partizan of Athanasius,
and who though, as appeared afterwards, unsound in doctrine,
was for a long time considered by the Catholics, chiefly on the
strength of his vigorous opposition to the Arians, perfectly
orthodox. The Council was thus a second time broken up : and although
the Emperor's letters desired the attendance of all the Bishops
then in Jerusalem, the Eusebians played their part so well,
that six only were sent as deputies, and these six were the most
powerful enemies of Athanasius, three of them having been also
employed as commissioners to the Mareotis.
arrfvettiere8 ^n ^eir arrival at Constantinople, they dropped all their
1 Apolog. § 85. 2 Apolog. §. 86.

SECT. XIX.] FIRST EXILE OF S. ATHANASIUS. 169
former calumnies against Athanasius, but adopted a new charge,
which they considered likely to touch the Emperor more nearly.
They affirmed that the subject of their hatred had, by his in
fluence with the people of Alexandria, obstructed the supplies
of corn which that city was in the habit of furnishing to Con
stantinople. Constantine, who was tenderly jealous of the
greatness of his own foundation, and who knew that without
the granary of Alexandria it could not subsist, burst forth into
fury : it was in vain that Athanasius denied the calumny; Euse
bius of Nicomedia pressed the charge, and Constantine too
easily believed him. Indeed, on a similar accusation, this impo
tent prince, whom the adulation of the Eusebians represented as
the chief pillar of the Church, had ordered the philosopher
Sopater, an intimate friend of his own, to execution.1 Taking
credit to himself for his clemency, he banished Athanasius to
Treves in Gaul.2 Thus after a struggle of ten years, this holy he is ba-
Confessor was given over to the will of his enemies. He gene
rously, in his writings, excuses the Emperor : the exile, he says,
was rather intended to remove him to a place of safety, than as
a punishment. And indeed Constantine shewed his suspicion of
the Arian faction by refusing to fill the see of Alexandria with
the candidates whom they wished to intrude.
Five of his Bishops stood by S. Athanasius in the hour of his
need; and four Priests, his most active supporters in Egypt,
were also subjected to the same sentence of exile.

SECTION XIX.
FIRST EXILE OF S. ATHANASIUS,
Athanasius was received with great honour, both by S. Maximin,
Bishop of Treves, and by Constantine the younger,3 who had the February.
1 Eunap. Vit. Philosoph. ap. Baron. But the testimony of Athanasius him-
336 X. self is express, that not a syllable was
2 Sozomen, indeed, says, that the said at Constantinople on this topic.
affair of Ischyras was the cause of S. 3 Apolog. § 9.
Athanasius's exile, (ii. 28, p. 79, CD.)

170

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[book

S. Athana
sius at
Treves.

chief command in the Gauls, and resided in the city which was
its then capital. Shortly after his arrival, the news of the
Council of Constantinople under the presidency, it would seem,
of Placillus of Antioch, reached him with all its remarkable conse
quences. Marcellus of Ancyra was deposed, how justly it is
impossible to say, on a charge of Sabellianism ; the work which
laid him open to this accusation was one on that passage of S.
Paul, " Then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him
That put all things under Him " : the reply to it, by Eusebius
of Caesarea, is still extant. With this intelligence, Athanasius
also received other tidings of greater importance. Wrought onby
the Eusebians, the Emperor allowed Arius to be received into the
Church; his faction desired S. Alexander of Constantinople,
then more than ninety years old, to do so : he refused ; they
threatened him with deposition if he would not comply : he per
sisted ; they by the mouth of Constantine named a certain day
on which Arius should be received ; the city was in consterna
tion ; arguments and entreaties were bootless ; by the advice of S.
James of Nisibis, then present, the Catholics discontinued them,
and had recourse to prayer alone ; the Friday night was spent by
Alexander in earnest supplications that God would stretch forth
his right arm ; the morning dawned ; the triumph of the Arians
seemed complete ; Arius was led in procession round the city ;
S. Alexander still persevered in prayer; the day was wearing
away ; the Cathohcs began to despair ; at three in the afternoon,
Arius, then in the square of Constantine, was struck by the
Hand of God, and gave up the ghost; the Cathohcs crowded
the churches to return thanks for their dehverance ; many Arians
were converted ; and the place of the archheretic's death was
long held accursed.
The Aiexan- In the meantime, the people of Alexandria were not idle.
tion for the They were earnest in their supplications to God that He would
return of S. J 1 T n ¦¦,¦-.*-. n
Athanasius. open the Emperors eyes, and to Constantine himself they ad
dressed a memorial, praying him to recall their Bishop. S.
Antony himself wrote again and again to the same effect ; but
Constantine, now drawing near the end of his days, turned a
deaf ear to all petitions. He upbraided the Alexandrians with
folly, in desiring the return of an ambitious and turbulent Pre-
1 Apolog. §. 87.

Death of
Arias.

SECT. XIX.] FIRST EXILE OF S. ATHANASIUS. 171
late; he commanded the Priests and Consecrated Virgins to
concern themselves no more in the affair, and professed his fixed
determination to abide by his resolve. To S. Antony he repre
sented the probability that the few who attached themselves
conscientiously to the party of Athanasius might be mistaken
through ignorance or party feehng : while it was not to be sup
posed that the decision of the many pious Bishops who had
condemned him could err through the one, or be influenced by
the other. At the same time, as John Arcaph was intriguing
at Alexandria, Constantine, in spite of all the efforts of the
Eusebians, banished him also.
Shortly after came tidings of the baptism of Constantine,
who had till then deferred that Sacrament, by Eusebius of
Nicomedia, and his subsequent death. He is reckoned by the Death of
^ in- i t ¦ rM ii • -i i Constantine.
Greek Church among the Saints ; the Latin Church has judged
more soberly and reasonably in denying him the title, although
reckoning him in a certain sense one of the greatest benefactors
that the Faithful have ever known.
In spite of all the efforts of Eusebius, the dying Emperor
gave strict commands for the recall of Athanasius ; and, it is
said, reiterated these injunctions in his will. But, whatever
might be the reason, the exiled Prelate did not, or could not, at
once avail himself of this permission. It is a tradition at
Treves, that he principally dwelt in a cavern, which is still
shewn, and is in the precincts of the late abbey of S. Maxi
min ; and that, in this place, he composed the Hymn Quicun-
que Fuit. The last part of this assertion is undoubtedly false ;
the former is probable enough.
The division of the empire followed : — Constantine, the friend
of S. Athanasius, had all the territory beyond the Alps ; Con
stantius, Egypt and the East; Constans, Italy, Illyria, and
Africa. From the share of Constantius must be subtracted
Armenia and Cappadocia; from that of Constantine, Achaia
and Macedonia, which had before been apportioned to Hanni-
balianus and Dalmatius. These, however, having been mur
dered by the soldiers, not, it is said, without the instigation or
connivance of Constantius, these provinces were annexed by the
respective emperors to their own shares.
Constantius was soon gained by the Arians ; and Eusebius of a.d. 33s,

172 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
Nicomedia resolved, by the Emperor's authority, to fill the See
of Alexandria with a partizan of that heresy. Constantine
however prevented this occurrence by determining to send
June 17, 338. Athanasius to his own Church : a resolution which he well knew
Constantius would not venture to oppose. He therefore ad
dressed a letter to the Faithful of Alexandria, in which he ex
horted them to receive their Prelate with joy, as a true preacher
of the Law of Christ ; and menaced his calumniators with the
severest punishment. Athanasius accompanied Constantine into
Pannonia, whither he went to confer with his brothers on the
division of the empire, and had an interview with Constantius
at Viminiacum, a city of Mcesia. He here procured the recall
of many other Catholic Bishops, and even ventured so far on
the indulgence of Pope S. Julius, as to expel several Arian
Prelates who had intruded themselves into the Sees of the cities
through which he passed. After a short stay at Constantinople
he proceeded into Cappadocia, and had a second interview with
Constantius at Caesarea ; and so, in the autumn, he arrived at
Retumofs. Alexandria. The burst of exultation with which he was re-
' ceived is reported to have exceeded the usual demonstrations
with which the Emperor himself was wont to be welcomed.
The return of S. Athanasius, though doubtless in itself most
justifiable, nevertheless gave a greater handle to his enemies
than any other action of his life. By a Council, they said, he
had been deposed ; by a Council therefore he ought to have been
restored. But their complaints were drowned in the burst of
joy which greeted the passage of the exiled Bishop through
Syria to Egypt. Marcellus of Ancyra, still held to be a Catho
lic, and probably erring rather in words than in meaning, took
the same opportunity of returning to his See.
a.d. 340. Full of indignation at the return of Athanasius, the Euse-
bians invented another calumny against him. Constantine,
after the Council of Nicaea, had by public ordinance decreed
that in every city a certain quantity of corn should be set apart
for the ecclesiastics, the widows, and the Consecrated Virgins ;
and more especially for the Sacrifice, in places where, as in
Libya, the soil did not produce corn. This portion, freely dis
tributed by Athanasius, was affirmed by his enemies to have
been disposed of by him to his own advantage. This charge

SECT. XIX.] FIRST EXILE OF S. ATHANASIUS. 173
was in vain denied, and the Arians then drew up a memorial to
the three Emperors, embodying this with other accusations.
They obtained, however, neither his death nor his banish
ment, evidently as they longed for either ; but Constantius was
weak enough to credit the charge with respect to the corn, and
'Sfrote a letter to the Prelate upbraiding him with avarice.
Many of the Egyptian Bishops came forward with an attestation AD- 329-
of his innocence : and thus this accusation fell to the ground.
The Eusebians, who had already, by the unjust deposition of
S. Paul of Constantinople, seated their patron on that throne,
now assembled in considerable force at Antioch, and pretending
that the See of Alexandria was vacant, proceeded to fill it with
that Pistus whose deposition we have already mentioned. Pistns
That the deposed Priest might not want a suitable consecrator, by the
Secundus, Ex-Bishop of Ptolemais, took upon himself that Bishop of
office. It does not appear that the civil power gave any en
couragement to this monstrous act ; and it was by God's good
Providence attended with happy effects. It was desirable to
obtain the recognition of Pistus by the Koman See : to this end
his friends dispatched a Priest and two Deacons to Rome, who
carried with them the information that had been collected in the
Mareotis. Julius forwarded them to Athanasius, and he dis
patched his own legates to Rome. The Arian deputies, who
expected nothing less, were thrown into consternation; Macarius,
though sick, left the city by night ; the Deacons Martyrius
and Hesychius, who, with greater effrontery, stood -to their
charges, were covered with confusion.
The same legates were charged with another important docu
ment. The Bishops of Egypt, whether at the suggestion of
Athanasius, or from their feeling that to allow him to bear
alone the brunt of the storm was, so far as in them lay, to
betray the truth, met in Council at Alexandria to the num- council of
J ' . Alexandria.
ber of nearly one hundred; and addressed a synodal epistle
to all Cathohc Prelates, which S. Athanasius has preserved.
In it they set forth the entire innocence of Athanasius, the
gross and impudent falsehoods of his adversaries, the pre
posterous conduct of Eusebius who, himself guilty of the
greatest violations of the Canons, ventured to upbraid the
Bishop of Alexandria with his pseudo-deposition at Tyre ; and

174

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[BOOK I.

S. Athana
sius at
Rome.

Council of
Antioch.

conclude with the information that the Eusebians had now
thrown off the mask, were making common cause with the pure
Arians, and were openly communicating with them in Egypt.
On the receipt of these missives, Julius resolved on convoking
a Council, where the point in question might be decided. To
this the deputies of S. Athanasius willingly assented, while those
of the Arians could not venture directly to decline the proposal.
Athanasius himself went to Rome, where also a memorial
arrived to Pope Julius, signed by sixty-three Bishops of Asia,
Phrygia, and Isauria, in his favour. But whether or not the
Pontiff ever had proceeded so far as actually to separate Atha
nasius from his Communion, certain it is, that he regarded him
with some suspicion : and perhaps justly, but not generously,
endeavoured to bear himself as an impartial judge between two
contending parties.
Athanasius waited at Rome during eighteen months, in the
vain hope that his adversaries would bring then: formal charge
against him, and that the matter would come to a trial. The
Council was fixed for the middle of the year 341, and the
Eusebians were invited to attend. In the meantime, Bishops
from all parts of the Church, among whom Marcellus of Ancyra
was the most eminent, continued to arrive in Rome, in hopes of
their obtaining that justice which their Arian persecutors had
denied them. The Eusebians were compelled to declare that in
their opinion no Council was necessary ; the event shewed how
much reliance was to be placed on their words.
Constantine had been, in the preceding year, murdered by the
troops of his brother, Constans ; so that Constantius was at hberty
to follow his own pleasure regarding Athanasius. Ten years
previously the elder Constantine had commenced a church of
rare magnificence at Antioch ; and his son had now completed it.
The Eusebians gladly took advantage of the solemnity of the
dedication to assemble a Council of ninety-seven Bishops ; —
and the Synod of Antioch is one of the most famous in Eccle
siastical History. With its three Creeds, none of them Arian,
and yet none fully Cathohc, we have nothing to do; we are here
concerned with its treatment of S. Athanasius alone. Among
the twenty-five Canons which under its name have been received
by all the Church, two, though not in themselves objectionable,

SECT. XIX.] FIRST EXILE OF S. ATHANASIUS. 175
were evidently intended by the Eusebians as fatal weapons
against Athanasius.
The Fourth Canon provided, that if a Bishop deposed by a
Council, or a Priest or Deacon deprived by his Bishop, pre
sumed to exercise his office, he should not be capable of restora
tion even in another Council. The twelfth Canon ordered that
if a Bishop or Priest, under the like circumstances, should appeal
to the Emperor, his punishment should be the same.
It is easy to see that Athanasius had laid himself open to
the penalty pronounced in both cases. Constantius was at
Antioch, assisting at the Synod, and the Arian portion of the
Council importuned him to allow the Canons to be put in force
against the Bishop of Alexandria, dwelling on their old as well
as their later calumnies against him. The Emperor did not, or
would not, see the flagrant injustice of an ex post facto
application of Canons, and consented.
The next difficulty of the Arians was to choose another Bishop
for Alexandria. Eusebius of Emissa, a learned Prelate, and
voluminous author, though afterwards suspected of Sabelhanism,
was first proposed, but he dechned the dignity. Gregory of Gregoryconsecrated
Cappadocia was then brought forward. He had spent much of Bishop of
his time at Alexandria, had been kindly treated by Athanasius,
and had requited his benevolence by becoming one of his
calumniators. This ordination was entirely contrary to the
Canons; and, fearing great opposition at Alexandria, the
Eusebians obtained an escort from the Emperor for the new
Bishop, and the re-appointment of Philagrius (who had before
distinguished himself in the inquiry with respect to Ischyras),
as Prefect of Egypt.
Gregory and his followers arrived at Alexandria towards the he enters
. . Alexandria :
end of Lent ; and the excesses which they committed are beyond
description. The imperial edict, treating Athanasius as deposed,
and his successor as the orthodox Bishop, was published by
Philagrius the Apostate : young men of debauched lives, Jews,
and Pagans, were encouraged to attack the Cathohc churches,
to wound the monks, to insult the virgins, and even to kill some
of the worshippers. Heathen sacrifices were offered on the altar
of the church of Quirinus ; in its baptistery such enormities his
were committed as cannot be mentioned. On Good Friday,

176 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
Gregory and Philagrius entered another church, and, as a
punishment for the horror everywhere evinced at their horrible
proceedings, caused thirty-four persons, as well married women
and virgins, as men of high family, to be publicly scourged.
Athanasius, whom the affairs of his Church had again called to
Alexandria, finding that his presence only increased the disturb-
Athanasius ance, while he was utterly unable to render any assistance to
for Rome, the Catholics, embarked for Rome.1
On Easter Day, Gregory threw many Catholics into prison,
and attacked several churches. He drew up a series of charges
against Athanasius, signed, for the most part, by Pagans, and
filled with such enormities as to deserve no punishment short
of death.
Gregory not only possessed himself of all the churches, but
forbade, under severe penalties, the private assembhes of the
Catholics. The dying departed without the viaticum ; children
remained unbaptized : better this, said the Faithful, than recog
nize the ministrations of the blasphemers of our Lord. Com
plaints were made in vain to Constantinople; no letters were
allowed to pass. Gregory soon after began his visitation of
Persecution Egypt : he pursued the same course wherever he went ; Bishops
were treated with the same barbarity which had been exercised
towards the Priests of Alexandria. Potammon, the illustrious
Confessor, whom we have already mentioned, and one of the
Three Hundred and Eighteen, was beaten so cruelly as to oc
casion, shortly after, his death ; and the Church reckons him
among the Martyrs.

SECTION XX.
EGYPTIAN MONASTICISM.
It is refreshing to turn from these bloody scenes to the quiet
life of S. Antony. At the age of ninety, he was tempted to
consider himself the most perfect of all the Monks. That night
it was revealed to him that he had overrated his attainments,
there being a hermit who had made greater advances in hohness,
1 S. Athanas. Epist. Encyc. 2, 3.

SECT. XX.] EGYPTIAN MONASTICISM. 177
whom he was exhorted to visit. Three days' journey brought s. Antony
him to the cell of S. Paul, the first hermit, then in the ninetieth s- faul:
year of his solitary life. They knew each other at once, though
they had never before met : and the raven that had brought half
a loaf daily for the supply of Paul's wants, on that day came
charged with a double portion. S. Paul knew by revelation that
the hour of his departure was at hand ; after sharing his repast
with his guest, and spending the night in prayers and psalms,
willing to spare S. Antony the pain of witnessing his death, he
requested him to fetch him a mantle which S. Athanasius had
bestowed on him. Antony returned with speed to his monastery
for the purpose of bringing it : on coming back again, he beheld
in a vision the soul of S. Paul carried by Angels into Heaven.
Hastening onward to the cell, he found the corpse of the hermit death of the
• 11-1-1 ™ttcr»
in an attitude of prayer, and bitterly lamented that he had
known so late one whom he had lost so soon.
Antony, as we have said, had already paid a visit to Alex
andria during the Pontificate of S. Athanasius. The occasion
is related thus : — His disciples observed him in an ecstacy,
which, after lasting about an hour, passed off. He threw him
self on his knees, and prayed long and fervently, shedding at
the same time abundance of tears. When he arose, he warned
his hearers to prepare for a severe persecution of the Church.
" I have seen," said he, " in a vision, an altar surrounded by
mules, who were employed in kicking at and overturning it :
and I heard a voice which said, ' My Altar shall be profaned.'
Notwithstanding, my children, be not discouraged ; — the Catho
hc Faith will in the end be victorious, and Arianism must be
cast out. Only stand fast in the Faith, and resist the doctrine,
not of Apostles, but devils.1 "
Of S. Antony's disciples, we have already mentioned the Disciples ot
Macarii. S. Paul the Simple held also a distinguished place s. Paul the
1 or simple :
among that holy fellowship. He was a poor countryman, who,
till the age of sixty, had served God in the married state. The
vices of his wife induced him to quit the world ; and he took
an eight days' journey into the desert, for the purpose of being
received as the disciple of Antony. The latter rejected him,
observing that he was too old for the monastic life ; and that he
1 S. Athanas. Vit. S. Anton, xviii. 105. Bolland. Jan. 2, p. 137.
N

178 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
had better return and serve God in the state to which he had
been called. The fervour of the candidate induced him to
remain three days without food at the door of the Hermit ; and
Antony, won by his importunity and earnestness, at length
admitted him his disciple. After a long and rigorous practice
of obedience, he placed him in a cell at three miles' distance from
his own ; and was accustomed to regard him as the holiest
among his followers. Paul had the gift of miracles in a far
more eminent degree than his great master ; and to him, accord
ingly, S. Antony was in the habit of sending such sick or
possessed persons as he himself was unable to cure. He had
circ. a.d. departed to his Lord some time before the period at which we
330. . . x
have now arrived. x
s. miarion : S. Hilarion, again, was one of the most successful imitators
of S. Antony. Born at Gaza of heathen parents, he was sent
to Alexandria for instruction. While there he received the
illumination of Baptism, and at once •changed a life of dissipation
for one of penance. After a visit to S. Antony in the desert,
he conceived the idea of following the same life in his own
a.d. 307. country ; and to this end, at the age of fifteen, he took up his
abode in a desert on the Asiatic border of Egypt. He here,
though naturally of weak constitution, passed a life of singular
austerity: but twenty years elapsed before he was known or
followed. Then he was privileged to work his first miracle;
and soon became the most celebrated of all monks for his super
natural gifts. From that time his disciples increased rapidly,
and, as the Father of the Monks of Palestine, he enjoyed httle
solitude from the concourse of those who came to visit, to
consult, or to be cured. On the death of S. Antony, — for we
will anticipate the course of history, — he resolved to retire into
greater privacy ; and though opposed by the inhabitants of the
neighbouring country, who assembled to the number, it is said,
of ten thousand, to resist his determination, he went into Egypt
for the purpose of visiting the monastery of Antony. At
Aphroditopolis, he obtained the requisite information from
Barsanes, a Deacon, who let dromedaries for those who wished
to visit Mount Pisper ; and, after three days' journey through a
fearful desert, he was received by the disciples and attendants of
1 Pallad. Laus. xxviii.

SECT. XX.J EGYPTIAN MONASTICISM. 179
Antony, Isaac and Pelusius. By them he was conducted over
the various places which had been hallowed by their Master.
Hence he retired to a desert near Aphroditopolis, and was soon
regarded by the Egyptians as him on whom the mantle of
Antony had fallen. Distressed at the honour he received, he
went first to Alexandria, and thence retired to the desert of the
Oasis. His reputation still following him, after a year spent
there, he sailed to Sicily, and took up his abode near Pachynus.
For a similar reason he left this retreat also, going first to
Epidaurus, and then to Cyprus, where, after five years' residence,
he gave up the ghost with great calmness. "Go forth," he a.d. 371.
said, " my spirit ; what hast thou to fear ? Threescore and ten
years hast thou served Christ, and dost thou dread death ? "
The well-attested miracles of S. Hilarion are more astonishing
and more numerous than those of any other Father, with the
single exception of S. Gregory the Wonder-worker.1
Less celebrated than Hilarion, and yet a worthy follower,
though not disciple, of Antony, was S. Isidore. He was the s- I^ore ot
spiritual director of many in the great desert of Scete ; and to
the end of a long life persisted in the severest manual labour.
He was principally remarkable for the gift of tears, — both that circ. a.d.
he had sinned so much, and' that he fell so far short of Antony
and Pambo.2
For Pambo also was one of the great Fathers of the desert ; s. Pambo.
and was to the Wilderness of Cells, — as that inhospitable tract
of country was called, — what Antony was to the desert of Pisper.
Here, eighty miles beyond Mount Nitria, in a solitude where
travellers directed their course, as in the high seas, by sun and
stars, he laid the foundation of that wonderful brotherhood, of
which we shall hereafter have to tell more largely. Of him the
story is related, that towards the beginning of his course, he
applied to another holy anchoret for spiritual direction. The
hermit began to recite the thirty-ninth Psalm : — " I said, I will
take heed to my ways, that I offend not with my tongue."
" Stay," said Pambo, " that is enough : let me retire to my cell to
practise it." In the seventy-first year of his age, he fell asleep a.d. 385.
in the Lord, as he was engaged in his usual occupation of
basket making.3
1 S. Hieron. in Vita. - Coteler. i. 487. 3 Pallad. Laus. 117.
N 2

180 patriarchate of Alexandria. [book i.
We can perhaps hardly calculate the prodigious influence
which this noble army of anchorets must have exercised on the
affairs of the Egyptian Church. The supernatural austerities of
all, the wonder-working powers of many, the impossibility of
influencing them by hope or by fear, and the physical security
in which their sohtude placed them, rendered them a barrier
which Arianism in vain endeavoured to assault. If, in after
times, when little remained of their original institution, except
its austerities, they were powerful enough to lead nearly the
whole Church of Alexandria into heresy, can we doubt that
under God, and next to S. Athanasius, they were the means, at
this epoch, of preserving it unshaken m the profession of
the Catholic Faith ?

SECTION XXI.
SECOND EXILE AND RETURN OF S. ATHANASIUS.
On leaving Alexandria,1 S. Athanasius appears to have remained
for some little time uncertain whither he should direct his
course. He lay concealed near the city for a few days : 2 and
employed himself in the composition of his encyclic Epistle to
all Catholic Bishops throughout the world ; in which he stated
the proceedings of Gregory at length, and shewed that, as the
danger was common to all prelates, so the defence should be un-
s. Athana- dertaken by all in common. He then sailed to Rome, apparently
visits Rome, after the conclusion of the Paschal solemnities, Easter having
May. this year fallen on the nineteenth of April.
Pope Julius received Athanasius in the most cordial manner ;
and again despatched legates to the Eusebians, requiring them
to send a deputation without loss of time, for the purpose of
making good then charge against the Bishop of Alexandria.3
1 We have assumed the double visit tions of Valesius, and the Benedictine
of S. Athanasius to Rome as proved Editors.
by the very able note of Tillemont " Epist. Encyclic, ii.
(viii. 1133) in opposition to the objec- 3 Apolog. cont. Arian. xx.

SECT. XXI.J SECOND EXILE OF S. ATHANASIUS. 181
In the mean time, through the exertions of the two companions
of Athanasius, during both this and his former visit to Rome,
the monastic system was becoming known and followed in that
city. Ammonius and Isidore, for such were the names of these
monks, were noted for their hohness of life, and contempt of the
world ; Ammonius carried the latter quality to such an excess
as to refuse, when in Rome, to view any of the public buildings
or other spectacles of interest, except the basihc of S.
Peter. x
In due time, Pope Julius received the answer of the Eusebians, Negocia-
/ *¦ . tions with
still in Council at Antioch, to his summons. It recognized, in the
' ° Eusebians.
general terms, the Primacy of the See of Rome, but excused
the Prelates from attending the proposed Synod in that city, on
the grounds of distance, shortness of time, and the Persian war.
Julius for some time kept the letter by him, hoping that the
Orientals would change their mind ; but finding no likelihood of
such an event, he convoked the long intended Council. Fifty
Bishops assembled in the church of which Viton, the same who
had been legate at Nicaea, was parish priest.2 After a careful
examination of the causes of Athanasius, Marcellus of Ancyra,
and S. Paul of Constantinople, the Synod acquitted all ; and
Juhus announced the fact in a Synodal letter to the Fathers of
Antioch. He severely rebuked them for their injustice, violence,
and false excuses for non-attendance : and concluded his epistle
by an assertion of the privileges of his See, and by reminding his
brethren of the terrible account that they must one day render
to God for all their works.
That account had, when the legates arrived at Antioch, been circ. octob.
A.D. 342.
already given in by Eusebius of Constantinople. But Julius,
finding that those who now were at the head of the Eusebian
faction, paid httle attention to the Epistle of the Council of
Rome, addressed himself to Constans, the firm friend of the
banished Bishop. On his remonstrance to Constantius, Nar
cissus, Maris, Theodore, and Mark of Arethusa, in Syria, were
ordered to wait on the Emperor of the West, and to vindicate
the proceedings of the Council of Antioch. This they failed in
doing : S. Maximin of Treves abstained from their communion,
1 Sozomen, H. E. iii. 7. 3 Apol. x.

182 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
and a breach seemed on the point of breaking out between the
East and West.
sketch of A second Council at Antioch produced a Confession of Faith,
the progress .
of Arianism. called Macrostichus, on account of its length ; it was not here-
A.D. 345. . .' . .
tical, but was declined by the Western Council of Milan, at
which S. Athanasius was present; the Fathers declaring their
preference for the Creed of Nicaea. It was now plain that an
(Ecumenical Council would be the only remedy for the distracted
state of the Church ; and by the consent of the two Augusti, it
was summoned at Sardica, on the confines of the two empires.
a.d. 347. About one hundred and seventy Bishops met : but to relate
at length then proceedings would be beyond our purpose. The
Western Bishops, about a hundred in number, remained at Sar
dica, Hosius of Cordova presiding; acquitted Athanasius and
Marcellus, and excommunicated the heads of the Eusebian party.
The Eastern Bishops retired to Phihppopolis : and there, to
the number of seventy -three, at the head of whom was Stephen
of Antioch, excommunicated Juhus, Hosius, Athanasius, Paul of
Constantinople, and all their adherents. Thus the East and
West were thrown into a state of open schism.
In the mean time the persecutions continued at Alexandria.
Public notice was given that if S. Athanasius or his companions
returned, it should be lawful for any one to bring them to
condign punishment. A second Council of Milan prevailed on
Constans to send an embassy to his brother, requesting the
return of S. Athanasius, in compliance with the Council of Sar
dica. Constantius, however, found some pretext for evading the
escape of the exiled Bishop, till the murder of Gregory by the
Alexandrians, who naturally hated him, left him without the sha-
A.D.349. dow of an excuse. Finding that the result of his longer refusal
would be a civil war, he determined to do with a good grace
that which must at all events be done ; and the letter which he
s. Athana- wrote on the occasion to Athanasius, was by no means wanting
recalled. in fair professions or obliging offers. Athanasius was at first
undecided how to act ; but the result of a second, and then of a
third invitation, each more urgent than the former, accompanied
with the offer of a public conveyance, convinced him that it was
his duty to return. Leaving therefore Aquileia, which had been
the place of his abode since the Council of Sardica, he waited

SECT. XXI.] SECOND EXILE OF S. ATHANASIUS. 183
on Constans at Milan, and on Pope Julius at Rome ; and fur
nished with a letter from the latter to the Church of Alexandria,
exhorting them to receive their Pastor with all joy and thank
fulness, he went by land to Antioch. Here he was favourably
received by Constantius, who confirmed by word of mouth all
that he had before written : and besides this wrote many letters
in his favour, and swore to the sincerity of his own joy at his
return. S. Athanasius in the mean while carefully abstained
from the communion of Leontius of Antioch, assisting in the
private assemblies of the Eustathians, as the Cathohcs were
called in that city, from their last Bishop, and one of the Fathers
of Nicaea. The Emperor took the opportunity of asking, not as
a matter of right, but simply as a favour, that in consideration
of the large body of Arians at Alexandria, Athanasius would
allow them the use of one church. The latter at once consented ;
" but then," he added, " it is but just that the Eustathians, who
are also a numerous body, should have the use of one church in
this city." Constantius replied that he was satisfied with the
proposition : but on consulting with his Arian Bishops, he found
them averse from closing with it. " Arianism," they urged,
" will make no great progress at Alexandria, while Athanasius
is there ; on the contrary, if the great number of the Eustathians
comes to be known, their tenets will spread more and more
extensively in Antioch." The Emperor on their advice withdrew
his request.1
S. Athanasius, in his progress through Egypt, held ordinations
every where, according to the peculiar right of the See of Alex
andria. The joy of that city on his return was unbounded.
Prelates from every part of Egypt were awaiting his arrival;
multitudes pressed round him, as he entered : many embraced
the monastic life as a token of thankfulness ; each house seemed
for the time turned into a church; charity was extensively
bestowed on orphans and widows; many among the heretics
joined the Catholic Church; many of the enemies of S. Atha
nasius openly retracted their sentiments ; many others who had
appeared against him, visited him in private, assuring him that
in their hearts they had always clung to his communion. In
1 Hist. Arian. ad Monach. xxii. Sozomen, H. E. iii. 20. Theodoret, H. E. ii. 12.

184 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
the words of the Sacred Historian, " there was great joy in that
city." 1
The peace with which the Church of Alexandria was blessed
remained unbroken by the commotions which shortly afterwards
arose in the Western Empire ; the murder of Constans, the
civil war of the three claimants to the purple, the battle of
Mursa, and the final accession of Gallus as Csesar. But Libe
rius, having succeeded to the chair of S. Peter, vacant by the
death of Julius, the Eastern Bishops took that opportunity of
requesting the new Pope to refuse his communion to Athanasius.2
At the same time a memorial in favour of the latter was pre
sented from about seventy Egyptian Bishops : and Liberius and
his Council at Rome remained firm to the Church of Alexandria.
The Eusebians renewed their calumnies to Constantius, per
suaded him that the ill-will of Constans toward himself had
been an effect ofthe machinations of Athanasius : that' they,3 and
the Emperor as well, were regarded by the Cathohcs as heretics :
and finally, that Magnentius, the murderer of Constans, had been
supported by the influence of the Bishop of Alexandria. Con
stantius, forgetting his promises and his oath, and being com
pletely under Arian influence, became daily more inveterate in
his hatred to that Prelate : though as yet veiling his ill-will.
The Arians, shortly afterwards, invented a method of annoy
ing Athanasius, of implication in which it is difficult to acquit
the Emperor. They forged a letter, as addressed by the Bishop
to Constantius, in which he requested permission to wait upon
him in Italy, for the purpose of conferring with him on Eccle
siastical affairs. Accordingly, to the great surprise of Athana
sius, an officer of the palace named Montanus, visited him, and
informed him that he was to be transported at the public expense
to Italy. The Prelate, after some hesitation, determined on
remaining where he was : and explained by letter to the Em-
1 See the fine description in the among the fragments of S. Hilary.
panegyric of S. Gregory Nazianzen, (Ed. Bened. 1327.) But this letter is
§ 17. well shewn to be a forgery, in the
2 It has been asserted that Liberius Benedictine Edition of the works of
was at first persuaded to refuse his that Father. Tillemont, (viii. 233,)
communion to S. Athanasius, on the believes it genuine.
strength of an epistle, to be found 3 Sozomen, H. E. iv. 8.

SECT. XXI.] SECOND EXILE OF S. ATHANASIUS. 185
peror the fraud that had been used. This behaviour was, by his
opponents, treated as a crime of disobedience to Constantius.1
Athanasius despatched five Bishops, one of whom was Ser-a- a.d. 353.
pion of Thmuis, and three Priests, to the Court, to watch the
turn of affairs. By the artifices of the Eusebians he was con
demned in a Council holden at Aries this year ; the Pope's legate,
Vincent Bishop of Capua, and probably the same who had been
present at Nicaea, after much persuasion, and with great reluc
tance, signing the sentence. He, however, in some measure
repaired this fault, by his subsequent noble behaviour with res
pect to the apostacy at Rimini. The news of this event probably
gave rise to the composition of the great apology of S. Athana
sius, commonly called his second : it contains only a short intro
duction and conclusion of his own, the greater portion being
taken up with a collection of documents which estabhsh his
innocence. He afterwards appended some additional matter to
it ; for, as we have it now, it contains allusictas to events which
did not occur till subsequently.
Liberius, afflicted and indignant at the betrayal of the Faith
by bis legates at Aries, demanded another Council : it was sum
moned by Constantius, then at Milan, in that city. Heresy
again triumphed. Athanasius was condemned ; but the Church a.d. 355.
of Rome was no longer implicated in the sin. Liberius was
banished ; Felix, Archdeacon of Rome, himself a believer in the
Faith of Nicaea, though communicating with the Arians, was
consecrated Bishop of Rome, thus becoming an Antipope, and
Hosius of Cordova was harassed and persecuted. A persecution
broke out every where; the Catholic Bishops were in many
places insulted or exiled; and to crown the misfortunes of the
Church, in this* year Julian the Apostate was made Caesar.
Officers from the Court arrived at Alexandria, charged, as
they said, with orders that all should communicate with the
Arians ; and that Athanasius should present himself before the
Emperor.2 Athanasius demanded to see the instructions of the
officers, but they were not forthcoming ; and so many prepared
to arm themselves in defence of their Bishop, that the Arians
did not at once dare to proceed. Troops however were thrown
1 Sozomen, H. E. iv. 9. 2 Apol. ad Constant, xix, &c. Hist, ad Monach. Iii.

186 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
a.d. 356. in from every part of Egypt ; and there appeared some danger
of a civil commotion, when the dispute was compromised by the
agreement that Athanasius should be left in quiet possession of
his Church, till the Emperor's pleasure could be more definitely
known. The Bishop addressed a circular to all his suffragans,
exhorting them to constancy in the Orthodox Faith, by a reca
pitulation of the variations existing at different times and in
different places between the Creeds adopted by the Arians, as
contrasted with the One Faith of Nicaea; ofthe violences employed
by their Prelates, and the remembrance of those Holy Bishops
as well living as dead, who had exerted themselves manfully for
Cathohc Truth.
Persecution In spite of the assurance given that the orthodox should not
dria!exan" f°r the present be molested in their public assemblies, as the
a.d. 356. people were keeping vigil on Thursday night, February 8,1 in
the Church of S. Theonas, the Emperor's officers, conducted by
the Arians, and followed by five thousand soldiers, invested the
whole place, rendering escape impossible. S. Athanasius re
mained in his Throne, and ordered one of his Deacons to read
the hundred and thirty-sixth Psalm, which dwells on the eternity
of God's mercy, exhorting the congregation to respond, " His
mercy endureth for ever," and then to retire. The soldiers burst
in : swords were unsheathed, and bows drawn : some persons of
the assembly were killed by the arrows, and a general rush made
towards the door. Athanasius still remained in his place ; the
soldiers surrounded the Choir, or rather the Holy of Holies;
the monks formed in a close body round their Bishop, and
bore him off; but such was the heat, the violence, the con
fusion, and the struggle, that he fainted, and was carried out for
dead. This is one of the events which may lead us to suspect that
Athanasius was not a man of much physical courage ; and the
rather to admire the grace which enabled him to give so long
and so arduous a proof of moral constancy.
The corpses were buried, in order to prevent inquiry : but
those who fell on this occasion are reckoned among the Martyrs.
The arrows found in the church were preserved, as incontestable
proofs of the outrage ; the soldiers attempted to obtain posses-
1 See Bolland. Jan. ii. p. 140.

SECT. XXI.] SECOND EXILE OF S. ATHANASIUS. 187
sion of them, but were prevented by the Catholics. A protest
was drawn up by the latter, and forwarded to Constantius. So
far from attending to it, he addressed a letter to the people of
Alexandria, approving what had been done, and exhorting them
to drive from the city Athanasius, whom, he said, he had only
recalled out of respect to the wishes of his brother. Heraclius,
to whom this letter was sent, read it in public, and declared that
resistance to the wishes of the Emperor would be absolutely
useless : if the inhabitants would not communicate with the
Arians, their public allowance of corn should be stopped; and
if the Pagans would not declare their readiness to receive that
Bishop whom the Emperor should appoint, their idols would be
taken from them. It is hard to say whether the latter threat
were more blasphemous or ludicrous ; nevertheless, it produced
great effect. The Cathedral was shortly after attacked by
Heraclius with a band of Pagans and heretics ; the same violences
were committed that have been described in the church of S.
Theonas : the altar, the throne, the seats, and the curtains were
pubhcly burnt, and incense was offered in the fire to the idols of
Alexandria. It was noted as a mark of Divine vengeance, that
one of the rioters, who seated himself insolently in the Bishop's
chair, was pierced by a sphnter, and died in a few hours.
During these troubles, S. Antony, who had now attained the Death of s.
hundred and fifth year of his age, found his health gradually " °ny'
dechne. Calhng two of his most favoured disciples to him, he
said, " My sons, as Scripture saith, I am going the way of all the
earth : the Lord hath called me, and I am desirous to depart."
After exhorting them to avoid all heresy and schism, he left one
sheep-skin cloak, and a cloak on wliich he was then lying, to
S. Athanasius : another sheep-skin to S. Serapion of Thmuis :
and his vest of hair to those whom he was addressing. "And
now," he continued, "farewell ; Antony is going, — and will not
be seen in this world among you again." And so he departed
to his rest.

188

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[book I.

SECTION XXII.

THIRD EXILE OF S. ATHANASIUS.

George,
Anti-Patri arch.

S. Athana
sius in the
desert.

One George had been ordained by the Arians for the See of
Alexandria. Of low birth, he had first been a parasite, then a
pork contractor for the anny, then forced to fly on a charge of
dishonesty ; and now he was made Bishop of the Second See in
the world. He had probably been ordained at Antioch two
years previously,1 and was by many believed to be a Pagan : his
very appearance testified the sensuality and cruelty of his dispo
sition, and he did not give himself the trouble to make any
pretence to religion. He made his entrance into Alexandria
during Lent ; and though behaving with the greatest insolence
from the beginning, his principal cruelties were reserved for the
week after Pentecost. Many were put to death for the Catholic
Faith ; and the tortures invented for them by George were quite
worthy of the most ferocious of the Pagan Tyrants.
Athanasius retreated into the desert : dihgent search was made
for him, but in vain : and the persecution extending itself
throughout the whole of Egypt, many Bishops were driven into
banishment. S. Athanasius shortly after resolved on a personal
appeal to the Emperor, and was only debarred when actually on
his journey, by authentic news of the consequences of the Coun
cil of Milan, and a perusal of two letters of Constantius. One
of these was addressed to the Princes of Axum, desiring them to
send Frumentius, now at the head of a very flourishing Church,
to be examined by George of Alexandria : in order, that if his
sentiments were heretical, he might be sent into exile, or if
approved, re-ordained. It appears that one Theophilus, an Arian
Bishop, after visiting the western coast of Arabia, and the island
of Socotra, came to Axum, and thence returned to the Court ;
but neither his mission, nor the Emperor's letter, occasioned

On this point compare Pagi 354, ix.; Tillemont, viii. 268; and Fleury, iii.428.

SECT XXII.] THIRD EXILE OF S. ATHANASIUS. 189
any difficulty to Frumentius, who steadily persevered to the end
of his course in the Cathohc Faith, and dying peaceably, was suc
ceeded by Cosmas, commemorated, like himself, in the Ethiopic
Calendar. Athanasius employed the period of his exile in visit
ing, and informing himself on, the Monasteries of Egypt. He
also composed another apology1 and addressed it to Constantius,
in which he clears himself from the charges of having sown dis
cord between the two Royal brothers; of having assisted the
usurper Magnentius ; of having celebrated the Holy Eucharist
in the great church, while yet unconsecrated ; (this was a new
accusation of his enemies, and he defends himself by producing
several instances, where in case of necessity the practice had
been allowed by Bishops whom the whole Church venerated :)
and finally, of disobeying the Emperor in refusing to leave
Alexandria.2 The tidings which S. Athanasius received in the desert grew a.d. 357.
every day worse and worse. First, he heard of the persecution
raised by Macedonius at Constantinople ; next of the creed of
the Council of Sirmium, which, so far from pronouncing the
Son to be Consubstantial, would not allow Him to be like in
substance ; then of the persecution of Hosius of Cordova, who
was more than a hundred years old, and had presided at
Sardica, — of his courageous resistance of torture, — his fall,
his communicating with the Arians, his bitter repentance, and
death ; then of the fall of Liberius, and loss of the immaculate-
ness of S. Peter's Chair : of the schism among the Arians, the
one party affirming, the other denying, the Son to be of like sub
stance : of the persecution, under Eudoxius of Antioch, of the
former, who assumed the title of Eusebians, by the latter, under
that of Anomceans, (from the Greek anomoios, unlike ;) of the
Council of Ancyra, where the ' former party, though still wide
of the whole truth, shewed some symptoms of returning to the
Cathohc Faith ; of the labours of S. Hilary in defence of that
truth for which he was exiled ; of the project of an (Ecumenical
Council at Nicaea; of the mischievous alteration, by which it
was proposed to hold two simultaneous Councils of the East and
1 Apolog. xiv. account of Palladius (viii. 136) is not
2 Ammianus Marcellus, xxii. So- worth notice.
zomen, H. E. iv. 10. The marvellous

190 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
West ; of their assembhng at Rimini and Seleucia respectively ;
of the artifice by which the four hundred Bishops in the fonner
place were led to subscribe to a formula which might be inter
preted to mean that the Son was created : of the deposition of
George of Alexandria and other violent Arians, at Seleucia, where
the Eusebians numbered one hundred and five out of one hun
dred and sixty Bishops -,1 of the final victory of the Arians, by
means of the Creed of Rimini, over both East and West, at
Constantinople. Thus the whole world, as it were, became
Arian ; and the Church Cathohc was nearer to a general apos
tacy than she has ever at any other time, been permitted to come.
Athanasius in the meanwhile had not been idle. He had
addressed a letter to the Monks of Egypt, in which he at length
exposed the vacillation and perfidy of Constantius. He wrote a
treatise on the new Confession of Faith adopted at Rimini and
Seleucia ; forcibly exposing the absurdity of imagining that the
Faith had till now been unknown. And Macedonius of Constan
tinople, deposed as an Eusebian by the Anomoeans, having been
the author of a new heresy, which denied the Divinity of the
Holy Ghost, and his followers, thence called Pneumatomachi,
or Fighters against the Spirit, extending themselves widely,
S. Athanasius, in a third treatise, refuted his blasphemy.
1 It has been thought by some, that Fathers, of the intercourse which must
S. Athanasius himself was present, have taken place between two such
though incognito, at the Council of pillars of orthodoxy as S. Athanasius
Seleucia. The principal ground for and S. Hilary, the latter of whom,
this belief is the expression of that then an exile in Phrygia, was allowed
Father himself, at the beginning of his to be present. There is a difficulty
treatise on the Councils of Seleucia also in the numbers of the Prelates
and Rimini, where he says that he will who met at Seleucia. Socrates says,
relate Hwep e&paKa Kai eyviev aKpifS&s. that the number of pure Arians was
But in the first place, it is hardly 34 ; S. Epiphanius, 43 ; but S. Hilary
likely that one, who was compelled (contra Const. 12) reduces it to 19.
to fly for safety into the remoter parts It does not appear easy to reconcile
of the desert, should be able, under the latter testimony, though that of an
any disguise, to have left Egypt en- eye-witness, with the express asser-
tirely, and ventured as far as Seleucia. tions of S. Athanasius, who makes the
Next, if his words are to be taken whole number about 160, of Socrates,
literally, they would imply that he was who fixes it at 160, or even Theodoret,
also present at Rimini, wliich would who makes it 150 ; since all seem to
have been physically impossible. agree that the semi-Arians numbered
Lastly, it is singular that no record about 105. See the Benedictine note
should exist, in the writings of other on S. Hilar, ii. 452.

SECT. XXII.] THIRD EXILE OF S. ATHANASIUS. 191
The Church was now in a very low condition : Athanasius
was her principal support in the East, and S. Hilary, or rather
his influence, in the West : but God was raising up other cham
pions, — S. Martin of Tours, S. Basil, and S. Gregory Nazianzen.
If the Church of Alexandria were divided, much more was that
of Antioch, spht, as it was in a short period, into three factions ;
the Eustathians, or old Catholic party : the Meletians, or follow
ers of Meletius, a Cathohc in heart, (though consecrated by the
Eusebians,) and reckoned among the Saints ; and the Euzoians,
or pure Arians, so called from their lately advanced Bishop
Euzoius, one of those Deacons whom S. Alexander of Alexandria
had excommunicated in the beginning of the troubles. It is
necessary here to note this, because this schism led to important
consequences. The bright spot in the horizon of the Church
was the increasing inclination of the Eusebians to return to the
True Faith ; they seemed startled at the depths of impiety into
which their scheme led, when consistently carried out ; and when
they had to decide between the Consubstantial and the Dissi
milar in Substance, seldom failed to prefer the former.
Such was the state of things when Julian declared himself
Emperor at Paris, but offered to share the world with Constan
tius. The latter, preparing to march against him, fell ill of a
fever ; and finding his illness mortal, received baptism from the
hands of Euzoius the Arian, and shortly after departed this life.
Julian succeeded peaceably : and to shew his contempt of
Christianity proclaimed a general toleration for all sects, and
hberty for the exiled Bishops to return. Of this edict Athana
sius did not dare to avail himself, on account of the violences
committed by George in Alexandria. But the end of this
wretched man was approaching.
Artemius, general of the forces in Egypt, was accused by the
Pagans to Julian of having deprived the temples of their dues,
and appropriated their wealth to other uses ; and his head was
struck off by the Emperor's order, at Antioch. George had
irritated the heathen in a similar way, and they now turned
their fury against him.1 Odious to the Cathohcs for his perse
cutions and blasphemies, disliked by the Arians for his vacilla-
1 Socrat. H. E. iii. 2. Sozomen. H. E. iv. 30.

192

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[BOOK I.

George.

tion and time-servingness, he now offended the Pagans by bring
ing to light the cruelties attendant on the worship of Mithras,
having discovered the skeletons of those who had been its vic
tims, when building a church on the spot once appropriated to
those rites. The Gentiles could not endure this exposure of
their enormities ; they assaulted the church where George was,
Murder of slew several of his adherents, and tying; cords to his feet, and to
those of two of his friends, dragged them up and down the city
till life was extinct ; then burning them on the sea shore, they
scattered their ashes on the waves, fearing that their victims
might be honoured as martyrs ; an apprehension most certainly
groundless, so far as respects the tyrant and the blasphemer
George. Julian overlooked the riot, though not failing in his
epistle to blame1 the Alexandrians for the want of reverence it
evinced to their god Serapis.
S. Athanasius lost no time in returning to Alexandria : and
mounted on an ass, he made his entry into that city. The same
joy prevailed as on his previous restoration. Roofs, walls, and
battlements were thronged ; incense was burnt, and torches lit ;
the Catholics present from all parts in the great mart of the
world, vied with each other in doing honour to the Confessor :
the inhabitants of Alexandria, in different divisions, according to
their age and sex, gave welcome to their Bishop : there were
feasts in public, and banquets in private. The Arians were
driven from their churches ; the Mystery of the Most Holy and
Consubstantial Trinity was again preached in them : and no
thing distinguished the Professors of the Cathohc Faith more
illustriously than the gentleness with which their persecutors
were treated.2 Those Arians who still retained their heresy,
obtained episcopal consecration for Lucius, a Priest ordained by
George.3 A Council was next held at Alexandria, at which S. Eusebius
of Vereeil, an illustrious Confessor for the Faith in the West,
was present : he, and the celebrated Lucifer of Cagliari, had

S. Athana
sius again
returns. A.D. 362.

1 Socrat. H.E. iii. 3. Julian. Apost.
Ep. 10. Philostorg. ii. 7, who lays the
blame of the transaction to Athanasius.
Ammian. Marc. xv. 7.
2 S. Greg. Nazianz. Encom. 18.

' It is difficult to understand how
the Benedictine Editors can deny that
Lucius was actually consecrated, 362,
6. See Le Quien, ii. 403, 404.

SECT. XXII.] THIRD EXILE OF S. ATHANASIUS. 193
been banished into the Upper Thebais : and, when the edict of
Julian allowed them to return to their Sees, Eusebius proposed
to go back by way of Antioch, for the sake of setthng the dis
tractions of that Church, while Lucifer should repair to Alexan
dria, and give his assistance to Athanasius in the Synod which
was then on the point of assembhng. Lucifer unhappily pre
ferred to visit Antioch : and there, by consecrating Paulinus
Bishop for the Eustathians, instead of inducing them to commu
nicate with the Meletians, he perpetuated the schism. He how
ever dispatched a Deacon to Alexandria, with orders to assent
to what should there be done.
The Council of Alexandria, on the contrary, was not more dis- council of
17 . Alexandria :
tinguished for its firmness than for its moderation.1 The first
business was to decide with respect to those who had been in
duced to subscribe the formula of Rimini. They had anathe
matized all such as should say that the Son of God was a
creature like other creatures, meaning thereby, that He was not a
creature at all ; while the Arians intended to assert that being a
creature, He was yet different from other creatures. The Bishops
who had subscribed, protested in the most solemn manner that
they had meant no harm : some further affirmed that they had
only attached their names to the formula, in order that by
retaining their churches, they might be enabled to exclude here
tical Prelates from possessing them. There was a difference of
opinion in the Council on this subject; some were for deposing
all those who had subscribed this formula, or any other heretical
Creed ; the greater part pointed out the tremendous breach that
such a sweeping condemnation would occasion ; others wished
that those who had fallen should content themselves with the
Communion of their own Church, being separated from that of
all other Churches. But in the end, gentler sentiments pre
vailed. The Bishops who had erred were only compelled to
anathematize Arius, and to subscribe to the Creed of Nicaea ;
and even those of the opposite party were received into lay com
munion, on renouncing their errors.
The Divinity of the Holy Ghost, and the equality of the
co-etemal Trinity was affirmed by the Council, who next pro-
i S. Athanas. Tom. ad Antioch. (i. 615.) Epist. ad Rufin. (i. 768.)
O

194 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
ceeded to settle a point of dispute between two parties of the
Cathohcs. The one asserted Three Hypostases in the Trinity,
the other only One : the former were called Arians, the latter
Sabelhans, by their opponents. S. Athanasius perceived that
the Faith of both parties was orthodox, and that the
oneSor°n°f dispute was only about words. To the asserters of Three
Hypostases Hypostases, he said, "Do you mean by these words, as the
Arians do, Three substances differing from each other, or,
as other heretics, Three Principles, or Three Gods ? " " God
forbid," they replied : " we only mean that the Father is and
exists; that the Son is and exists in the Substance of the
Father; and that the Holy Ghost is and exists : we abhor the
heresy that teaches the existence of Three Principles : we hold
the Son to be Consubstantial with the Father, and the Holy
Ghost inseparable from the Substance of Both." "This," said
the Council to their opponents, "is the very Cathohc Faith,
But you, who hold One Hypostasis only in the Holy Trinity,
do you mean, with Sabellius, to annihilate the Substance of the
Son and the Holy Ghost ? " , " God forbid," they answered :
" we merely use the word in the sense of substance, that we may
assert the Holy Trinity to be Consubstantial." Then said
the Council to both parties, " You are all agreed, then, in ana
thematizing Arius and Sabelhus, Paul of Samosata and Manes,
and to subscribing the Creed of Nicaea." Thus unity was res
tored among the orthodox. In a similar way, those who, both
holding the Faith, were dissatisfied with each others' expressions
on the subject of the Incarnation, were made to allow their real
accordance. In this Council Asterius, an Arabian Bishop, was
spokesman for the Eastern, Eusebius of Verceil for the Western
Church. S. Athanasius, writing in the name of the Council to the
Church of Antioch, detailed the proceedings which we have re
counted : and sent several other letters on the same subject to
the more influential among the Bishops. The only unfortunate
result of this most Catholic Synod, was the schism of Lucifer
of Cagliari, who would not communicate with those who
received to their communion the subscribers of the formula of
Rimini. Thus the Luciferians were with respect to the Demi-
Ariaiis what the Novatians were to the Pagans ; though in no

SECT. XXIII.] FOURTH EXILE OF S. ATHANASIUS. 195
other respect can the two sects be compared. For Lucifer had
been a Confessor for the truth, and, but for his unhappy divi
sion, would doubtless have been reckoned among the Saints by
the Church at large, as by a peculiar devotion of that of Sar
dinia he is to this day.1 Of the proceedings of the Apollinarians
in this Council we shall have a further occasion to speak.

SECTION XXIII.
FOURTH AND FIFTH EXILES OF S. ATHANASIUS : HIS RETURN
AND DEATH.
The Pagans, emboldened by the favour of Julian, addressed a
memorial to him, in the same year, against S. Athanasius, whom
they represented as the great enemy of their religion, and the
preventer of the due exercise of their rites. For they had recently
re-introduced the murder of infants, for the purpose of drawing
auguries from an inspection of their entrails. Julian replied,
that although out of his moderation he had allowed all the
Galileans, banished by Constantius, to return, yet he would not
suffer the insolence they complained of in the case of Athana
sius, whom he commanded on the receipt of that epistle to leave Athanasius
the city.2 The Christians also presented, though in vain, a juiianf y
memorial : Julian taunted them with being the slaves of those
Hebrews who had been bondmen to their fathers, and with pre
ferring a man accused of the most heinous crimes, to the
memory of Alexander their founder, and Serapis their guardian
god ; and Athanasius, who had at first been required only to
leave Alexandria, was now commanded to withdraw from Egypt.
Troops were sent to drive the Bishop into exile, with orders,
if they were able, to slay him : the Caesarea, or great church, was
sacked and burnt. S. Athanasius consoled his weeping friends
by assuring them that it was a cloud that would soon pass. He
embarked in a boat, and sailed up the Nile towards the Thebais.
1 And the Bollandists so reckon him : on the subject ; a schism which, they
endeavouring to prove that, though he say, owed its origin to his disciples.
disapproved of the decree of Alexandria, 2 Socrat. H. E.ii. 13,14. Sozomen,
he never went so far as to raise a schism H. E. v. 1 5. Theodoret, H. E. iii. 9.
o2

Vision of

Julian.

19° PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
He was soon missed, and pursued ; but a friend had time to
give him warning of the design against his life. With great
presence of mind, he ordered the boat to be put about, and
descended the river towards Alexandria : in a short time he was
met by the murderers, who demanded if Athanasius was far
before him. "He is very near," replied the friends of the
Prelate, according to others S. Athanasius himself; and the
boat of the officer was urged on with greater speed.
Julian was now on his expedition against the Persians. Didy
mus, celebrated in the Church of Alexandria for his piety, and,
although blind, for his learning, was in deep distress at the
tidings of persecutions in different places, and at the general
exultation of the Pagans. He had passed a whole day, towards
the end of June, in fasting and prayer : and as he slumbered in his
Didymus. chair, at one o'clock in the morning, heard a voice say distinctly,
" Juhan is dead ; rise, and eat, and send tidings to Athanasius."
Didymus carefully noted the day and hour ; and found that at
Death of that very hour the Apostate had indeed gone to his account : as
though wounded in the morning, he survived till after midnight.
S. Athanasius, it is said, received a yet earlier intimation of the
Emperor's fall. While at Antinoe, he received a visit from
Pammon, an Abbat in the adjacent country, and S. Theodore of
Tabenna. By their advice he betook himself to the cells
governed by the last-named hermit ; and while one day lament
ing the state of the Church to his two friends, was amazed to
see them look at each other, and interchange a smile. "Are
you mocking the weakness of my faith ? " demanded the Prelate.
On which they informed him that the tyrant had been summoned
to his account.1
Arianism now began to totter. The succeeding emperor
Jovian professed himself a Cathohc, and recalled the Bishops
banished by Juhan. Athanasius had not waited for this sum
mons, but had previously returned to Alexandria. He was here
agreeably surprised by receiving a letter from the Emperor, re
questing from him a True Exposition of the Catholic Faith. He
assembled a Council, and inserted in his reply the Creed of
Nicaea, and a brief but clear explanation of it. Jovian requested
1 Bolland. Mar. 14, p. 71.

SECT. XXIII.] FIFTH EXILE OF S. ATHANASIUS. 197
Athanasius to visit him at Antioch, where, shortly afterwards, a
small Council was held, by those in the Communion of S. Mele
tius, where several Demi-Arian Bishops approved of the term
Consubstantial. The proceedings of this Council having been
laid before Athanasius, he wished to enter into Communion with
Meletius : but the affair was procrastinated by the Meletians till
it fell to the ground.1
Lucius, the Arian Bishop of Alexandria, and his friends, made
a journey to Antioch, wishing to influence the Emperor in their
favour : but they only succeeded in incurring his indignation :
and to make the prospects of their sect yet darker, a schism
broke out among the pure Arians.
Athanasius, on his return into Egypt, spent some time in
visiting its principal monasteries, more especially that of S.
Pacomius. We may refer to this period his letter to Rufinia-
nus, who had consulted him on the proper method of dealing
with penitent heretics. The Prelate points out that various
Synods had already defined the matter; that the originators of
heresy, if ecclesiastics, were, on repentance, to be received to
lay Communion only ; those who had joined the heresy through
ignorance or infirmity, were to be retained in the enjoyment
of their full rank. In this decision, he says, the whole
Cathohc Church was agreed : the Luciferians only objected and
rebelled. While thus engaged, he heard of the death of Jovian,
and the appointment of Valentinian as Emperor, who at once gave
the East to his brother Valens. The happy reconciliation, in a
great measure, of the Eastern with the Western Church followed:
and was succeeded by the Arian persecution of Valens.
At its outset, an Edict was passed, banishing those Bishops a.d. ae?.
* • i -i i Persecution
who, having been exiled under Constantius, had returned under °f valens.
Juhan. In virtue of this proclamation,2 the prefect of Egypt
endeavoured to deprive the Alexandrian Catholics of their
churches, and to drive Athanasius from the city. The orthodox
rephed, that Athanasius did not come under the terms of the
edict : that he had indeed been banished by Constantius, but had
also been restored by the same Emperor ; and were on the point of
taking up arms in defence of their Bishop. The Prefect wrote

i S. Basil. Ep. 371. 249. 2 Socrat. H. E. iv. 13. Sozomen, H.E. vi.

12.

198 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
to Valens for instructions, and the sedition was appeased. A few
days after, S. Athanasius, divinely warned of impending danger,
left his house and the city towards evening, and hid himself in
the tomb of his father. Towards midnight the prefect surrounded
the house with troops, hoping to seize Athanasius, and convey
him quietly from the city. This was the last trouble which
befell the Confessor : an order came from Valens to recall him ;
and after a few months' absence, he again entered Alexandria.
Various conjectures have been made as to the reasons which in
duced Valens, while persecuting the other Catholic Bishops and
their flocks, to spare Athanasius and Alexandria. It is probable
that he did so either from fear of Valentinian, who might have
taken it ill that so great a champion of the truth should suffer
any thing ; or by the persuasion ofthe Arians, unwilling to bring
the powerful genius of Athanasius in contact with the mind of
Valens, and fearing that persecution might induce him to try
the force of a personal appeal to the Emperor.
a.d 370. S. Athanasius had now governed Alexandria more than forty
years, and the end of his life was peaceful. At the head of a
Council of ninety Bishops, he remonstrated with S. Damasus of
Rome, that Auxentius, the Arian Bishop of Milan, had not been
excommunicated, and his representation had the desired effect.1
The synodal letter addressed by this Synod to the Bishops of
Africa exists among the writings of S. Athanasius.
About this period we meet with an instance of his wilhngness
to drop the rights of his See where the good of the Church
was at stake. There was, in Pentapolis, a See called Erythrum,
which comprehended, among other villages, the petty towns of
Palaebisca and Hydrax. Orion, Bishop of Erythrum, a man
advanced in years, was solicited by the inhabitants of Palaebisca
and Hydrax, in consideration of their distance from the See, and
siderius of hjg own infirmities, to consecrate a young man named Siderius,
their Bishop. Orion consented, and the ceremony was performed
by Philo, Bishop of Cyrene, a well meaning man, but inexact in
his observance of the Laws ofthe Church, without any reference to
the See of Alexandria, and by himself: thus violating two Canons.
S. Athanasius not only confirmed Siderius in his See, but some
1 Theodoret, H. E. ii. 22.

SECT. XXIII.]

DEATH OF S. ATHANASIUS.

199

time after, approving his character, translated him to the Church
of Ptolemais, which we now find to have become, in a sense,
Metropohtical. He did credit to the choice of the people : and
in old age, resignmg the more honourable See of Ptolemais,
retired to end his days in the charge of his former See. We
also find him excommunicating the governor of Libya for
cruelty:1 defending S. Basil, lately made Bishop of Caesarea;
at length apparently reconciled to Meletius ;2 and instructing
Epictetus in the Mystery of the Incarnation, which the widely-
spreading Apolhnarian heresy rendered a necessary task.
Three years after the date of this work, S. Athanasius was a.d. 373.*

1 Synesius, Ep. 67.
2 S. Basil, Epp. 47, 52.
* The date of the decease of S.
Athanasius is, as is well known, a ques
tion of great difficulty. Those who
would place it in a.d. 371, ground
their decision on the following argu
ment. 1. Socrates, whose Consular
chronology is very exact, places the
death of the Patriarch under the Con
suls Gratianus and Probus : that is, in
the year 371. 2. It is well known
from the testimony of S. Cyril, Socra
tes, and others, that S. Athanasius
only sat forty-six years. But S. Alex
ander's decease cannot be placed later
than April 18, 326 : and (as we have
seen) the Roman Martyrology places
it February 26 of that year. This
seems to fix that of S. Athanasius
in 371 or 372. On the other hand, it
is urged : 1 . That S. Proterius of Alex
andria, who certainly ought to have
been acquainted with the principal
events in the life of his illustrious pre
decessor, says expressly, that he was
alive at Easter, a. m. 89 : that is,
March 31, a.d. 373. 2. The Chroni
con Orientale informs us that S. Atha
nasius died on Thursday, May 2, which
gives the same year. 3. S. Jerome
fixes the ordination of Peter II. in
373 ; and we have no intimation that
the See was long vacant. 4. ltis almost

certain that S. Basil was not consecrated
Bishop till the spring of a.d. 370. But
it is impossible that in the short space
of eleven months so many letters could
have passed between him and S. Atha
nasius, as they certainly wrote to each
other. With respect to the first argu
ment on each side, we must confess
that it is almost equally hard to believe
Socrates or S. Proterius inaccurate :
for to assert that the latter simply
meant that S. Athanasius regulated the
difficult Easter of a.d. 373, is absurd.
Therefore we must be guided solely by
the weight of the other arguments.
But the second reason for 371 is of
very little force : because it assumes
that the death of S. Alexander, and
consecration of S. Athanasius, were
synchronous. Now S. Athanasius was
absent at the death of his predecessor ;
and, as we have seen, the Meletian
Theonas was intruded into the See,
which he occupied three months. This,
according to our reckoning, would
make the ordination of S. Athanasius
to have taken place at the latter end of
May, 326 ; and thus, if he died May 2,
370, he would not have sat forty-seven
years complete : or, in common par
lance, he had sat forty-six years. If it
be objected that Rufinus says, Obiit
quadragesimo et sexto anno Sacerdotii
sui, we reply that the authority of that

200

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[BOOK I.

Death of S.
Athanasius.

attacked by a mortal illness. Being pressed to name his suc
cessor, he mentioned his faithful and aged companion Peter :
and shortly afterwards, after so many perils and banishments,
gave up the ghost in his bed, in his own house, justly claiming
the most illustrious place among the Confessors, and known in
his Church by the title of the Apostolic Patriarch. " And thus,"
as S. Gregory Nazianzen closes his panegyric, "he ended his
life in peace, and he was gathered to his fathers in a good old
age, to the Patriarchs and Prophets, Apostles and Martyrs, who
strove for the truth. And on his departure he received more
excellent honours than those which attended his entrances to
the city : for he so left this world, as to move the tears of many,
and to leave a glorious remembrance of himself, of more value
than visible tokens of respect, in the hearts of all."

SECTION XXIV.

PONTIFICATE OF PETER.

Peter II.
Pat. XXI.
A.D. 373.
A.M. 89.

The death of S. Athanasius was a signal for fresh efforts on the
part of the Arians. Peter was however peaceably enthroned by
the unanimous voices of the clergy and people, the neighbour
ing Prelates having assembled with the utmost speed to prevent
any attack of the opposite faction.
Euzoius of Antioch resolved to go himself to Alexandria, and
to put Lucius into quiet possession of the See. This project
was approved by Valens, who in the mean time wrote to Palla
dius, the prefect of Egypt, to drive out Peter by main force.
This commission was very pleasing to Palladius, who was a
Pagan : and assembhng a band of heathens and of Jews, he sur-

writer is too much weakened by his
notorious inaccuracies to render it of
very great moment. The arguments
which we have stated in behalf of 373,
(and we might have adduced more,^
appear incapable of a satisfactory an
swer : and therefore with the Benedic

tine Editors, with Tillemont, (though
he speaks less decidedly,) and with
Pagi, we have fixed the latter year :
in spite of the objections of Hermant,
Petavius, Papebrochius, and Baronius,
(which last writer puts the decease of
S. Athanasius in 372.)

SECT. XXIV.] PONTIFICATE OF PETER. 201
rounded the church of S. Theonas ; and informed Peter, that if
he did not voluntarily retire^ he would be dragged forth by
force. The Prelate was thrown into prison,1 and on his hberation Heisthrown
.... . _ into prison,
thought it prudent to retire : and the same scenes were re-acted, and retires.
which in the time of S. Athanasius had been witnessed in the
same church. A youth, infamous for his debauched life, mounted
the altar, and there exhibited a popular dance ; another ascended
the pulpit, and thence delivered an harangue in praise of vice.2
Many of the Cathohcs suffered on this occasion, and are reckoned
as Martyrs.
Shortly after, Euzoius aud Lucius, in company with the Entry of
Count Magnus, anived in Alexandria. The blasphemous con
gratulations with which they were received by the Pagans must
have been revolting even to themselves. " Welcome," they
cried, " to the Bishop who does not acknowledge the Son :
welcome to the Bishop, the beloved of Serapis ! " Nineteen
Cathohc Priests and Deacons, some of them in extreme old age,
were dragged before the tribunal of Magnus the Quaestor, a man
of bad character, who had narrowly escaped capital punishment
under Jovian, for having destroyed the church of Berytus in the
time of Julian the Apostate. He pressed them to communicate
with the Arians, urging that even if they were in the right,
God would surely pardon them for yielding to compulsion.
They appealed to the Creed of Nicaea, and protested that they
could not vary from that. Having been thrown into prison for
several days, they were scourged in pubhc, and banished to
Hehopohs in Phoenicia. Those who by tears or gestures
expressed their sympathy with the sufferers were also imprisoned
or sent to the mines by Palladius the Praefect. Among the
latter was the Deacon whom S. Damasus of Rome had commis
sioned to carry to Peter his congratulations and condolences on
his accession to the Chair of S. Mark. Epiphanius even assures

1 So Sozomen : whom Baronius allude to it. It is stranger that Peter
seems inclined (372, lxix.) to doubt, himself says nothing of his imprison-
because Rufinus says nothing of the ment.
imprisonment of Peter. But Makrizi 2 Theodoret, H. E. iv. 18, 19. So-
(§ 1 66) mentions it ; though Severus zomen, H. E. vi. 19. Socrat. H. E.
(Renaudot, p. 99) does not appear to iv. 21.

202 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
us, that some of the most strenuous advocates of the Truth
were condemned to the beasts.1 With the details of this
persecution we are acquainted from an encyclic epistle of Peter
himself, preserved by Theodoret.
Though Arianism thus again prevailed in Egypt, it was in a
far different manner from its former supremacy. Now the Church
knew herself better : the Formula of Nicaea was acknowledged
by all to be the expression of her belief; and the True Faith
was known to be so by those who yielded to fear or constraint.
The number of the Arians was also much diminished: the
contest had more definitely assumed its true form, and was felt
to be a struggle, not about words, but for the greatest Truth
for which man can contend.
Euzoius, having accomplished his errand, returned to Antioch.
Probably by his persuasion, Valens shortly afterwards issued an
edict, commanding the banishment from Egypt of all who
confessed the Consubstantial.2 Eleven Bishops were sent into
exile. The behaviour of S. Melas of Rhinocorura3 deserves to
be mentioned. The soldiers sent to convey him to his place of
Meias°f S' ex^e reached his church towards evening, and found him engaged
in preparing the lamps. Not imagining that a Prelate could
be employed in so menial an office, they inquired for Melas.
The Bishop informed them that he was within, and should be
told of their arrival. Taking them into his house, he set supper
before them, and himself waited at table : when they had finished
he made himself known. They were so much touched by his
humility and kindness, that they offered to let him escape ; but
S. Melas preferred sharing the exile of his brethren. He must
have been at this time young; since Sozomen, writing nearly
eighty years after, mentions his brother Solon, who succeeded
him in the Episcopate and seems to have resembled him in
virtue, as not long dead.
The Monks of Egypt were one of the great objects of the
1 Haer. 68. sometimes to the other. We learn
2 Socrat. H. E. iv. 11. Sozomen, from Sozomen that the Bishop and
H. E. vi. 19. Clerks of this church lived together as
¦* Rhinocorura formed the boundary canons regular, having a common
of Egypt and Phoenicia, and is accord- house and a common table. — Le Quien,
ingly sometimes reckoned to the one, ii. 541, 2 Sozomen, H. E. vi. 31.

SECT. XXIV.] PONTIFICATE OF PETER. 203
hatred of Lucius. He spared no pains in discovering their persecution
abodes ; and even himself led a large party of soldiers to drive Monks :
them into exile. It is said that the inmates of a particular
monastery which he was about to visit, were requested, as they
often were, to pray over a paralytic man brought to them for
that purpose. They anointed him with oil, and on saying the
words, " In the Name of Jesus Christ Whom Lucius perse-
cuteth, arise, and go to thy house ! " they restored him whole
to his friends. Neither their prayers, however, nor their mira
cles protected them from the insults and from the fury of the
Arians ; till Lucius, perceiving that the number of the Monks
prevented the exercise of any very severe measure against the
whole of their body, contented himself with banishing their
Abbats. Among the most illustrious of the exiles had been the two exiie 0f the
Macarii and Isidore. They were banished to an island in the Isidore! a°
Nile, the stronghold of Paganism, where the Gospel had not as
yet been preached, and where the priest was honoured for the
supposed sanctity of his life and prevalence of his prayers. At
the moment that the bark which was earring the Holy Confessors
touched the shore, the daughter of this man was seized by a
demon. Rushing down to the coast, — " We had trusted," she
cried, " to be safe from you in this unknown spot : it is our
ancient habitation ; here we abode in peace ; here we hurt none.
But if you claim this island also, take it : we cannot resist your
power." As the spirits thus spoke, they threw the maiden to
the ground, convulsed her, and left her. The result of this
miracle was the conversion of the whole island. The populace
of Alexandria, on receiving intelligence of the event, were
scarcely to be restrained from an open outbreak : and Lucius
thought it prudent to give private orders for the release of the
Macarii and Isidore. J
Peter, shortly after his release from prison, retired to Rome, Peter at
where he was honourably received by S. Damasus, the successor Rome'
of Liberius.2 While there, he assisted at a Council held by S.
Damasus against ApoUinaris,3 whose heresy, as we have already
1 Theodoret, H. E. iv. 21. Hieron. Ant. Merendse Vit. S. Damasi,
p. 43.
2 S. Greg. Nazianz. Orat. in laudem 3 Epp. S. Damas. 2, 3 ; Vit. p. 55.

204 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
observed,1 may be said to have arisen at Alexandria. He had
been for some time accused of teaching that the Saviour was
HeresiDarian 0rL^ m ^*s ^0(ty a man> an<* ^^ ^s Divinity supplied the
place of a human soul ; but his great reputation had rendered
the Eastern Bishops unwilhng to condemn him, though not
hesitating to anathematize his doctrines. At length his errors
became too flagrant to be any longer concealed or connived at :
and the See of Alexandria had again the honour, in conjunction
a.d. 376. with that of Rome, to be the foremost in condemning heresy.
The presence of Peter at Rome was important on another
account. The schism at Antioch, between the Eustathians, or
old Cathohc party, under their Bishop Paulinus, ordained by
Lucifer before his return to the West, and the new Catholic
Antioch. party under S. Meletius, had troubled both the East and West.
The holiest Bishops in the East, such as S. Basil and S. Eusebius
of Samosata, sided with Meletius. S. Damasus and the Western
Bishops communicated with Paulinus. Meletius asserted Three
Hypostases in the Holy Trinity, Paulinus One : S. Damasus
would not allow the former, for fear of being considered an
Arian, nor S. Basil the latter, lest he should be imagined a
Sabelhan.2 Notwithstanding the decision of the Chair of S.
Peter, Meletius after his death was reckoned even by the Western
Church among the Saints, — an honour not accorded to Pauhnus.
Peter served as a kind of connection between the two conflicting
parties, though his sentiments inchned to those of Damasus.
S. Basil addressed a letter to him while at Rome, on the subject,
in which he complains in very strong language, that the Western
Bishops, who could not be so well acquainted with the actual
state of affairs, should presume to class Meletius and Eusebius
among the Arians.
S. Basil also addressed an Epistle to the Faithful of Alexan
dria, in the absence of their Bishop, calling on them to contend
earnestly for the Faith once for all committed to the Church,
to call to mind their own illustrious Saints, to emulate them in
their conflict, that they might be accounted worthy to share with
them their glory, and to play the man for the Lord of Hosts.

1 P. 38. Ber. ap. S. Cyril, Ep. 13. S. Basil,
2 Vit. S. Damas. pp. 60, 89. Acac. Ep. 214. S. Hieron. Ep. 15, i. 38.

SECT. XXIV.] PONTIFICATE OF PETER. 205
A remarkable event which happened about this time must
have convinced the Arians that they were not recognized by any
party as the legitimate occupants of the Throne of Alexandria.
Mauvia, Queen of the Saracens, who bordered on Palmyrene
and Phoenicia Libanensis, had been engaged in a series of wars
with the Roman Power, and had generally been successful.
Terms of peace were offered, and accepted by the Queen,
on condition that Moyses, a monk of reputation in her domini
ons, should be ordained Bishop of the Saracens. The proposal
was considered reasonable ; and Moyses was directed to receive
consecration from Lucius. When brought before that Arian
Prelate, "I am unworthy," said the Monk, "to receive the
grace of the Episcopate at all : but if necessity be laid upon me, consecra-
I refuse to accept it from a blasphemer of our Lord, and an Moyses.
intruder into a See already filled." However much Lucius
might resent this public affront, for the protest was made in the
presence of the civil authorities of Alexandria, the necessity of
the case compelled him to acquiesce ; and Moyses was ordained
by the Metropolitan of Damascus.1
During the persecution of Lucius, the Monks of Egypt s. Meiania
received the most essential services from the celebrated Melania,
who was at that time on her way to Palestine, and remained
eight months in the country.2 Her zeal led her to provide
retreats for a vast multitude of recluses; and during three
days, she supported, at her own expense, five thousand monks.
She was summoned before the Praefect, and threatened with the
severest punishment, unless she consented to acquaint the
magistrates with the names and hiding-places of those whom
she maintained; but her popularity and high birth exempted
her, though desirous of suffering for Christ, from further
molestation. 3
Valens, now at Antioch, found it necessary to defend Thrace
from the incursions of the barbarians ; and accordingly set out
for Constantinople. But before leaving the city,4 he gave orders
1 Rufin.ii. 6. Socrat. H.E.iv. 29. 3 S. Paulin. Ep. 10 ; Baronius,
Sozomen, H. E. vi. 38. Le Quien ii. 372, xcii., who proves that these events
851, 852. occurred in Egypt, and not in Palestine.
4 Socrat. H. E. iv. 38. S. Hieron.
2 Pallad. Lausiac. cap. xxxiii. Chron. Baronius, 377, ii.

206 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
Death of that the persecution against the Catholics should cease, and that

Valens

the persecu- the exiles should be restored. As soon as the intelligence
tion ceases. i -i -n
reached Rome, Peter, provided with letters of Communion from
Damasus, returned to his Church, where he was received with
great joy. On this, Lucius retired first to Constantinople, then
to Bercea. Valens, by the just judgment of God, perished in
his expedition. The few remaining months of the fife of S.
Peter were darkly clouded by an unfortunate action on his part,
which threatened to lead to serious results.
The Church of Constantinople was now in a most lamentable
condition, having been in the hands of the Arians for more
than forty years. Demophilus, their present Bishop, was alto
gether intolerable to the Catholics, and Theodosius, on being
elevated to the purple in the East, was anxious to provide a
Prelate who might be able to raise that important Church from
s. Gregory her ruins. S. Gregory of Nazianzum, a Bishop without a See,
Nazianzen: 1 , J ' \ '
appeared to the orthodox party the most eligible for the post ;
and he accordingly, not without great reluctance, came to Con
stantinople. His difficulties were at first great : the Arians
possessed all the churches, and he was compelled to hold his
assemblies in the house where his friends entertained him.
This house afterwards became the celebrated church of the
Resurrection : so called from the Resurrection of the Faith in
Constantinople, which had its origin there. Peter favoured the
election of S. Gregory, and, in virtue of the jurisdiction which
Alexandria claimed, and still claims, over Constantinople in a
vacancy of the latter See, instituted him therein,1 But from
whatever cause, he soon after repented of this action. There
tionSof ra" was one Maximus, a native of Alexandria, who although a
Christian, professed himself a Cynic, and wore the ordinary
dress of that sect of philosophers. This man, whose character
had been notoriously bad, obtained from Peter a promise to
ordain him Bishop of Constantinople. We are not informed by
what artifices he procured this engagement ; but having secured
it, he sailed for Constantinople, where, partly by praising the
eloquence of Gregory, and partly by exhibiting, as if received
in Confession, the marks of stripes by which he had been
punished for a misdemeanour, he insinuated himself into
1 S. Greg. Nazianz. Carm. de Vita.

Maximus.

SECT. XXIV.] PONTIFICATE OF PETER. 207
the confidence of the Bishop, and made some progress in popu
lar esteem in the city. Having so far succeeded, he informed
Peter of his proceedings, and requested him to send some
Prelates for the purpose of consecrating him.
The character of Peter at this time stood high ; and he used
all his authority for the promotion of the design of Maximus.
He dispatched three Bishops to Constantinople, with full powers
to consecrate him. The pretext, however, under which these
Prelates were sent, was the conveyance of the customary
tribute of corn to Constantinople. On arriving in the Imperial
City, they, in a most irregular and hurried manner, ordained
Maximus.1 The people were indignant : the expressions of their
affection towards S. Gregory were numerous ; and the intruder
was compelled ignominiously to leave the city. The Emperor
and the Pope declared against him; the latter, indeed, who
did not approve of the Translation of Gregory, considered the
See as vacant. Maximus, meanwhile, after a fruitless interview A-D- 379-
with Theodosius at Thessalonica, returned to Alexandria, and
urged Peter to assist him in re-establishing himself at Constan
tinople. To entreaties he added threats, declaring that if the
Bishop of Alexandria would not give him the help he demanded,
he should himself be deposed. But the Praefect of Egypt
banished Maximus ; and Gregory was for a short time quietly
restored to his dignity.2
Peter's hfe was now drawina; to an end. On the fourteenth Death of
Peter,
of February, a. d. 380, he was taken from the world. His
memory is venerated by the Coptic Church, which reckons him
among the Saints. But the Church Catholic has refused him
the title : partly on account of his inconstancy in the matter of
Maximus ; partly, as it would seem from S. Jerome, from the too
great facility with which, after his return to Alexandria, he ad
mitted heretics to his Communion ; — thence laying himself
open to the charge, though perfectly unfounded, of having
received bribes for the purpose of shortening the period of their
probation. 3
1 Pagi, 379, viii. The Chronology have returned to Alexandria till after
however is not without difficulties, the death of Peter.
inasmuch as evidence has been adduced 2 S. Greg. Nazianz. Carm. de Vita.
to place the election of Maximus in 3 Sollerius, p. 50*, § 259.
a.d. 380 ; in which case he could not

208

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK. I.

Fourteen days after the death of Peter, a law was published
by Theodosius, then at Thessalonica, for the purpose of defining
the Catholic Faith; in which Communion with S. Damasus of
Rome, and Peter of Alexandria, is required in its professors. The
tidings of the death of latter had not as yet reached Thessalonica.

SECTION XXV.
PONTIFICATE OF TIMOTHY.
Timothy, On the decease of Peter, Timothy, his brother,1 who appears
am 386° ; ' to ^aye ^een ^esigna<;ed by the dying Prelate as his successor,
was, by the election of the Bishops and Clergy, placed in the
vacant See.
a.d. 38i. In the year following this election, Theodosius, eager to put
an end to the various disputes by which the Church was dis
tracted, determined on convoking a numerous Synod for their
second consideration and settlement ; and the Second General Council
Oecumenical ~ . m1 , . . _ . -„
council. met at Constantinople. Though consisting only of Lastern
Bishops, from the subsequent reception of its decrees by the
whole Church it is justly regarded as GUcumenical.
The first proceeding of the assembled Fathers was to declare
the consecration of Maximus null and void. This was done the
more easily, because, from whatever reason, no Egyptian Bishop
was then present at the Council. S. Meletius of Antioch, as
Prelate of the See third in dignity, presided. Gregory was
then solemnly installed in the Episcopal Throne, in spite of the
most vigorous opposition on his own part. S. Meletius shortly
after went to his reward; and it was now hoped that the
Antiochene schism might cease. For it had been agreed by both
parties, that of the two Prelates, Paulinus and Meletius, which
ever should survive the other should be accounted by all as the
Canonical Bishop. S. Gregory, now presiding in the Council,
was urgent that this compact should be observed; but the
younger Bishops could not endure the idea of thus yielding to
1 Sozomen, H. E. vii. 5. 2 Socrat. H.E. iv. 37. Eutychius, p. 491.

SECT. XXV.] PONTIFICATE OF TIMOTHY. 209
the Western Church, which had always continued iu the Com
munion of Paulinus : and the schism was continued by the
election of Flavian.
It was probably during this interval,1 when neither Alexandria Alexandria
nor Antioch were properly represented in the Council, that its Third see :
celebrated Canon was passed, whereby Constantinople was
declared the second See. But Timothy constantly refused to
allow the validity of this Canon ; the Church of Rome did the
same; and, for centuries after, Alexandria still held the second
dignity everywhere but at Constantinople.
Timothy having arrived at the latter city, immediately attacked
the validity of Gregory's translation; rather out of jealousy of
the Eastern Church (Alexandria, as we have seen, always allying
itself with Rome), than from any dislike to that Bishop. His
opponents could not be more willing to insist on, than that
aged Prelate was to tender his resignation : and the appoint
ment of Nectarius to the See was the final result. On the Timothy at
Constanti-
cession of S. Gregory, Timothy presided in the Council; tilln°Ple:
disgust at the influence of the Eastern Prelates and at the
Canon by which his own See was degraded, caused him to sail
for Alexandria; and he refused again to leave his city, though in
vited to be present at the subsequent consecration of Nectarius.
It need hardly be said that the chief thing done in the
Council of Constantinople, besides what has been specified,
was the expansion of the Creed of Nicaea into that form which
we, in common with the whole Cathohc Church, employ in our
Communion Office : the single point of difference being, that
the Procession of the Holy Ghost was only affirmed to be
from the Father. In the law which gave force to the decrees he returns to
of the Council, Timothy was named with Nectarius and other
principal Bishops, as those with whom all, professing to be
Cathohcs, were required to be in Communion.
Timothy, after returning to his flock, was under the happy
reign of Theodosius spared the persecutions to which his prede-
1 The time at which the several given in the text seems on the whole
Canons of Constantinople were made the more probable. Of the subsequent
is involved in much obscurity ; and reception of these Canons by Alex-
some will have it that the second and andria itself, we have spoken in the
fourth Canons were enacted after the Introduction.
departure of Timothy. The account

A.D. 385.

210 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
cessors had been subjected. He was an old man when raised to
the See, and departed this life in peace, after having held it
juiy 20, ' more than five years. Though not reckoned among the Saints
by any except the Coptic Church,1 his character stood high for
piety and learning. The rescript of Theodosius to Optatus2
speaks of him in the highest terms ; and his contempt of riches
appears to have been so great, as to obtain for him the surname
of the Poor.3 His most celebrated work was a Canonical Epistle
on Penance, still extant; and he had composed the lives of
S. Apollos and other Egyptian recluses.4 He is said to have
built several churches in Alexandria: and to have been eminently
successful in the conversion of Arians.5

SECTION XXVI.
DESTRUCTION OF THE TEMPLE OF SERAPIS:
THEOPHILUS AT CONSTANTINOPLE.
The episcopate of the two succeeding Patriarchs was the period
Patr. xxiii. at which the Church of Alexandria attained her highest dignity.
A.D. 385. ,
a.m. 101. The power of its Prelate was in some respects, as we nave
already observed, greater than that of the Bishop of Rome over
his own Prelates ; and the civil authority attached to the office
was, as we shall have occasion to notice, exceedingly great.
Theophilus had been secretary to Athanasius, and was, so far
1 On the 20th of July. Timothy, 8 Apophthegm. Patr. — Ttp.oBeov tou
the citizen of Benhur, in whose honour apxwo-K6irou 'AXe^avSpeias tov Xeyo-
a church was built, the dedication of p.(vov hin-h p-o v o s. Le Quien, ii.
which is a Festival in the Coptic Calen- 406.
dar, does not appear to have been the
same with this Patriarch, as Sollerius 4 Sozomen, H.E. vi. 29.
(p. 51,* § 265) thinks: but rather that
Timothy who is celebrated by the 6 Eutychius, p. 491. Makrizi, § 173.
Copts, together with his wife Mora, on These writers add that, in the Patri-
the 23rd of November. archate of Timothy, the use of flesh on
2 Vir cum omnium sacerdotum sus- Easter Day was made compulsory (that
ceptatione venerandus, turn etiam nos- is, even to the severest recluses), as a
tro judicio approbatus. The rescript is protest against the Manichoaans. This
quoted by Baronius, 385, xxxi. Renaudot denies (p. 102).

SECT. XXVI.] DESTRUCTION OF TEMPLE OF SERAPIS. 211
as the management of business and the maintenance of his
Church's dignity was concerned, a fit possessor of the Evangeli
cal Throne. In other qualities yet more important for a Prelate,
the contrast between himself and his predecessors is sorely to
his disadvantage.
His first memorable action proves him, however, not to have a.d. 389.
been wanting in zeal. There was at Alexandria1 an ancient
temple of Bacchus, once of great celebrity, but now so complete
a ruin that only the walls remained. Theophilus obtained a Theophilus
grant of it from the Emperor Theodosius, purposing; to build a grant of the
, , , t i • i 1 /. Temple of
church on the spot. In clearmg the ground for the foundations, Bacchus :
various crypts were discovered, and in them figures connected
with the abominations of the Phallic rites. The Pagans could
not endure the discovery of their shame. They flew to arms : the Pagans
rt-t • • t p -1 take up
the Christians defended themselves, and, although the stronger arms«
party, would not attack their opponents. The latter, after
having killed some of those who were most foremost in exposing
their secret crimes, retired into the Temple of Serapis. This
building served excellently as a fortress. It was raised on a
terrace of enormous height ; its form was square, with a central
court; there were subterranean passages and communications
known only to the Priests ; the walls were massy, and composed
externally of excellent masonry, while covered internally with
copper plates, under which popular behef held a layer of silver
to be concealed, while under that again was one of gold. The
greater part of the edifice was taken up by lodgings and apart
ments of various kinds for the Priests and official attendants :
the shrine itself was lighted with only one window, so contrived
that at mid-day, once a year, a ray of the sun fell on the face of
Serapis, an enormous figure, the extended hands of which
reached from one side of the temple to the other : and precisely
at that time the sun-god was brought on a visit of congratula
tion to his brother idol. The Pagans having fortified them- fortify them-
. .. . selves in the
selves in this building elected Olympius, a philosopher, as their Temple of
leader : they were even bold enough to attempt a sally, in which
some Christians were taken prisoners : these were instantly
dragged to the altars, and either compelled to sacrifice, or
exposed to the most cruel tortures.
1 Sozomen, H.E. vii. 15. Socrat. H.E. v. 16.
P 2

212

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[BOOK I.

are sum
moned to
surrender,

refuse,

are par
doned,

Evagrius, the Praefect of Egypt, collected a few soldiers, and
hastened to the temple, representing to the rebels the madness
of hoping to resist the whole Roman power, and the punishment
which a prolonged resistance would necessarily entail. Driven
to despair, and encouraged by the harangues of Olympius, who
exhorted them to suffer any extremity rather than abandon the
gods of their ancestors, the besieged refused to listen to any
terms of accommodation. As the situation of the place rendered
it inaccessible, except with loss of life and by means of a regular
storm, Evagrius thought it his duty to write to Theodosius for
instructions how he should proceed in this conjuncture, and, in
the mean time, the insurgents were left in quiet possession of
the fortress. Theodosius rephed, that he envied the lot of those
Christians who had fallen in this affair, as esteeming them
Martyrs; that their murderers should be freely forgiven (the
invariable custom of the Church, lest the glory of the Martyr
should be tarnished by revenge), but that, at the same time, all
the temples of Alexandria, which had been the causes of this
outbreak, should be demolished. Theophilus, in conjunction
with Evagrius, charged himself with the execution of this edict.
It was read in public : Christians as well as Pagans assembled
to hear the result of the inquiry. The former, as soon as its
bearing was manifest, gave a shout of exultation; the latter
were struck with terror and fled ; the insurgents, and Olympius
among the rest, quitted the temple of Serapis, and left it an
andevacuate easy prey~to the Catholics. It is said, that in the dead of the
preceding night, the doors of the shrine being shut, and no
person within it, the chant of " Alleluia !" was heard in its
recesses. It is certain that the victory of the Christians was
not stained with any blood ; for even Helladius, the Priest of
Jupiter, who had, or professed to have, slain nine persons in the
revolt, was permitted to fly to Damascus, where he obtained a
hvelihood as a teacher of grammar.
Theophilus and the people repaired to the temple of Serapis
for the purpose of effecting its destruction. There was however
an ancient tradition that, when the idol should be destroyed, the
earth would perish, the heaven fall in, and chaos would return.
This belief, actually held by some, and influencing others almost
unconsciously to themselves, held back the crowd from attempt -

the place.

SECT. XXVI.] DESTRUCTION OF TEMPLE OF SERAPIS. 213
ing its ruin. At length a soldier, possessing more courage than
the rest, struck the image, which was of wood, though studded The image
... ° ... of Serapis is
with various metals and precious stones, a blow on the cheek destroyed:
with his hatchet. A shout of horror arose from the Pagans,
of triumph from the Christians. The soldier redoubled his
blows : he smote the idol on the knee, and it fell ; a third blow
lopped off the head. The Heathen were in expectation of some
dreadful event : an extraordinary noise was heard in the body of
the fallen god ; and a swarm of rats, its ancient tenants, escaped
at the neck. Now all was derision and mockery : the unfortu
nate Serapis was hacked in pieces, and afforded materials for a
bonfire ; and the images of the same deity, the common orna
ments of the Alexandrian houses, were demolished, their place
being supplied by a painting of the Cross.
In levelling the foundations of the temple the Cross was found
engraven on several of its stones ; and an ancient tradition tradition
t respecting
was then remembered, purporting that, when that figure was the Cruss-
triumphant, the worship of Serapis should be at an end. This
prophecy has been imagined, like others, to have been made
after the event ; but recent discoveries in Yucatan have strangely
tended to confirm it. The Cross, in that country, was venerated
long before the arrival of the Spaniards ; and a tradition was
current to the effect that when it was triumphant, the Mexican
gods would no longer be worshipped.
The Pagans had yet one strong hold on popular feehng. The
celebrated Nile-gauge, kept till the time of Constantine in the Removal of
temple of Serapis, transferred to the cathedral by Constantine, gauge.
and brought back again at the command of Julian the Apostate,
was now a second time removed to the church. The worshippers of
Serapis prophesied that the Nile would not rise that year : on
the contrary, it arose higher than had ever been known. A few
years subsequently there was a deficient inundation : the Pagans
attributed it to their being forbidden to appease the Nile by
their usual sacrifices. The Governor, in reply to their remon
strances, assured them, that if such rites as theirs were neces
sary to the fertilization of Egypt, the goodness of the result did
not compensate for the wickedness of the means. Shortly after,
the river rose rapidly : it passed the highest mark, and fears
were entertained that Alexandria itself would be inundated,

214 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
The Pagans consoled themselves for their disappointment by an
indecent jest.
a.d. 390. The destruction of idols, commenced at Alexandria, extended
of idols itself throughout the whole of Egypt : the infamous secrets of
Egypt. their worship were discovered, the metal obtained from them
recast into vessels for the use of the Church ; and one image only
retained, that of a ridiculous ape, lest in after times the heathen
should deny their worship of such monsters. The wrath of
Eunapius, a pagan writer, is excessive. He accuses Theophilus
of changing the worship of the great gods into the adoration of
miserable men who had suffered for their crimes, referring of
course, to the honour shewn to the relics of the Martyrs ; and
asserts that the Bishop's private interest was at the bottom of
his exertions against idolaters.
a.d. 389. The schism of the Church of Antioch still continuing, the
Council of Capua entrusted Theophilus with the final settlement
of the matter ; but Flavian, the same who was ordained by the
Council of Constantinople, would not submit to his arbitration.
It must be confessed that the Western Bishops interfered un
warrantably in this matter x : they attempted to prejudice Theo
dosius against Flavian, by complaining of his tyranny ; but the
Emperor stood firm to that excellent Bishop, the patron of S.
John Chrysostom, and the preserver of Antioch from the
penalties which it had incurred by sedition.
a.d. 394. We find Theophilus at a Council holden in Constantinople;
on occasion of the consecration of the Church known by the
name of the Apostolicon, and dedicated in honour of SS. Peter
and Paul, to decide the dispute between Agapius and Bagadius,
for the possession of the See of Bostra, the Metropolis of Arabia.
In the course of the examinations, Theophilus, who presided
with the Bishops of Constantinople and Antioch, gave it as his
opinion, that although three Bishops could consecrate, they could
not depose a Prelate, and that nothing less than a Provincial
Council was sufficient for the latter act. This was approved by
the Fathers then present.2
The errors of Origen, which had slumbered for so long a time,
were now to occasion fresh trouble in the Church. A difference
arose between John Bishop of Jerusalem, who was suspected of
! S. Ambrose, Ep. 50. 2 Theod. Balsamon. 390. Baronius vi. 151.

SECT. XXVI.] THEOPHILUS AT CONSTANTINOPLE. 215
holding these tenets, and S. Epiphanius and S. Jerome ; and the
angry feelings excited on both sides, before the death of Theo
dosius, brought forth bitter fruit subsequently to that event.
Epiphanius was a great admirer of Theophilus, and was drawn Theophilus
on by him to acts of which, had he lived, he would assuredly constanti-
have repented. On the death of Nectarius of Constantinople,
the Emperor Arcadius resolved to supply his place by S. John
Chrysostom of Antioch ; and to render his consecration the
more solemn, he convoked a Council on the occasion. Theo
philus had designed a Priest of his own,1 named Isidore, to fill
the chair of the imperial city : and the reason assigned for this
desire is, if true, not a little discreditable to both. In the war a.d. 39s.
between Theodosius and Maximus, Isidore had been entrusted
by Theophilus with two letters, charged with which he awaited
the event at Rome. The one was a congratulation to be deli
vered to Maximus, in case his forces should prove victorious ; the
other was to be given to Theodosius, if success should declare in
his favour. Having formed this design, it was natural that the
Alexandrian Patriarch should be opposed to the election of S. Chry
sostom ; and personal intercourse did not diminish his unwilling
ness to officiate, as his office rendered it necessary for him to do, at
the consecration of the new Prelate. Eutropius, the then powerful
prime minister, on hearing of the opposition of Theophilus, took
a summary method of putting an end to it. Taking him aside,
he shewed him a large quantity of documents, carefully pre
served. " These," he said, " are memorials received at different
times from several of your Bishops against your proceedings ;
your choice is free, either to consecrate John of Antioch, or to he con-
defend yourself against these accusations." Theophilus chose s. John
the former alternative. This account too clearly shews the close
ness of that dangerous embrace with which, at Constantinople,
the State had already clasped the Church.
At the same time we must remember that on this matter and
the subsequent transactions connected with it, we are left for
information almost entirely, so far as historical accounts are con
cerned, to writers prejudiced in favour of S. John Chrysostom.
It cannot be denied that the latter, in common with S. Meletius,
and the rest of the Antiochene school, had a tendency to ration-
1 Socrat. H. E. vi. 2. Sozomen, H. E. viii. 2.

216 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
alizing views ; — a tendency from which, as we have observed,
the national feeling of the Egyptian Church shrank with horror.
We, in looking back on the whole course of events, are able to
perceive that this tendency in S. Chrysostom's mind was left in
check by his piety and the authority of the Church : but Theo
philus had no guarantee at that time, that it would not result
in semi-Arian, or even Arian tenets. Doubtless his desire of
placing a Priest of his own in the chair of Constantinople, had
much influence on his conduct : but it were uncharitable not to
allow that he might not unreasonably be prejudiced against a
Priest of S. Flavian, who had been elevated to the Throne of
Antioch in spite of a most solemn compact, and who undoubt
edly represented the Arianizing portion of the Catholic Church
in that city.
a.d. 399. In the next year the Sees of Alexandria and Constantinople
re-established communion between Flavian of Antioch and the
Church of Rome.1 But this harmony between S. Chrysostom
and Theophilus was not of long continuance.
a.d. 400. Rufinus, the friend of S. Jerome, unfortunately at this time
published a translation of Origen's work on principles, hinting
in his introduction that Jerome had approved it ; that Father
wrote against Rufinus, and strongly condemned the doctrine of
Origen. The tenets of the latter were condemned at Rome,
and generally in the West ; Theophilus had already set the
example. The hasty tempers of S. Epiphanius and S. Jerome
accused the See of Alexandria of too great tolerance for heretics;
and a circumstance occurred which quickened the proceedings
of Theophilus.
The on- The errors and doctrines of Origen had for many years ceased
geman ° .
controversy ^0 occupy a prominent place in public interest. The Arian
revives: ±J x x _ r
controversy had concentrated on itself all the polemical theology
of the Church ; and while that lasted, no other heresy, not even
the Apollinarian, could excite more than a passing investigation.
But the writings of Origen had made their way into the Monas
teries of Egypt, and there found readers who were not engrossed
by the all-prevailing topic of Arianism, and the mystical tempe
rament of whose minds disposed them to adopt the opinions of
that extraordinary man. Men, who dwelt in the furthest
1 Sozomen, II. E. viii. 1.

SECT. XXVI.] THEOPHILUS AT CONSTANTINOPLE. 217
recesses of the desert, who passed months together without the
sight of a stranger, who had wild crags and interminable
wildernesses for their companions, who were familiarized
with the sublimity of a mountain noon-tide, and the awful
beauty of a tropical night, these men, we say, must have been
peculiarly susceptible to the impressions of nature, and pecu
liarly willing to see or to imagine the finks which unite visible
nature with the invisible world. Hence they eagerly received
the wild theories of Origen on Angelical natures, the origin of
spirits, the essence of stars, and the like mystical visions ; and
hence, when the word Origenian became a term of reproach,
Egypt was plunged in endless disputes. For, though undoubt
edly the public tendency was to the mysticism of .that writer,
few owned themselves his partisans, and some among the
Monasteries were declared enemies to his name and doctrines.
Foremost among these were a set of heretics who at this time
appeared in Egypt,1 and interpreted literally those passages of
Scripture where the different members of the human body are
attributed to the Deity. They thence acquired the name of
Anthropomorphites ; they were for the most part ignorant
monks, and violently opposed to Origen, as from his attachment,
to the mystical significations of Holy Writ, the most diametri
cally opposed of all Christian writers to their own dogmas.
They went further, and branded the Catholics with the title of
Origenians. Theophilus, in his usual Paschal letter, took occasion to combat Theophilus declares
this heresy, which he did with great clearness and by solid against the
proofs. His Epistle was received by the Monks with an outcry morphites.
of indignation. Those of Scete, reputed the most perfect in
Egypt, would not allow it to be read ; their Abbat Paphnutius
was the only person in the monastery who received its doctrine
as sound. Serapion, who possessed great authority among the
brotherhood, from his age, his austerities, and his exemplary
life, was in vain told by Paphnutius that the passages he quoted
were to be taken in a spiritual sense. It happened opportunely
that Photinus, a Deacon of Cappadocia, well esteemed for his
learning, visited the monastery : and from him Paphnutius
learnt that the Eastern Church explained the texts in question
' Socrat. H. E. vi. 7. Sozomen, H. E. viii. 11.

218 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
as he himself had done. This concurrence of testimony overcame
the obstinacy of Serapion ; the poor old man burst into tears,
exclaiming, " They have taken away my God, and I know not
what to worship ! " The greater part of the Monks were not so
easy to be convinced. They came in a crowd to Alexandria, ex
claiming against Theophilus as a heretic and a blasphemer. If,
they cried, he is not implicated in the errors of Origen, why
does he not anathematize them? The Bishop, desirous of
restoring peace to his Church, promised to do so; and in a
Council which he shortly after assembled, he fulfilled his
engagement. In his next Paschal letter, he took occasion to
dwell at length on the subject ; and in some instances, appears
to have dealt unfairly with the expressions of Origen. The
Paschal letters, in which Theophilus attacked these errors, are
now only known to us through the Latin version of S. Jerome.1
A dispute arose about this time at Alexandria, which was de
structive of the peace of the whole Eastern Church. An aged
priest named Isidore, who had been ordained by S. Athanasius,
Theophilus was master of the Hospital in that city : and as his charity was well
Isidore : known, he was presented with a thousand pieces of gold by a rich
widow, engaging himself by oath to expend the money in cloth
ing the poorest women of the city. The donor was unwilling to en
trust the sum to Theophilus, because his passion for building was
notorious : and she feared that he would employ the money in
increasing the principal Church, already too large. The Bishop
heard of the transaction, and though indignant with Isidore,
was unable at the time to punish the affront he imagined him
self to have received. But shortly afterwards, he called his
Priests together, and in their presence, put a paper into the
hand of Isidore, informing him that it was a memorial presented
eighteen years before against him, and desiring him to answer
it. Isidore represented the injustice of requiring him to defend
himself when no accuser was present; and Theophilus, after
shuffling for some time, promised that on another day the plain
tiff should be forthcoming. He soon, by a bribe, prevailed on
a young man to undertake the character; but the transaction
came to the ears of Isidore; and Theophilus, perceiving his
scheme to be discovered, excommunicated that Priest, on pre-
1 S. llieronym. Epp. 96, 98, 100.

SECT. XXVI.] THEOPHILUS AT CONSTANTINOPLE. 219
tence of a heinous crime committed by him. His victim took
refuge in the monastery on Mount Nitria, where he had been
brought up. Theophilus commanded the neighbouring Bishops
to drive the principal Monks from their retreat, without assign
ing any cause. Four brothers, known by the surname of the
Long, Ammonius, Dioscorus, Eusebius, and Euthymius, men of banishes the
great learning and reputation among the Monks, presented thers,
themselves at Alexandria, conjuring their Prelate to inform them
wherein they had offended him : but they received the grossest
insults, and were taunted with vague accusations of Origenianism.
Theophilus went farther ; he prevailed on five Monks whom he
selected from Mount Nitria, by bestowing on them Eeclesiasti- and other
cal preferment, to accuse their brethren, and to sign memorials
which he had himself composed. Fortified with these docu
ments, he obtained the assistance of the civil power in dispos
sessing the Monks of their mountain : and they retired, to the
number of three hundred, into the surrounding provinces. Fifty
of them, whom with others, to the number of eighty, the malice
of Theophilus had pursued into Palestine, sought refuge at Con
stantinople; and casting themselves at the feet of S. John
Chrysostom, implored his protection against the unprincipled
attack of Theophilus.1
S. Chrysostom acted in this affair with great prudence. He
learnt, no less from the statement of the Monks themselves, than
from the confession of some clerks of Theophilus, then at Con
stantinople, that great wrong had been done them ; at the same
time, he was unwilling to come to an open rupture with the the Long
Bishop of Alexandria, not only for the sake of preserving the constanti.
peace of the Church, but because his own station was at this
time, through the machinations and violence of the Arians,
exceedingly insecure. He therefore lodged the fugitives in the
buildings attached to the Church of the Resurrection ; yet, while
he allowed them to perform their devotions in it, and took care
that their wants should be amply supplied, he would not admit
them to his communion.
In the mean time he wrote to Theophilus, beseeching him,
from friendship to himself, his spiritual son, to receive them. In
reply, Theophilus despatched the five monks whom he had
1 Sozomen, H. E. viii. 10.

220 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
suborned, and their accusations were laid before S. Chrysostom.
The exiled Monks, now thoroughly aroused, drew up a memorial
of the violence they had suffered, and appended to it several
grave accusations against their Bishop. Chrysostom wrote in
more urgent terms to Theophilus, and received an angry answer,
to the effect, that the Canons of Nicaea forbade one Bishop
to interfere with the concerns of another; that if the See of
Alexandria was to be tried, a Synod of its own Bishops was
the proper judge : and that the Bishop of Constantinople,
at so great a distance, could in no case be a proper au
thority. S. Chrysostom, thus finding interference useless,
contented himself with general exhortations to peace, and let the
matter rest. Theophilus, on the contrary, was determined that
it should not sleep. He had at one time regarded S. Epiphanius
as an Anthropomorphite ; but he was now glad to avail himself
obtains the °^ ^s authority.1 Knowing his hatred of Origenianism, he
ofES<?yhCe re(luested him to assemble the Bishops of Cyprus, to condemn
nius> the errors of that system, and then to send its Synodal letter
to S. Chrysostom. For, he hinted, the Bishop of Constantinople
was not thoroughly opposed to them; as he had evinced by
giving shelter to certain Egyptian monks condemned for holding
them, who had taken refuge with him. At the same time, he
wrote to S. Chrysostom, exhorting him to convene a Council for
the same purpose.
a.d. 402. S. Epiphanius, having done as he was requested, brought the
acts of the Cyprian Council in person to Constantinople;2 where
he would not hold communion with Chrysostom, who had pro
posed to receive him with great honour. The four Fathers whom
we have previously mentioned, not contented with the manner
in which their cause was espoused by S. Chrysostom, presented
a memorial to the Emperor, against Theophilus, and the latter
was required to present himself at Constantinople for the purpose
of justifying his proceedings. He did so ; and the result was
very different from that which the parties interested in promoting
his arrival had expected.
and goes to Theophilus brought with him many Egyptian Bishops : and
nopie.antl" some from India,3 by which Abyssinia is probably meant. He
was lodged for three weeks in one of the palaces of the Emperor :
1 Sozomen, H. E. viii. 14. " Socrates, H. E. vi. 12. ¦> Socrates, H.E. vi. 11.

SECT. XXVI.] THEOPHILUS AT CONSTANTINOPLE. 221
and during the whole of that time pointedly abstained from every
mark of communion with S. Chrysostom. The contrast be
tween the behaviour of the two Prelates to each other was indeed
remarkable. Chrysostom, although the Monks importuned him
continually to do them justice, would not take cognizance of an
affair out of his own province ; on the contrary, Theophilus
wrought night and day to effect the destruction of his rival.
Nor was he alone in his endeavours. The reform brought to
pass by S. Chrysostom in his Church, had of course raised many
enemies against him : already a deputation had been sent to
Antioch, in the hope of discovering some fault of his youth, for
which he might be deposed, — but to no purpose ; Acacius,
Bishop of Bersea, was incensed against him, and some Priests
and Deacons, and a few ladies of consideration, at court, whom
Chrysostom had reproved for their love of dress, and their false
hair, were eager to revenge themselves upon him. Theophilus
kept open house for all the discontented, lavished his money
where he thought it necessary, promised promotion to those who
should remain faithful to him, and even engaged to restore two
Deacons to their rank, one deprived for adultery, the other for
murder, if he should succeed in his project.1
He then drew up a memorial to himself, which he caused to
be signed by his partisans : it contained a number of false accu
sations, and only one true charge, which, even if proved, was
immaterial. The Empress Eudoxia was won over to the side of
the malcontents ; and by her means they doubted not that the
Emperor would lend a favourable ear to their representations.
Matters being thus ripe, Theophilus passed over to Chalcedon ;
the Bishop of that place, Cyrinus, an Egyptian, was known to be
an enemy of S. Chrysostom, and was unable, from an accidental
wound, to cross the strait to Constantinople. A Council of synod of
„ ¦ n 1 • • -r, ¦ the 0ak :
forty-five Bishops, of whom thirty-six were Egyptian, were as
sembled in a suburb of Chalcedon, known by the name of the
Oak : and twenty-nine articles of accusation were presented
against S. Chrysostom. He on the other hand assembled a
Council of forty Bishops in the hall of the Bishop's house. The
1 The prejudiced account which Ba- spect to Sozomen and Socrates is as
ronius gives of the whole affair, is one violent as his reasons for contradicting
of the greatest blemishes in this part them (see 402 I.) are weak.
of his annals. His language with re-

222

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[book

and ba
nished

he returns:

relation of this event belongs rather to the History of the
Church of Constantinople; Theophilus triumphed, and S.
s. chrysos- Chrysostom was deposed. He was forthwith banished by the
torn deposed ¦" * . J
Himperor s orders, and carried over into Asia. His exile, how
ever, only lasted a day. On the night of his banishment, an
earthquake occurred, which Eudoxia regarded as a warning of
the Divine anger. The people loudly exclaimed against the
Emperor, and against Theophilus ; orders were given for the
recall of Chrysostom : there was a burst of popular joy when he
crossed the strait ; and though unwilling to re-enter the city
till acquitted by a more numerous Council than that which had
condemned him, he was constrained by the people to resume his
ordinary episcopal functions. The sermon which he delivered
on the occasion, in which he compares his Church to Sarah, and
Theophilus to Pharaoh, is still extant.
In the mean time, the Council at the Oak were in no small
danger from the violence of the people. Theophilus, finding
Theophilus that there was a project of throwing him into the sea, embarked
in the middle of the night, and at the beginning of winter, when
the navigation of the Mediterranean was dangerous, and
hastened to Alexandria. He had previously reconciled himself
with the two superiors of Mount Nitria, Eusebius and Euthy
mius, who were the only survivors of the four whom he had
driven into exile. This very reconciliation, however, so easily
effected, excited still more strongly popular indignation against
Theophilus ; and that the rather because, after all his opposi
tion to the works of Origen, he did not himself desist from
reading them. This inconsistency was pointed out to him.
" The works of Origen," he replied, " are like a meadow, adorned
with various kinds of flowers. If I find anything useful or
beautiful, I gather it ; if I light on anything poisonous, I pass
it by."1 Ofthe whole of this proceeding, so disgraceful to Theo
philus, the Eastern historians say not one word.2
On his return, he wrote a long work against Chrysostom, in
which the language is said to have been worthy of the design.3
We know it from the description given of it by Facundus. In the
1 Le Quien, ii. 407A. stantinople, but assigns an entirely
2 Renaudot, p. 103. Eutychius, false cause as its origin, (p. 535.)
indeed, gives a slight account of a 3 Socrat. H.E. vi. 17.
dispute between Alexandria and Con-

SECT. XXVI.] THEOPHILUS AT CONSTANTINOPLE. 223
final exile and persecution of S. Chrysostom, however, Theophilus a.d. 403.
seems to have borne no part. Had the request of S. Innocent to
Honorius for a general Council been attended with success, it is
more than probable that the Bishop of Alexandria would have
paid the penalty of his violence by his deposition. Yet it is
fair to remember, that, had the grounds of S. Chrysostom's con
demnation been just, Theophilus was only exercising an undoubt
ed right in the deposition of a guilty Patriarch of Constantinople.
It is, however, but charitable to hope, that in the nine re
maining years of his life, his repentance was sincere. And there
are the more grounds for believing this, because of the willing
ness which he displayed, after the death of S. Chrysostom, to
communicate with the Bishops of his party,1 and his intercourse
with the illustrious Synesius. Synesius was a native of Cyrene : synesius
he had studied philosophy at Alexandria, where he also married, ptolemais :
Theophilus performing the ceremony. He gave himself up, on
his return to his own country, to his studies, and to the plea
sures of the chase :2 but his reputation was so great that it was
proposed to elevate him to the See of Ptolemais, which, as we
have seen in the Introduction, was at this time invested with his Legan-
Metropohtical, or rather Legantine dignity. To this herity:
offered the greatest resistance, declaring, in the first place, that
his faith on the subject of the Resurrection was not the same
with that of the Church : and in the second, that he by no
means proposed to himself to observe continence.3 Theophilus
convinced him that, on the first point, his creed was essentially
Catholic : and was content, in order to avail himself of his ser
vices, to overlook the second. And, in fact, this proceeding was
fully justified by the event. Synesius became an excellent
Prelate : and his letters, still extant, evince the respect and sub
mission he entertained for the decisions of the Evangelical chair.
We have already mentioned that Siderius had, by S. Athana
sius, been consecrated Bishop of the little town of Palaebisca.
He had no successor : and the See was again united with that
of Erythrum.* Paul, Bishop of the latter place, was exceed
ingly beloved : but Theophilus, thinking it more for the interest his mission
of the Church, that Palaebisca should once more be constituted wscaT
1 See Baronius, 407. xxxvi. 3 Synesius, Ep. 105. 246 D.
2 Synesius, Calvit. Encom. 66 D. * Synesius, Ep. 67. 208 A.

224 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
a separate See, despatched Synesius thither to arrange the
matter. The inhabitants of Palaebisca, while professing the
greatest respect for the decrees of the See of Alexandria, be
sought with the most pitiable entreaties that they might not be
deprived of the watchful tenderness of Paul. Women held up
their children to move compassion : and neither the promises
nor the threats of the legate could prevail over their deep-rooted
affection. He adjourned the assembly for four days; but the
next meeting presented the same scene ; and Synesius, quite
overcome by the affection of these poor people, advised Theo
philus not to insist on the point : and the latter consented.
But Synesius, on proper occasions, knew how to display the
most determined firmness.1 Andronicus of Berenice, a city of
Pentapolis, having purchased his situation by bribery, used it
to practise the most odious cruelties. He invented new instru
ments of torture : the hall of justice had become a mere place
his contest of punishment. The people complained to Synesius : and the
nkus. " latter warned the Governor, but uselessly, against the course he
was pursuing. Andronicus, instead of paying any attention to
this remonstrance, affixed to the doors of the church an edict
against the Priests. At length, as Synesius requested him to
set free a man of high birth, whom he was putting, without any
pretext, to the torture, Andronicus exclaimed to his prisoner,
" Your trust in the Church is hopeless : if you had clasped the
knees of Christ Himself, He should not deliver you." Having
heard this blasphemy, Synesius solemnly excommunicated its
author, and announced this proceeding in a letter to all the
Bishops of Pentapolis. Andronicus was terrified, and made a
profession of penitence : Synesius did not beheve him in earnest,
but yielding to the persuasion of Bishops more experienced than
himself, he re-admitted him to communion. The event justified
his suspicions ; Andronicus committed greater excesses than
before; and was finally disgraced and imprisoned. Synesius
interceded for him with the civil government, and procured the
alleviation of his punishment.
Theophilus In the next year, Theophilus fell sick of a lethargy, which
a.d'. 412! ' proved to be mortal. Just before his death, he exclaimed,
" Happy wert thou, Abbat Arsenius," (referring to one of the
1 Synesius, Ep. 72. 218 C. Ep. 89. 230 D. Ep. 58. 201 B.

SECT. XXVII.] EARLY PONTIFICATE OF S. CYRIL. 225
most illustrious of the Egyptian monks,) "to have had this hour
constantly before thine eyes !"
So died Theophilus, in the twenty-eighth year of his episco
pate. His faults are obvious to all, and admit of no defence.
His ambition, his intolerance of opposition, his total want of
principle, are displayed in his persecution of the Monks of
Mount Nitria, and of S. Chrysostom. But he had also virtues, for
which he was esteemed by his contemporaries, and held in
honour after his death.1 His care of his province was most
exemplary : his orthodoxy was never questioned ; his writings
were afterwards appealed to as authorities ; his ecclesiastical
regulations were judicious. His Paschal Cycle was celebrated in
antiquity.2 He created several new Bishoprics : but is said
neither to have been sufficiently careful of the character of those
whom he consecrated, nor of the Canon which forbade the erec
tion of a See in a hamlet or village. On the whole, he appears
to have possessed most of the requisites for a good Bishop,
e xcept the most important of all, — personal piety.3

SECTION XXVII.
THE EARLY PONTIFICATE OF S. CYRIL.
On the death of Theophilus, two claimants of the Chair of S. s. cym.
. Pat XXIV
Mark appeared. The one was Timotheus, Archdeacon of Alex- a.d. 412.
. A M. 128
andria, who was supported by the influence of the Prefect ; the
other Cyril, brother's, or as the Arabian writers will have it,
sister's,4 son to the deceased Bishop. The people were on the
point of sedition : but at length the party of Cyril, providen
tially for the Church, prevailed.5 After a vacancy of three days,
the neighbouring Prelates assembled,6 and laying the Gospels on
1 S. Leo, in one place, speaks of him There is a curious passage in Sollerius,
as "Sancta; memorise Theophilus"- p. 52*D, in which he seems to assert
and in another, couples him with S. that the Bollandists had some idea that
Athanasius and S. Cyril as " proba- Theophilus possessed a claim to be
tissimos praesules. ' ' placed in the Catalogue of the Saints.
2 Le Quien, ii. 407 A. 4 Renaudot, p. 108.
3 He is commemorated by the Coptic 6 Socrat. H. E. vii. 7.
Church on the eighth day of October. 6 Severus ap. Renaudot, p. 103.
Q

226

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[BOOK I.

His early
education :

'M

w

his great
authority.

he attacks
the Nova
tians,

the head of the Bishop elect, prayed over him, that God, Who
had chosen him, would strengthen him with the virtue necessary
for the well governing of His Holy Church.
Cyril had been brought up under Serapion, on Mount Nitria;
he had early displayed great diligence in study : and is said to
have known the New Testament by heart. It is the reproach of S.
Isidore of Pelusium,in a letter addressed to him, that his thoughts
were rather with the world than in the desert.1 After five years'
abode in Mount Nitria, his uncle summoned him to Alexandria,
where he was ordained, and where he expounded and preached
with great reputation. His favourite authors, if we may be-
/' lieve the Jac£hiie^Jiev«rus, were S. Dionysius of Alexandria,
S. Athanasius, S. Clement of Rome, and S. Basil. The works of
Origen he held in abhorrence, and would neither read them
himself, nor have any communication with those who did.
The power of the Alexandrian Bishop was now very great : it is
somewhat inconsistently, by writers of the Roman Communion,
termed excessive :2 and S. Cyril, from the first, seems to have
determined that it should lose nothing in his hands. Indeed
from the hasty and violent actions which distinguished the be
ginning of his episcopate, we should rather expect a repetition
of the outrages of Theophilus, than, — in spite of whatever
infidel or schismatical historians may choose to call it, — the
noble defence of the perfect Divinity of our Redeemer, which
has rendered his memory precious to the Church.
The See of Alexandria was not, at this time, in Communion
with that of Rome : the Western Church had vindicated the
character, and now revered the memory, of S. Chrysostom; Theo
philus, on the other hand, and, following in his steps, Cyril,
would not insert the name of that illustrious Prelate in the
sacred diptychs ; that is, in the list of those Bishops who were
commemorated in the office of the Holy Eucharist. And this
state of things lasted for several years.
Cyril's two earliest acts were by no means worthy of his
character or of his dignity. He not only closed the churches of
the Novatians, but deprived them of their vessels and treasures,
and confiscated the property of Theopemptus, the Bishop of that

1 S. Isid. Pel. Ep. i. 25.
2 See the § in Le Quien, ii. 362,

" Alexandrini Patriarchse auctoritas
Egypti Ecclesise exitialis."

SECT. XXVII.] EARLY PONTIFICATE OF S. CYRIL. 227
sect. He next exerted himself against the Jews ; and certainly
not without great provocation. Hierax, one of his most zealous
auditors, was in the theatre, while the Governor was transacting
in that place some civil business.1 The Jews who were present
cried out, that he came for the purpose of exciting sedition, a.d. 415.
Orestes, the Governor, had long been offended at the enormous
power assumed by the Bishop, and the more so, as it encroached
on his own : he was glad therefore of any excuse for venting his
anger on Cyril, and having arrested Hierax, caused him to be
scourged publicly on the spot. Cyril sent for the principal
persons among the Jews, threatened them severely, and charged
them to beware how they again excited popular feeling against
the Christians. The Jews, in their turn indignant, concerted a
general massacre oftheir adversaries ; and, on an appointed night,
having taken care previously to distinguish themselves so as to be
easily recognizable by each other, gave the alarm in all quarters of
the city at once, that the great church was on fire. The Christians
rushed forth in large numbers to give their assistance : the J ews
fell upon them, and despatched not a few. On the following
day, Cyril, with a large body of his adherents, and the cor
poration of the Parabolani, whose office it was to visit the sick and Jews-
in time of plague or other mortality," and who were thus
familiarized with scenes of horror, attacked their synagogues,
drove the Jews themselves out of the city, and gave up
their houses to a general sack. Orestes was justly indig
nant that Cyril should thus have taken the law into his own
hands : and was besides fearful that the commercial prosperity
of the city would receive a blow from the compulsory exile of so
many of its inhabitants. He drew up a representation of the
case for the Emperor's consideration ; and the Bishop forwarded
a counter-memorial. But the latter some short time afterwards, with ores6.
probably thinking that he had carried matters with too high a
hand, requested to be reconciled with Orestes; the latter ob
stinately refused. The Monks of Nitria, hearing this, came in
a crowd to the city, and attacked the Governor in his chariot ;
and one of them, named Ammonius, wounded him severely with
a stone. The culprit was arrested, condemned, and executed ;
Cyril ordered that his name should be changed to Thaumasius,
1 Socrat. H.E. vii. 26, 13, and Valesius's note.
Q 2

228 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
(admirable, J and that he should be honoured as a Martyr. But
the more sober part of his people were opposed to the step : and
in the course of a few years, Cyril himself was glad to let this
monstrous canonization sink into oblivion.
nypatia?' It would have been well had matters stopped here. But the
people, imagining that a lady of high birth, celebrated as one
of the first philosophers of the day, and the correspondent of
Synesius, named Hypatia, was the chief hindrance to the re
conciliation of Orestes with their Bishop, attacked her, headed
by one Peter, a reader, in the street, dragged her into the Caesarea,
tore her in pieces, and burnt her remains in a public place. This
audacious crime deservedly threw a dark cloud over the reputation
of Cyril, which was not dispersed for some time ; and was the
occasion of a severe law from Constantinople, to prevent for the
future the like excesses, as well as to restrain the number of the
Parabolani, and to deprive the Patriarch of their nomination.
The name of S. Chrysostom was inserted in the diptychs
about this time, first at Antioch, and then at Constantinople;
Atticus, Bishop of the latter See, wrote to Cyril, excusing him
self for the act, and exhorting him to imitate it. Cyril blamed
what had been done, and positively refused to follow the example
of the other great Sees. S. Isidore of Pelusium, hearing of
this, wrote in strong terms to Cyril, exhorting him not to
imitate the passionate violence of his uncle, nor to let private
hatred, under the mask of piety, entail a perpetual schism on
s.cyrii in ithe Churches. The other yielded to this remonstrance, and, it
communion . *¦
with Rome, 'is said, to a supernatural vision : and thus Alexandria came
once more into Communion with Rome.1
The Pelagian heresy made but few converts at Alexandria;
and S. Cyril therefore took no prominent part in defending the
Doctrine of Divine Grace. He was principally employed in the
quiet government of the Church, and in the composition of some
of his voluminous writings. Among these we may mention the
earhest of his Paschal Homilies, of which we have twenty-nine,
from a.d. 414 to a.d. 442 :2 his seventeen books on "Worship in
1 Nic. 14, 28. Baronius, 412. lxiii. and some two years later. See Baron.
It seems better to refer the reception of 412, xxiv: and Bolland. Jan. 8, S.
the name of S. Chrysostom, with Theo- Atticus, viii.
phanes, to the year 419 : although 2 See Aubert, Prolegom. Op. S.
some have placed it seven years earlier; Cyril, v. ii.

SECT. XXVII.] EARLY PONTIFICATE OF S. CYRIL. 229
Spirit and in Truth," his Glaphyra, or commentary on the
Pentateuch ; and those on Isaiah, the Minor Prophets, and S.
John. He also confuted the treatise of Julian the Apostate
against Christianity : and the remark which Severus makes on
this subject is an amusing proof how little dependence can be
placed onhis accounts. Julian's treatise, says he, was worse than the
writings of Origen or Porphyry; which is the same thing as if an
historian of the present day were to declare that the works of Vol
taire were more dangerous than those of Bishop Taylor or Gibbon.
It would seem that years were necessary to mellow down the
spirit of S. Cyril, before he could be a fit instrument in the
Hand of God for the maintenance of the Faith, in the great
contest to which he was to be called.
Egyptian monasticism still maintained its high sanctity : and ^nasti"
continued to produce recluses whose names are had in cism-
veneration by the whole Church. Of these, Arsenius, the same
who was envied by the dying Theophilus, stood forth at this
time the most illustrious. A Deacon of the Roman Church, he
had been entrusted with the education of the young Arcadius :
and having irritated the Prince by inflicting on him corporal
punishment, escaped to Alexandria, and at length took refuge
in the desert of Scete, where he received the apologies and for
gave the anger, of Arcadius. Here he dwelt for forty years,
distinguished above all other monks by his love of solitude.
When that part of Egypt was ravaged by the barbarians, he re
tired into another wilderness : where he lived fifteen years longer.
It is a strange and almost incredible picture that Cassian draws, cassian
. . , -i-iiT-i- • t visits the
who visited the most celebrated Egyptian monasteries towards Monaste-
the close of the fourth century. On the mountains of S.
Antony five thousand monks followed his example, and venerated
his memory. Near Hermopolis, S. Apollonius was charged with
the spiritual conduct of five hundred recluses : S. Isidore, in the
Thebais, with that of a thousand. At Antinous, Dioscorus in
structed twice that number : five thousand occupied the Desert
of Nitria : five hundred that of Cells. The Rule of Tabenna
was followed in most of the Egyptian monasteries : twice a year
the monks met, or, as it would afterwards have been termed,
held a chapter of their order : at Easter, and in August ; and
the Easter Communion was sometimes attended by fifty thousand

230 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK I.
monks. These monasteries consisted, for the most part, of
about thirty houses : each house contained a certain number of
brethren, generally about forty, who all wrought at the same
trade : and these were distributed by three and three in cells.
The houses were distinguished by the letters of the alphabet,
and the inmates of the house wore that letter worked on their
habit. Three or four houses formed a tribe, — that is, a body
that during one week took, in turns, the manual labour, the
more immediate service of the Church, and every other branch
of monastic discipline. Their usual food was biscuit and water :
of the latter they took two of six ounces each, one at three in
the afternoon, the other at sunset. This quantity of food was
not easily eaten by the novices, but was found necessary, after
long trial. On Festivals, the first meal was taken at noon :
but no alteration was made in the quantity or quality of the
food. They met for prayer at night-fall, and at midnight. It con
sisted of twelve Psalms, recited by one of their number, stand
ing, the rest sitting on low stools ; for their labours and fastings
did not permit them to stand. At the end of each Psalm, they
rose, continued awhile in mental prayer, prostrated themselves
for a moment, and again sat. To the Psalms were added two
lessons, one from the Old, and one from the New Testament :
except on Saturday, Sunday, and in the Paschal Season, when
they were both from the New Testament. They communicated
on Saturday and Sunday morning : on other mornings they did
not meet for prayer, but continued at work in their cells, and
engaged in mental devotion.
But the nearest approach to Heaven which was ever made by
the Church Militant, was to be found at Oxyrinchus. It was a
large city : but the monks and consecrated virgins formed the
greater part of the population. The number of the former was
ten, of the latter twenty thousand. There was neither heretic
nor Pagan in this city. It contained, besides the oratories of
the recluses, twelve churches : the praise of God continually
resounded in its streets ; and by the order of the magistrates,
there were police continually on the look out for the poor and
the strange, who were constantly supplied and lodged by the
wealthier citizens.

BOOK II.

THE RISE OF THE NESTORIAN HERESY,
A.D. 428,
TO THE DEPOSITION OF DIOSCORUS,
AND THE GREAT SCHISM,
A.D. 451.

BXeVuJ Ta, davfiaTa, Kai avaKTjpvTTia Trjv QeoTr/Ta' opw Ta TraGr), Kai
ovk apvovjiai Tjjv 'AvOpWTTOTrjTa. 'AXX' o 'EfifiavovrjX (ftvaeuis [lev irvXas
avevJ^ev lis avOpuJ7T09, irapQevias he KXeiOpa ov Biepprj^ev ws Geos* dXX
ovtws 6K [lijTpas igrjXBev, u>s Si aKOrjs elarjXGeV oviias eryevvyOr], lis
<jvve\ii<fa6'ri ' a7ra9ivs GiaijXOev, a(f)6upTW$ e^yjXOe.
S. Proclus, Homilia in Incamationem Verbi.

233

SECTION I.
NESTORIUS PREACHES AND DEFENDS HIS HERESY.
We now approach the critical period of Alexandrian History.
We shall see the Church of Egypt, in the brief space of twenty-
three years, stand forth the foremost champion of Cathohc Truth,
and its deadliest enemy ; — we shall see it overthrowing ration
alism, and succumbing to mysticism : we shall find it at length
rent into two opposing Communions, both continuing to this
day, and thenceforth declining, till the second See in the Chris
tian Church sunk to an unassignable position among Cathohc
Bodies, till its succession of Patriarchs has become little more
than a name, and the region once so illustrious for Bishops and
Martyrs, is almost swallowed up by the doctrines of the False
Prophet of Mecea.
We are bound therefore to dwell more minutely on the two
controversies which distracted the Church concerning the In
carnation of the Son of God, than we did on that, which while
its subject-matter may be held of more importance, left no trace
behind it ; — the Arian heresy. It would seem as if rationahsm,
in its strong-hold, Antioch, unable longer to deny the True
Divinity of the Word, sought another outlet whereby it might
trouble the Church. Of the rise of the new heresy we are
now to write : and it will be necessary for awhile to leave Alex
andria, that we may trace the controversy to its source.1
Sisinnius, the successor of S. Atticus on the Throne of Constan- Disputed
succession at
tmople, departed this life, after a Pontificate of less than two constanti-
years, on the twenty-fourth day of December, a.d. 427.2 The
choice of his successor was a question of much difficulty. A
large number of the clergy were in favour of Proclus, the
Metropolitan of Cyzieum, who is reckoned among the Saints ;
but Philip, a Presbyter of the Church of Constantinople, had
1 It is hardly necessary to say how and diligence of Gamier, in his invalu-
much, in the first half of the following able edition of Marius Mercator.
book, we are indebted to the learning 2 Socrat. H.E. vii. 26.

234 patriarchate of Alexandria. [book ii.
also his partizans, and there seemed but little likelihood that the
contending factions would be able to agree in the election. Theo
dosius, desirous of composing the difference by the nomination
of a third party, cast his eyes for that purpose on the Church
of Antioch ; both because its Presbyters were at that time cele
brated for learning and eloquence; and doubtless also because
the memory of S. John Chrysostom seemed to render such a
choice popular and full of promise.
character of Among the clergy of Antioch, Nestorius had the highest
Nestorius. ° bJ ' . . °
reputation. A native of the little town of Germanicia, he had
embraced the monastic life in the house of S. Euprepius near
Antioch. On entering the Priesthood, he was made Catechist of
the Church of that city : and in that capacity was noted for the
facility with which he exposed and combated the heresies of the
day. He had studied under Theodore of Mopsuestia ; and was
imbued by him with those unsound principles of rationalising
tendency which, a century earher, might have made him a ready
disciple of Arius, but which now, without at present assuming,
either in his master or in himself, any very definite form, floated
round and obscured the Doctrine of the Incarnation. His learn
ing was not deep : but his asceticism, his solitary life, his decisive
and dogmatical manner, and above all, his great power of
extempore eloquence, rendered him the admiration of the citizens
of Antioch. He was an imitator of S. Chrysostom in his style
and sentiments, and employed himself principally, and with
sufficient effect, in attacking the Arian and Apollinarian heresies.
It has been the fashion to regard him as a man who, having
thoroughly digested his own system, simulated asceticism, and
affected piety, for the sake of attaining an eminence whence he
might propagate and support it. But it is unnecessary to attri
bute any such well-formed plan to one who, in truth, seems
neither to have been possessed of talent nor powers of dis
simulation, to render it effectual. It is sufficient to regard
him as weak, and ambitious, but as much inferior to Arius in
power as superior to him in morality; one who regarded the
orthodox with a great degree of contempt, as illogical and super
stitious ; and who was determined, if the occasion should present
itself, to propagate those purer and more enlightened principles
which he believed himself to possess.

SECT. I.] NESTORIUS DEFENDS HIS HERESY. 235
On receiving the Emperor's summons to Constantinople, he He is conse-
chose for his companion Anastasius, a fellow Priest, who was Patriarch,
imbued with the same sentiments as himself, and of whose a.d. 428.
assistance he afterwards availed himself. His nomination was
popular ; and he was consecrated amidst a large concourse of
Prelates, Priests, and Laity. A speech which he shortly after
wards made in public to Theodosius, was considered at least as
derogatory from his humility as expressive of his zeal. " Give
me, 0 Emperor," he exclaimed, " a world freed from heresy,
and I will bestow on you the Kingdom of Heaven as your
reward. Assist me in quelling heretics ; and I will assist you in
putting the Persians to flight."
Nor did his somewhat intemperate zeal confine itself to words. ™^iolent
Only five days after his consecration, he demolished a church of April15-
the Arians. Its possessors set fire to it ; the flames spread ;
and had not the wind providentially changed, that quarter of the
city would have been reduced to ashes. The populace, from
this circumstance, bestowed on their Prelate the name of " the
incendiary," and the fact was afterwards remembered and com
mented on. He attacked with similar violence Macedonians,
Pelagians, and Novatians ; and shortly afterwards procured a law May 30,
from the Emperor against all heretics. A deed of at least equal
merit was his extinguishing the last spark of hatred against the
memory of S. John Chrysostom, whose name, though precious
among the citizens of Constantinople, had up to this time been
regarded with jealousy and dislike by the Court.
Whatever might have been the opinions, and the general sys
tem of Nestorius, his orthodoxy seems to have been unsus
pected for seven months after his ordination. A circumstance
then occurred which brought him into direct collision with the
imphcit teaching of the Church.
Anastasius, the Presbyter whom we have already mentioned, a"^*^
preaching in the great church, and in the presence of Nesto- **t0ty[j}ry
rius, asserted that the Blessed Virgin Mary had no right to the Mother of
title of Mother of God : for, said he, she was a human creature, November
and Deity cannot be born of humanity. A tumult instantly
arose in the church, and the preacher was compelled to pause ;
on which a. Bishop, Dorotheus by name, and one of the most
intimate friends of Nestorius, rose in his place, and said, in a

236 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK II.
loud voice, " If any man affirm Mary to be the Mother of God,
let him be anathema." Nestorius, in the increasing confusion,
shewed by his silence that he approved the new doctrine ; and,
not content with thus negatively supporting it, he prepared to
uphold it by most vigorous measures.1
Nestorius On Christmas Day, the great church, as usual, was thronged
the new with worshippers ; and Nestorius openly stood forward the
Dec. 25. patron of the new heresy.2 After a few common-place ob
servations on the general providence of God, he proceeded to
dwell on the Incarnation as its most wonderful display. Man,
he observed, the image of Divine Nature, had been attacked
and corrupted by the devil: for man, he proceeded (using a
metaphor happy from its appositeness to the then state of
things), the King of Kings grieved, as for a violated statue of
his own, and by forming a nature, without human seed, in the
womb of the Virgin, brought to pass by a man the restoration
of humanity." Hath God," he continued, " a Mother ? Then may we
excuse Paganism for giving mothers to their divinities. Then
was Paul a liar when he testified concerning Christ, that He
was " without father, without mother, without descent." No :
Mary was not the Mother of God. For "that which is born of
the flesh is flesh ; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit."
A creature brought not forth Him Who is uncreated ; the
Father begat not of the Virgin an Infant God, the Word ; for
in the beginning was the Word, as John saith : a creature
bore not the Creator, but rather a Man who was the organ of
Deity. For the Holy Ghost created not God the Son : and
' that which is conceived in her, is of the Holy Ghost' ; but
He fabricated of the Virgin a Temple, wherein God the Word
should dwell. God was incarnate, but never died ; yea, rather
elevated him in whom He was incarnate : He descended to raise
that which had fallen, but He fell not Himself. 
On account of the employer, then, I venerate the vestment
1 This account seems to be, as Gar- that Dorotheus first propagated it, and
nier thinks it, the best way of recon- that with an anathema.
ciling two opposing stories — the one of 2 A translation of the sermon, or
Socrates, (H. E. vii. 32,) that Anasta- rather of an abridgement of it, is given
sius first preached the new heresy : the by Marius Mercator, (Opp. Ed. Gar-
other of S. Cyril, (Epist. ad Acacium,) nier, P. ii. p. 5.)

SECT. I.] NESTORIUS DEFENDS HIS HERESY. 237
which He employed : on account of that which is concealed, I
adore that which appears."
The horror which these doctrines occasioned were so exces
sive, that, even in the presence of that august assembly, there
were not wanting some who openly expressed their indignation.
A monk was bold enough to oppose the celebration, by Nes
torius, of the Holy Mysteries ; and, as the reward of his zeal,
he was publicly scourged, and driven into exile. Yet this vio
lence was without effect on the popular mind ; and the greater
part of the pious inhabitants of Constantinople abstained from
the communion of their patriarch.
At the commencement of the following year, Nestorius de- his second
o J 3 sermon :
hvered his second sermon in defence of his dogma. The mode- ^^V'
ration of tone in the second, as compared with the first sermon,
is remarkable ; and the same observation is also applicable to
the third, delivered a few days subsequently, possibly on the
Feast of the Epiphany.
In this discourse, while he applauds the piety and reverence Ms third:
of his flock, he severely rebukes them for their want of a proper
knowledge of God. From hence, he proceeds to establish the
two Natures of Christ, on which his sentiments are sufficiently
orthodox and temperate; and then dilates on the Scriptural
argument, which he conceived to he against His One Person.
It is never, he observes, said in the Gospel that God was born,
or that God died : the term employed on such occasions is
Jesus, or Christ, or Lord. This point he endeavours at
length to establish ; and, singularly enough, in the course of
his argument, he reveals how low were his views on the subject
of the Holy Eucharist. His conclusion is this : — " Say of Him
That assumed, that He is God ; and of that which was assumed,
that it was the form of a servant. Then infer the dignity of
the union, because the authority of the two is common — be
cause the dignity of the two is the same ; and while the natures
remain separate, confess the oneness of their conjunction."
The seventeenth Paschal Epistle of S. Cyril was read, as the xvn. Pas-
custom was, on the Feast of the Epiphany. It is certain, there- of s. cyrii?
fore, that if the first sermon of Nestorius were delivered on the
preceding Christmas Day, S. Cyril would not have seen it ; but
he might very well have heard of the occurrences at the end of

238 patriarchate of Alexandria. [book ii.
November, and of the anathema then pronounced by Doro
theus. It is not wonderful, then, that he should devote
the homily to a discussion of the Doctrine of the Incarnation.
It must be confessed that, in some of his statements, the writer
goes to the very verge of Catholic truth ; and it is almost ne
cessary to receive them with a tacit explanation of his words in
an orthodox sense. Among these passages, his explanation of
the text, " Jesus increased in wisdom and stature," stands pre
eminent.1 The name of Nestorius, and all allusions to Con
stantinople, are suppressed.
In that city a spirit of determined opposition was also awakened;
and, as has been so often the case in a holy cause, it began with
the laity, and, through Monks and Priests, finally communicated
Eusebius at- itself to Bishops. Eusebius, then an advocate at Constantinople,
tacks Nes- .
tonus: afterwards Bishop of Dorylaeum, put forth a short pamphlet, in
which he accused Nestorius of renewing the heresy of Paul of
about Samosata. " I conjure those who shall read these lines" —
January 15. J
thus the writer commences it, — " by the Most Holy Trinity,
to communicate it to all Bishops, Priests, Deacons, Readers,
and laymen, residing in Constantinople, to the evident confusion
of the heretic Nestorius, as evincing him to hold the sentiments
of Paul of Samosata, condemned a hundred and sixty years
since by Cathohc Bishops."
ami is foi- While this composition was the principal topic of conversation
lowed by . . r . f .
Marius Mer- in the city, Marius Mercator, a resident in Constantinople, and a
about man of considerable power in religious controversy, brought out a
pamphlet on " the difference between the heresy of Nestorius, and
those of Paul of Samosata, Ebion, Photinus, and Marcellus ;"
and this treatise was also conducive towards the exposure of the
new teaching. By degrees, the Priests took up the defence of
the faith ; and one or two who had ventured in the church of
Discontent S. Irene-next-the-Sea, to inveigh against Nestorius, were,
at Constan- . o o j j
tinopie. by his authority, silenced. " We have an Emperor," exclaimed
February 15. flje populace, " but no Bishop." Complaints were brought
forward in all quarters against the Patriarch : he was charged
with want of charity towards the poor, covetousness, and in-
1 S. Cyril, Opp. v. ii. 230 B. It is should place it in a.d. 430. Pagi
singular that Gamier, contrary to the remarks this also, 429. xiv. Fleury
date affixed by this letter to Easter, xxv. 8.

SECT. I.] NESTORIUS DEFENDS HIS HERESY. 239
dolence ; and threats were heard of casting into the sea one who
had now manifested himself to be a wolf in sheep's clothing.
Nestorius, alarmed at the turn which affairs were taking,
threw himself on the Emperor's protection ; and Theodosius took
care to repress by an exertion of his authority, the murmurs of
the people.
The Festival of the Annunciation drew on : and Proclus, s- Procius
' . preaches on
whom we have already mentioned as one of the candidates for the 'ncar-
J _ nation.
the Throne of Constantinople, was appointed to preach on that Marcn 25-
day. He had been consecrated Metropolitan of Cyzicum by
Sisinnius : but the clerks of that church claimed the election,
and would not admit the Patriarch's nominee. Proclus there
fore resided at Constantinople as a Priest attached to the great
church : and his eloquence pointed him out as an appropriate
preacher to address so numerous an audience on so august an
occasion. Nestorius was present in person : and it is easy to
judge what his feelings must have been when Proclus delivered
his magnificent oration on " the Virgin Mother of God " : an
oration which, if we except a few homilies of S. John Chrysos
tom, finds no match in the treasures of Oriental Theology. It
was the Festival of the Virgin, he said, that had called that
assembly together; — that Virgin to whom earth and ocean
emulously offered their best and their noblest gifts ; she who
was typified by the bush that burnt with fire, and was not con
sumed : — the Mother and the Maiden, — the Bridge from God
to man ; — in whose womb the incircumscript God found an
habitation ; who embraced Him Whom the Heaven of Heavens
cannot contain. " God," continued the orator, " was born of a
woman, but not mere God : — man was born of her, — but not
man unmixed : and He made the gate of ancient sin the gate
of safety, and where the Serpent by disobedience had diffused
his poison, the Word, by obedience, formed a living Temple.
Be not, 0 man, ashamed of that Birth ; — it was the means of
thy Salvation. If God had not been born, He could not have
died; if He had not died He could not have destroyed him
that had the power of death, that is, the devil. It is no injury
to the architect to remain in the building which he himself has
raised; it is no pollution to the potter to renew the clay
which he himself has formed ; it contaminates not the In-

240 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK II.
contaminable to proceed from the Womb of the Virgin. In
that Womb the deed of our common liberty was engrossed ; in
that Womb the panoply against death was fabricated. There,
as in a Temple, God was made a Priest ; — not changing the
nature that He had, but out of compassion putting on that
which is after the order of Melchisedech. The Word was made
Flesh, although the Jews believe not the truth; God put on the
form of man, though the Pagans deny the miracle : and for this
cause the Mystery is lo the Jews a stumbling block, and to the
Greeks foolishness. If the Word had never dwelt in the
womb, Flesh could never have ascended the Throne. If God
had abhorred to enter the Virgin, it had been an injury to the
Angels to minister to man. We speak not of a deified man ; we
confess an Incarnate God. He That is in his essence without a
Mother, is in the earthly economy of grace without a Father ;
or else how shall we say with Paul, without father, loithout
mother ? If He be purely man, He is not without a Mother :
if He be purely God, He is not without a Father ; but now He,
remaining one and the same, is without a Mother as the Former,
and without a Father as the formed." Thence Proclus takes
occasion to dwell on the debt which human nature owed, and of
its utter inability to pay : a debt which could be paid by none
but God, and which God accordingly condescended to pay. If
Christ be one, and the Word another, we have no longer a
Trinity, but a Quaternity. This were to rend the tunic of the
dispensation, woven from the top throughout ; this were to be a
disciple of Alius, and with him to divide the Essence ; — this
were to sever the Unity, and to be ourselves severed from God.
He came to save, but it was necessary also that He should suffer:
and how could both these things be ? A mere man could not
save ; a mere God could not suffer : but He That was God by
essence, became man : and that which was, saved ; and that
which was made, suffered. " I see," concludes the Saint, " His
miracles, and I proclaim His Deity : I behold His sufferings,
and I deny not His Humanity : Emmanuel opened the gates
of nature as man ; but burst not the bars of virginity as God.
He so came forth from the womb of Mary, as by hearing He
entered, [when she heard the Angelic Salutation] : so was He born,
as He was conceived: without human passion He entered: without

SECT. I.] NESTORIUS DEFENDS HIS HERESY. 241
human corruption He came forth -,1 as saith the Prophet Ezekiel:
This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall
pass out thereat : because the Lord, the God of Israel, hath
passed out thereat, therefore shall it be shut. Behold the mani
fest setting forth of S. Mary, the Mother of God. Henceforth
let contradiction be at an end : that, being enlightened with the
knowledge of the Holy Scriptures, we may obtain the Kingdom
of Heaven for ever and ever."
As soon as the preacher had concluded, the loud and long-
continued applause of the congregation gave token that his
sentiments on the controverted question were entirely their own.
Nestorius, with great presence of mind, relying on his power of
extempore discourse, rose in his place, and commenced an
address to the people. Though his name had not been men
tioned, nor his office hinted at, by Proclus, the allusions to his
three sermons were frequent and manifest ; and the turn given
to the text, without Father, toithout Mother, sufficiently showed
the person whom Proclus had in view. It must be allowed that
the answer of Nestorius, considering the circumstances under
which he spoke, — the eloquent discourse that had preceded, the
infuriated multitude that surrounded, and, above all, the badness
of the cause that he supported, evinces a high degree of coolness,
judgment, and tact. No wonder, he began, that these applauses
are considered due to the praises of Mary : the Temple of the
Lord's Flesh exceeds all praise. Still, the dignity of the Son
of God ought not to be sacrificed to the honour of a creature.
To say that God was born of Mary is to give a handle of unbe
lief to the Pagans : to say that God was joined to the Son of Mary
is firm and impregnable ground. To affirm with him who had
just spoken that Christ, Who was born of the Virgin, was
neither purely God, nor purely man, was indeed a strange doc
trine. Surely the people of Constantinople were not inferior in
theological knowledge to those of Antioch : surely they would
not endure to be told, as they had just been, that " God was
made a High Priest." The words of the Angels to the Apostles
as they stood gazing after their ascended Lord were beyond all
' We must thus translate, unless we of human passion He entered: without
would rather read, apBdpruis ehyXBev, the suffering of human birth He came
otiraflws e|5jA0e, Without the corruptign forth.
11

242 patriarchate of Alexandria. [book ii.
controversy. This same Jesus, Who was an hungered, Who
died, Who bore the Cross, He shall so come in like manner
as ye have seen Him go into Heaven. If the Quickener of
all could die, where is He That shall give life to us ? To confuse
the Persons of our Lord is to put arms into the hands of the
Arians : the Catholic Truth is far otherwise to be enunciated.
He who inhabited the Temple is one thing ; the Temple which
He inhabited, another. It is the Lord's own declaration.
Destroy this Temple, and in three days I ivill raise it again.
By Nature, then, Christ is Two : in so far as He is the Son, One.
To confound this with Photinianism was a mistake unworthy of a
serious confutation : it was the only doctrine by which the error
of Photinus could be opposed. Answer not, a fool according
to his folly. The blandishments of eloquence, the popularity of
a dogma, must never be suffered to stand in the way of diligence
in examination, and the glory of Truth.
There can be no doubt that this sermon was not without its
effect : and Nestorius resolved on re-stating at greater length,
Nestorius what he had then briefly touched. The three statements of
snprodus. Proclus, that S. Mary is entitled to the name of Mother of God, —
that God was made a High Priest, — that God suffered and died, —
afforded Nestorius materials for three elaborate sermons. They
would appear to have been delivered on the Saturday and Sunday
following Easter, and on the next Sunday.1 In the first he endea
vours to explain how the term " Mother of God," may be used
in an inoffensive sense, while he alleges that its employment
may lead the way to heresy and blasphemy. " I have learnt,"
he concludes, "from Scripture that God passed through the
Virgin Mother of Christ ; that God was born of her, I have
never learnt. Holy Scripture never asserts this ;— there we are
told that Christ, that the Son, that the Lord, was born of
1 All that is known for certain is, tunity, as we have stated ; but the third,
that they were delivered in the three which was very numerously attended by
Synaxes immediately succeeding Easter. the friends of Nestorius, and looked for-
Now these took place on Saturdays, ward to as his great effort, would there-
Sundays, and the Festivals of the Prin- fore most probably be reserved for the
cipal Martyrs. But there were none of Sunday. Still Garnier's words are very
the latter at that season ; the first two true : " vix definire licet, quo quisque
sermons were therefore probably pro- die sermo sit dictus."
nounced at the earliest possible oppor- ,

SECT. I.] NESTORIUS DEFENDS HIS HERESY. 243
the Virgin. Let us all confess this ; for he that receives not
the words of Scripture, when he has heard them, is wretched
indeed. Rise, take the Child and His Mother. It is an
Archangel that speaks. An Archangel1 may be supposed to be
acquainted with the Incarnation better than yourself. And he
arose, and took the Child and His Mother. It saith not, he
arose, and took God and His Mother." And with this notably
inapposite quotation, the sermon, as we now have it, abruptly
ends. The next sermon of Nestorius, founded on the text, " Con
sider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ
Jesus," vehemently attacked the statement of Proclus, that God
was made a High Priest. It contains little more attempt at
argument than the stringing together of several passages which
the author thought favourable to his views : and while, like the
preceding, it suppresses the name of Proclus, it freely deals out
to him the charges of madness, of heresy, of evident opposition
to Scripture. Finally, the third and most famous sermon con
tradicted the dogma of the Birth and Death of God. It comr
mences by a statement of the opprobrium, under which Nesto
rius then laboured, — and for which he seized this opportunity
of congratulating himself. "Nothing," says he, "is more wretched
than the state of that shepherd who boasts that he has received
the praises of wolves. For, if he desired to please them, and
chose to be loved by them, woe to his flock ! None can please
at the same time sheep and wolves ; and therefore do I contemn
the voices of those that reproach me, and employ against them
the words of our Lord, ' Generation of vipers, how can ye, being
evil, speak good things?' " Such language shewed that no com
promise was to be looked for : and the whole tenor of the
discourse evinced the same thing. In its doctrine and its argu
ments it in no respect differed from those that had preceded it.
It was probably with a view of strengthening his cause by
' Thepassagestands.intheGreektext read, from a comparison of the two,
thus. AKtij tSiv a77€/Aaj' jj cpavii, Tixa AStti tZv i.yyeXay ti <f>uvf). Ta^a Se
Se p.aXX6v aov. Ta Kara t^v yevvr)tnv ^SMok, k.t.A. The passage is only
ijSeaav oi apxdyyeXoi. Marius Mer- referred to, not quoted, in S. Cyril's
cator translates, Hsec angelorum vox Contradictions, (torn. ii. 10, C. Ed.
est, imo tua. Fortasse generationem Aubert, 1638).
Ipsius noverat Archangelus. We would
R 2

Circ. April

244 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK. II.
spreading his dogma beyond his own Dicecese, that Nestorius
dispersed copies of his sermons, more especially of his first
Homily, in all quarters'. They by this means reached Egypt,
and falhng into the hands of some Monastic bodies were read
and received. Cyril had hitherto taken no active part in
the controversy that was raging at Constantinople. But
he now came forward with a Letter to the monks, in which
he stated and vindicated the True Doctrine of the Incar
nation. We feel immediately that a new turn is given to
the controversy. Cyril was an antagonist from whom Nes
torius must instinctively have shrunk. There is no laboured
panoply of culled texts and adjusted quotations : the Bishop of
Alexandria seems imbued with the whole analogy of the Faith,
and evidently perceives, almost by instinct, that it and the new
doctrine could not co-exist. And yet it would also appear that
Cyril was not as yet fully awake to the danger with which the
Church was threatened. For he speaks, in one passage, of the
desirableness of leaving a question so difficult in the obscurity
with which it had pleased God to invest it. After bringing
forward the authority of Athanasius, for the term which Nesto
rius had condemned, he proceeds to argue against those who,
from the silence of Nictea, object to the word Theotocos. After
reciting the Creed, without its Constantinopohtan additions, he
deduces from that the orthodoxy of the common behef as to the
Incarnation. To call S. Mary the Mother of Christ, says he, is
to bestow on her a term which, in a sense, might be applied to
others : as it is written, Touch not My Christs, and do My
Prophets no harm. He then dwells on the objection, that
S. Mary was in no sense the Mother of the Divine Nature of
our Lord; and proves that in consequence of the intimate
union between the Two Natures, which, however, he in no way
confounds, (and we may see Divine Providence in his clearness,
when we remember the heresy that was, at no great distance of
time, to arise on this point,) what may be predicated of one may
be, and in Holy Scripture frequently is, predicated of both.
And from many passages both of the Old and New Testament1
1 The texts on which he principally xxxv. 4 ; xl. 10 : S. John x. 15 : He-
dwells, are — Psalm xiv. 7 ; cviii. 1 : brews iii. 1 : Philipp. ii, 6, 7.
Hebrews i. 6 : S. Matt. xvii. 25 : Isa.

SECT. I.] NESTORIUS DEFENDS HIS HERESY. 245
the writer makes manifest, that Christ was not a Deiferous
Man, but Incarnate God. The concluding words of the Epistle
were, in after times, perverted by the Monophysites to an here
tical meaning : but they contain in themselves nothing besides
Truth.1 " Since then, according "to nature, He is truly God
and King, since we read expressly that they crucified the Lord
of Glory, how can we doubt that the Holy Virgin is to be named
the Mother of God ? Thou, therefore, adore Emmanuel as truly
One, nor, after the conjunction once made, again sever Him
into Two. Then the infatuated Jew will laugh in vain, then will
he be manifestly guilty of the Death of the Lord : then he will
be convicted of having sinned, not against a man like ourselves,
but against God the Saviour of all. Then shall the words be
fulfilled, — Ah, sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed
of evil-doers, children that are corrupters : ye have forsaken the
Lord, ye have provoked the Holy One of Israel to anger : ye are
gone away backwards. Then shall the Gentiles in nowise be
able to mock at the Christian Faith. They will acknowledge
that it is to no mere man that we pay Divine honour : God
forbid : but to Him That in His Nature is God, for we are not
ignorant of His Glory. For though He was born as we are, yet
He remained that which He was, namely God."
A copy of this Epistle was forwarded by Cyril to his apocrisi-
arii, or ecclesiastical agents, at Constantinople 2: and thus reached
the hands of Nestorius. It was well received by several of the
most influential men in the government, and some even thanked
the Patriarch by letters for his exertions in the cause. But
Nestorius, while for some reason he did not think fit to reply
himself, committed that task to one Photius, who was probably
a Priest attached to the great church. That pamphlet has
perished : though Cyril himself saw it. Not contented with
this, Nestorius is accused of suborning certain Egyptians, who
were then resident in Constantinople, and had been banished
from Alexandria by Cyril on account of their immoralities, to
1 S. Cyril, Opp. v. iii. 17 B. accidentally carried to Constantinople,
2 It is unworthy of the open charac- instead of being, as it was, industriously
ter of Cyril that, in speaking of this distributed there. And this may be the
Epistle to Pope Celestine, he should reason why Tillemont (Note xiv.) denies
say, eTto Tives airliyayov 4v rp Kusv- the correctness of the account of
aTavTivovTr6\ei rei laa, as if it had been Gamier.

246 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK. II.
present a memorial both to himself and to the Emperor against
their Patriarch, accusing him to the one of ill administration of
his Church, to the other, of arrogating to himself Imperial
powers in the civil government of his province.
In the mean time, as the controversy was beginning to attract
the attention of the whole East, S. Celestine, who then filled the
Roman chair, received information of it from some quarter, of
which we are ignorant. A Council (as was so frequently the
case), was then sitting at Rome : and the Pope, in its name,
FirsfEetter addressed a letter to Cyril, requesting information on the sub-
EndofSuSe; ject. The Patriarch replied; and then, understanding that
Nestorius was still continuing his efforts to injure him at Court,
addressed his first letter to him, which is extant. In this he
complains that Nestorius left no means untried to injure him :
that he had given no just ground for such proceedings : that he
was impelled now to write, as well by his own desire to contend
for the Faith, as by the Epistle he had received from Pope
Celestine, and by the general complaint of the Eastern Churches;
that if a false statement of doctrine had been made by Nestorius,
the recognition of one word, the Theotocos, would restore ortho
doxy to himself, and peace to the Church, — that he himself was
not then for the first time engaged in the controversy, having
composed a treatise on the Incarnation before the ordination of
Nestorius ; and that he was prepared to submit to imprisonment,
exile, or death itself, rather than betray the truth once delivered
to the Saints. This letter was despatched to Constantinople by
Lampon, a Presbyter of Alexandria, and the confidant of Cyril.
circ. August The terms in which it is couched were by no means calculated
to conciliate : and show somewhat of the same spirit which
had led Cyril to the vehemence displayed by him in his youth.
Nestorius, to a mere worldly eye, has a great advantage in his
answer, which is extremely short. "The importunity of Lampon,"
he writes, "has wrung from me these few lines. I shall say
nothing further than this : that though, in the Epistle of your
brotherliness, there are many expressions which ill assort with
Christian charity, yet, for the sake of that gentleness than which
nothing is more mighty, I am resolved to persevere in my former
relations of friendship, and not to be provoked to a rupture."
It is evident that Nestorius was playing the same game which

SECT. I.] NESTORIUS DEFENDS HIS HERESY. 247
Eusebius had employed with so much effect in the early part of
the Pontificate of S. Athanasius, and was determined to repre
sent the controversy as one about words, and its origin as lying
solely in the pertinacious dogmatism of the Bishop of Alexandria.
Henceforward, the two most powerful Sees of the East were in a
state of open opposition, and in the ruin of his rival consisted
the only safety of either Nestorius or Cyril.
The Patriarch of Constantinople resolved, if possible, to sup- Nestorius writes to
port himself by the authority of the Roman Pontiff. He there- s. celestine.
fore addressed to him an Epistle on the subject of certain
Pelagian Bishops, then resident in Constantinople, and subjoined
three pamphlets, — the first on the Incarnation : the second
against the Arians and Macedonians : the third professedly
against the Apollinarians, but in reahty against the Cathohc
doctrine. Nestorius, however, was attacked at the same time
by Marius Mercator, on the ground of the intimacy he main
tained with the Pelagians; and by several monks of Con
stantinople, in which they complained of the hard usage to
which they had been exposed, on account of their defence of the
Theotocos, and demanded a Council. Complaints were openly
heard of the conduct of Cyril, that, whereas he had shown him
self manifestly equal to supporting the controversy, he had
hitherto taken no steps in his official character to overthrow
Nestorianism. He excuses himself, in a brief reply, by observ
ing that himself, and all the Eastern Bishops, had, in fact, been
anathematized by Nestorius, since all held Mary to be the
Mother of God : and that to retort that anathema on those who
should deny that title to her was a step which he and his
Egyptian Synod had not thought it right, in the then juncture
of affairs, to take.1 But the eighteenth Paschal Homily, pub- a.d. 430.
hshed at the commencement of this year, dwells, as might be
expected, on the subject of the Incarnation, though it does not
commence with that topic.2 According to their usual custom
the Synod of Alexandria assembled before Lent. S. Cyril,
having now received the attacks made by Nestorius on Proclus,
addressed a letter, in the name of his Council, to that Patriarch.
1 S. Cyril, Opp. v. ii. 230 B. vois rien de remarquable sur Plncar-
2 We cannot imagine how Tillemont nation.
can say (Note xiv.), Dans la 18, je ne

248

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[BOOK II.

S. Cyril's
SecondLetter to
Nestorius :
February.

March.

He commences by complaining of the injurious reports which
had been circulated against him, and leaves his innocency to be
vindicated by God v he proceeds to warn Nestorius of his errors,
to prove that he misunderstood the Nicene Creed, to explain the
Incarnation of the Son of God, neither by the conversion of
the Divinity into Flesh, nor into man, that is into Flesh and
Soul, but by the hypostatical union of the Soul and the Flesh
to God the Word : Who thus, in an inscrutable manner, became
man, and is called the Son of Man. He proceeds to dwell on
the two generations of Christ, from his Father, before all
Worlds, from His Mother, in the world : he asserts that it was
not by the infusion of the Word into a man previously con
ceived by the Blessed Virgin, that Christ became what He was;
he explains in what manner God may be said to have suffered,
in what manner to have died, and to have risen again : in what
manner the Humanity of Christ is to be adored : he affirms
that the term Tlieotocos has the authority of the Fathers, and
concludes as he began, with entreating Nestorius to acknowledge
his error.1
Nestorius replied by an* Epistle which evinces more talent
than any of his other writings.2 He artfully confounds his ' use
of the word God, with that of the word Divinity; and thus,
by confusing the abstract with the concrete, is enabled to
distort various passages of Scripture to his own meaning. He
however, virtually at least, allows that Two Natures are united
in one Person3 : and praises Cyril for asserting this "true," as
he calls it, " and orthodox " dogma.4 The end of this letter is
remarkable. Nestorius praises the zeal of Cyril for preventing
scandal, but tells him that he has been misled by the clergy of
Constantinople, who entertained his sentiments, but were in
fected with Manichfean errors : that so far from the Byzantine
Church being in any confusion or trouble, its state had never

1 S. Cyril, Ep. iv. torn. v. ii. 22. This
Epistle was said at Chalcedon to have
been written in the month Mechir : that
is, between January 26 and February 24,
and probably, as Tillemont observes,
before Lent, as having been approved
by the Septuagesimal Council.
- S. Cyril, Ep. v. torn. v. ii. 25.

3 See the very learned note of Gar-
nier, Mar. Merc. ii. 62. But it is clear
that he means a moral, not a real union.
4 'Ey c5 ko.1 t^v twv (puaeaiv iirrivovv
Sialpeaiv, KaTa. tov tt)s ' ' AvBpta-no'TT]Tos
Kai ®e6T7}Tos x6yov, Kai t^\v toutcov els
evbs irpoai&irou awdcpeiav , k.t.X. v. ii.
27 A.

SECT. I.J NESTORIUS DEFENDS HIS HERESY. 249
been more flourishing, — that, in particular, the Court was well
satisfied with all that had passed, and concludes with an appli
cation to himself and his opponent of the text, " David waxed
stronger and stronger, and the house of Saul waxed weaker and
weaker. v'
In mentioning these "Manichsean" clerks, who were un
doubtedly Catholics, as opposed to Pelagians, Nestorius adds
that they had been deposed, and the Council in which this depo
sition, whether just or unjust, took place, was probably held at
Constantinople according to the usual custom, enjoined by the
Canons of Nicaea, before the "Lent of this year.
By the same messenger to whose care he had entrusted his
second Epistle to Nestorius, Cyril had also written to his apo-
crisiarii, instructing them how to reply to the difficulties pro
posed by the Nestorians, — how to bring forward their own
arguments, — and, above all, on what conditions to assent to a
pacification.2 He had also addressed a letter to a common friend
of Nestorius and himself (who has been supposed to be Acacius
of Melitene) protesting that he was earnestly desirous of peace,
so that it could be obtained only without injury to the Faith3;
but that he was resolved to suffer the extremest penalty before
he would suffer that to be violated or attacked.
In the mean time the See of Rome had not been idle. When
Celestine had received from Nestorius the letters that we have
already mentioned, he lost no time in laying them before Leo,
then Archdeacon of Rome, afterwards his more celebrated suc
cessor. By his advice the documents were entrusted to his
intimate friend Cassian, to be translated into Latin and refuted.
And a more suitable choice could hardly have been made. For,
besides his skill in both languages, he had a particular affection
for the Church of Constantinople, in which he had been ordained
deacon by S. John Chrysostom. The result was the work of cassian's
J *¦ Treatise on
Cassian on the Incarnation, divided into seven books, and con- J!"5 mcama-
. . . turn.
taining a complete refutation of Nestorius, whom the writer
frequently quotes, but never names.
Having probably heard some report that such a work was in
hand, Nestorius again addressed Celestine: in appearance on
the subject of the Pelagians, but in reality with the intention
1 2 Samuel, iii. 1. 2 Ep. viii. 3 Ep. vii-

250

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[BOOK II.

of making good his own cause. This letter was entrusted to
Valerius, a patrician of reputation, and an active friend of the
Patriarch's ; but the result, as will be seen, by no means answered
the expectations of the writer.
S. Cyril, finding that the account given by Nestorius of the
favourable disposition of the Emperor towards his doctrine was
not unfounded on fact, addressed two treatises to Theodosius,
and his sister Pulcheria, who is since reckoned among the
Saints. That Princess appears not to have shared in the
general prepossession towards the Patriarch of Constantinople ;
and doubtless her dislike to his tenets was strengthened by the
timely interference of Cyril. He, meanwhile, as soon as the
Paschal Festivities were over, despatched an Alexandrian Dea
con, by name Possidonius, to Rome : together with a confession
of faith, authorized by the Septuagesimal Synod, and contained
council of in a letter to Celestine.1 Possidonius was detained some weeks
Rome :
Nestorius in Rome, probably while Cassian was putting the finishing
August. stroke to his work : at length, in the beginning of August, a
Synod met in that city, where the Treatise on the Incarnation,
Cyril's confession of faith, and the Epistle of Nestorius, were
publicly read. The Synod resolved that the statements of Nes
torius were heretical, that those of Cyril were consonant to the
orthodox faith ; that the Patriarch of Constantinople should be
compelled, on pain of deposition, to subscribe the Alexandrian
confession, on or before the tenth day after monition, — and that
Cyril should take the proper means for notifying and carrying
out the sentence. The Pope, in the name of the Council, wrote
to Cyril, informing him of the province that had been assigned
to him; to Nestorius, warning him even now to recant his
error, and escape the severest penalty that the Church could
pronounce : to the Clergy of Constantinople, exhorting them to
stand fast in the faith : and to the Prelates of ifour of the prin
cipal Oriental Sees, John of Antioch, Juvenal of Jerusalem,
Rufus of Thessalonica, and Flavian of Philippi, setting forth
what had already been done, and the peril with which the Truth
was menaced. These letters all bear the same date, August 11,
430. 1 It is curious to observe the mali- tine was flattered by the appeal, and
cious ingenuity with which Gibbon the partial version of a monk decided
twists this fact. " The vanity of Celes- the faith of the Pope," &c. viii. 287.

SECT. I.] NESTORIUS DEFENDS HIS HERESY. 251
Possidonius returned with these documents to Alexandria,
and having allowed himself a few days' rest in that place, pro
ceeded to Jerusalem and Antioch. To the Prelates of those
Sees Cyril also wrote, defending his own proceedings, and
acquainting them with his appointment as the Legate of Celes
tine, to carry out the resolutions of the Roman Council.
The result was a letter from John of Antioch to Nestorius,
advising him, but in vain, to retract. As soon as the s. Cyril's
. Third Letter
unwearied Deacon had embarked, Cyril assembled the au- to Nestorius:
' ^ . November 3.
tumnal Synod, and, as its head, addressed his last and most
celebrated letter to Nestorius, which was approved as it seems
most probable on the third of November. None can justly ac
cuse Cyril of eagerness in procuring the downfall of his oppo
nents, but such as, to carry out their own preconceived hypothesis^
dare to violate all truth, and to reject all testimony. The contro
versy had now lasted two years : the unity of the Church was
endangered. Rome commissioned (had commission been needed)
and the East requested Cyril to interfere : the rationahzing Ori
ental school was gathering strength, and every moment's delay
was dangerous ; and yet, allowing a month for the voyage of
the Deacon from Rome to Alexandria, the Patriarch delayed his
final and decisive communication to Nestorius six weeks longer.
The letter, which is of considerable length, contains the Creed
of Nicaea, and an exposition of that part of it which concerns
the Incarnation, — which exposition Nestorius was summoned
to sign, as also to subscribe to twelve anathemas, proposed
by Cyril, and directed against the errors of the new Constan-
tinopolitan school. These celebrated anathemas are in substance
as follows : —
1. If any shall assert that Emmanuel is not Very God, and
consequently that His Blessed Mother is not the
Mother of God:
2. Or, that the Word is not hypostatically united to the
Flesh, so as to be one Christ :
3. Or, that the Union is not real, and more than a simple
connexion of authority and power; thus, after that
union, dividing theLoRD into Two Hypostases :
4. Or, that the things said of Christ in the Gospels,
Epistles, or by Himself, are attributable to Two
Persons or Hypostases :

252 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK II.
5. Or, that the Saviour was not True God, but a Man
carrying or filled with the Divinity; whereas the
Word being Incarnate was fellow-sharer with us in
Flesh and Blood :
6. Or, that the Word is the God or Lord of Christ,
instead of confessing that after the Incarnation of the
Word, One and the same is God and Man :
7. Or, that the Man Jesus was energized by the operation
of God the Word :
8. Or, that the Man, assumed as an Habitation by God
the Word, ought to be honoured, and glorified, and
named God with Him, as being another from Him :
9. Or, that Christ was enabled by the Spirit, as by a
virtue alien from Himself, to do His mighty Works :
10. Or, that our High Priest was not the Very Word of
God; or, that in the Sacrifice offered for man, He
offered also for Himself:
11. Or, that the Saviour's Flesh is not life-giving, as proper
to the Word, but as belonging to another joined
with the Word :
12. Or, that the Word did not suffer, was not crucified, and
did not rise according to the Flesh :
Let him be Anathema.1
This Epistle was dispatched to Nestorius by four Egyptian
Bishops,2 Theopemptus of Cabasa, Daniel of Dardanis, and
1 The precise authority which the and perhaps Acacius of Melitene : that
anathemas hold as an exposition of the the Council of Chalcedon purposely
teaching of the Church is expounded omitted all mention of them ; that as
with even more than his usual ability late as the end of the fifth century they
by Tillemont, Art. xl. It appears that were held in doubtful reputation ; that
the Council of Ephesus approved the however the fifth and sixth Councils
writings of S. Cyril to Nestorius in expressly approved them ; that they
general terms, — while the anathemas were alleged by Pope S. Martin in the
themselves were permitted to pass Council of Lateran against the Mono-
without comment in the mass, but not thelites as authoritative ; — and that
especially noticed;— that the feeling of since that time they have generally been
many of the Fathers was very strong considered as part of the teaching of
against them ; — that S. Gennadius the Church.
wrote most strongly against them, and a Baronius, 430, L. makes Potamon
S. Proclus disapproved of them ; — that and Macarius to have been priests only.
in the lifetime of Cyril they found no This mistake is corrected by Gamier,
defenders but himself, Marius Mercator, Prsef. xix., and Pagi, 430. xi.

SECT. I.] NESTORIUS DEFENDS HIS HERESY. 253
Potamon and Macarius,1 whose sees are unknown. With it,
Cyril despatched two others. The one is addressed to the Clergy
and people of Constantinople; in which, as upbraiding himself
for the delay which had taken place, he informs them that the
step was now taken which ought to have been made long before;
that the authority of Celestine and of himself had denounced
excommunication to the troubler of the faithful; and exhorts
them, whatever might happen, to stand firm, remembering the
blessing promised to them that are persecuted for righteousness'
sake. The other is to the monks of the Imperial City, in which
the Alexandrian Synod praise them for, and exhort them to
maintain, their constancy.
The Bishops sailed from Alexandria at the beginning of
November, but contrary winds prevailing, they did not arrive
at Constantinople till Friday, the fifth of December. Thus
they crossed, as we shall see, the mandate of the Emperor
for the (Ecumenical Synod. On the following Sunday, at the Nestorius
conclusion of the Liturgy, they followed Nestorius to the Bishop's Dec. 7.
palace, and there, in the presence of almost all his Clergy, and
a considerable number of laymen of rank and station, they
delivered to him the anathemas.2 After receiving them, he pro
mised the Legates an audience on the following day ; but, on

1 We know not whether this be the 6th, (7th,) and preached the sermon on
same Macarius on whom the heresiarch the 13th of December : however Pagi,
Dioscorus composed a panegyric: and Baluze (Nov. Coll. Cone. 422,) may
Asseman. Bibliothec. Orient, i. 619. try, by inserting a parenthesis before
3 There is a hot dispute as to the day postquam, and after accepit, to elicit
on which the monition was delivered to another sense. One thing however, is
Nestorius. Pagi endeavours to prove clear, that the date Nov. 30, Indict.
at length that they were received by xiii. attached to the Synodical Epistle
him on Sunday, Nov. 30 : but we con- of S. Cyril, is not genuine : both be-
fess that his arguments 430, xiii., &e., cause Cyril always dates by the Egyp-
do not appear to us capable of over- tian, never by the Roman months :
throwing those of Gamier. It is a and because according to the
point of no very great importance ; but method of computation in use till the
the plain words of Mercator, Ejusdem eleventh century, the Indiction was
sermo in Ecclesiae habitus postquam xiv. not xiii : for till that period it
literas Celestini Romani Episcopi, et always began in September. On this
Cyrilli Alexandrini denunciationes ac- point also the History of Pelagianism
cepitviii. Id. Dec. post sextum diem, by Cardinal Norisius (ii. 7.) may be
quam easdem literas accepit, must mean consulted.
that he had received the letters on the

254

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA.

[BOOK II.

Theodoret
supports Nestorius :

Council of
Ephesusconvoked :
Nov. 19.

presenting themselves for that purpose, they were refused admit
tance. Nestorius, in the early part of the week, sent an express
to John of Antioch, with a copy of the Epistle of S. Cyril. He
appears to have mistrusted his own power of coping with such
an antagonist, and he requested his friend and former Prelate to
call on Theodoret and Andrew of Samosata for a reply.
Theodoret had now attained considerable eminence. Born at
Antioch, he had been dedicated to God from the cradle ; he had
been the intimate friend of Nestorius and John of Antioch ; and
had now for about seven years been Bishop of Cyrus, in Syria,
to which dignity he had been raised against his own will, as he
preferred the quiet retreat of his monastery of Apamsea. He
distinguished himself by his untiring zeal : his diocese had con
tained a great number of heretics, all of whom he was made the
means of converting ; among others, he baptized ten thousand
Marcionites. He wrote against both Pagans and heretics, and
now, conceiving that the views of Cyril were Apollinarian, de
clared himself against them.
Nor is it to be wondered at, that one so intimately connected
with the Syrian rationalistic school should have entertained appre
hensions of the uncompromising tone of Cyril: or imagined that,
to say the least, some balance of doctrine was needed in his state
ments. Andrew of Samosata, originally a monk of Constantinople,
was of the same school and temperament as Theodoret ; like him
also in this, that, while his feelings and prejudices were on the
side of Nestorius and the Asiatic teachers, he did not finally
forfeit the Communion of the Church.
Before the Legates could arrive at Constantinople, the Em
peror, by a rescript of the nineteenth of November, had, at the
desire of both Cathohcs and Nestorians, convoked an (Ecumeni
cal Synod. Ephesus was fixed as the place : the approaching
Pentecost as the time. The Bishops who were summoned by
their metropolitans would thus be enabled to celebrate Easter
with their flocks, before they began their journey to the place of
meeting. It would appear that this " appeal to the Future
Council," (as in later ages it would have been called,) had the
effect of suspending the execution of the sentence on Nestorius.
With the summons to the Council, the Imperial messenger bore
a private letter from Theodosius to Cyril. The emperor accused

SECT. II.] CECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF EPHESUS. 255
the Prelate of being the cause of the then troubles ; and re
buked him for having addressed separate letters to himself and
the Princess Pulcheria, as if there had been division in the Royal
Family. To this letter Cyril thought it better to return no
answer, till the (Ecumenical Council should establish his
innocence. Having secured the co-operation of his Eastern friends, Nes
torius, on the Saturday following his receipt of the anathemas, Dec- 13-
dehvered a sermon in the great church on the question. The
Priest-Catechist had preached on the necessity and benefits of
charity : and Nestorius, taking up the subject when he had left
off, proceeded to complain, (though not expressly naming Cyril,)
of the want of that virtue exhibited by the See of Alexandria
in its dealings with Antioch and Constantinople. " From it," said
the Patriarch, "Flavian and Nectarius suffered: from it, Meletius,
now reckoned among the Saints : from it he, whose holiness, in
spite of their unwillingness, thou hast been compelled to own,
John Chrysostom." He then debates the question at great
length, not without many inuendos against John of Antioch :
and concludes by recommending moderation, on both sides, as
to the use of words, so that Catholic virtues might be retained
in deed. On the following day he again spoke, but very shortly, pec. h.
on the same subject; and with that discourse, our collection of
his sermons terminates.
As winter passed on, S. Cyril employed himself in the com
position of three works : the first, his reply to. Andrew of Samo
sata, whose work had been approved by a Council at Antioch ;
the second, his answer to the treatise which Theodoret, as re
quested, had composed : the third, his answer to the Blasphe
mies of Nestorius. The controversy raged uninterruptedly at
Constantinople : Nestorius replied to the twelve anathemas of
S. Cyril by twelve counter anathemas, and Marius Mercator
again answered these.
With the approach of spring, preparations were made at
Ephesus for the numerous body of expected Prelates : provisions
were laid in, houses made ready : and the holy season of Lent
drew on.

256 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK II.

SECTION II.
THE (ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF EPHESUS.
a.d. 431. As soon as the Paschal Feasts were over, Nestorius and Cyril
a.m. 157. respectively set sail for Ephesus. The former was accompanied
by ten of his Bishops, by a large body of private friends, among
whom was Count Irenteus, and a sufficient number of slaves,
who are said to have been armed : Count Candidian, the Empe
ror's commissioner and captain of the Imperial Guard, also went
with the Patriarch. On the other hand, Cyril was attended by
fifty of his Bishops : but was not accompanied by any retinue.
As the Dicecese of Alexandria contained about one hundred Pre
lates, we may judge that the Patriarch was unwilling to deprive
the faithful of more than half their Pastors, lest the business of
the Churches should be insufficiently carried on.
Then' voyage was prosperous as far as Rhodes : and thence
Cyril wrote to his flock a short letter, expressive of his affection
for them, and his desire to be remembered in their prayers.
From Rhodes the Egyptian Prelates had a less favourable pas-
june 2 or 3. sage : nor did they arrive at Ephesus till the Tuesday or Wed
nesday before Pentecost, which this year fell on the seventh of
June. Nestorius was already there : Juvenal of Jerusalem
jane 12. arrived on the Friday after Pentecost ; and the concourse of
Bishops was very numerous. Cyril embraced the opportunity
of again writing to his people. The Prelates, he assured them,
were in good health, and eagerly expecting the opening of the
Council : nor did they doubt that the Catholic Faith would
prevail, to the consolation of the orthodox, and the confusion
of heresy. But "that wicked one, the sleepless beast, walked
about plotting against the Glory of Christ l " : his purposes
1 These words have been by most Cyrillus, says Baronius : de furori-
historians taken to apply to Nestorius, bus Nestorii, writes Gamier, &c.
and perhaps they might not untruly Fleury says, more sensibly, On veut
have been said of him ; nor is the cha- qu'il entende Nestorius; mais c'est
racter of Cyril such as to make his plutSt le demon, auteur de toutes les
use of them, in itself, unlikely. Ac- heresies, quoiquHl puisse avoir voulu
cordingly, ha>c plane de Nestorio marquer par eette e'nigme les cabales

SECT. II.] (ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF EPHESUS. 257
however must fail, since a Mightier than he confined him, and
overruled them.
The fact that the Egyptian Bishops were well was of no
trivial moment, for the extreme heat of the weather was most
prejudicial to the health of the assembled Prelates, and had
actually cost one or two their lives. The Fathers were extremely
impatient of their long detention, and it began to be whispered
that something more than the mere length of the journey must
detain John of Antioch and the Oriental Prelates of his Dioecese.
On the 18th of June, that Patriarch wrote to S. Cyril, acquaint- John of
ing him with the hardships which he had undergone in a forced announces
march of thirty days. " Many of the Bishops," says he, " are approach.
sorely afflicted from the difficulties of the journey, — and many
of our beasts of burden have perished through long continuance
of labour. Pray therefore for me that we may accomplish with
out inconvenience the five or six days which yet remain, and
embrace with joy thy holy and reverend head.1 " Alexander of
Apamea and Alexander of Hierapolis were charged by the
Patriarch to inform the Fathers of his near approach ; — and
they again and again requested them, on his part, not to delay
the opening of the Council.
But during these delays, the Prelates were hot idle. Various occupations
conferences were held on the grand subject of controversy; and Fathers:
S. Cyril found no more devoted adherent than Memnon, Bishop
of Ephesus, — a Prelate whose personal character did not equal
the orthodoxy of his sentiments. Among those who distinguished
themselves by their eloquence in the sermons which were preached
before the Fathers, S. Cyril stood conspicuous; though the
vehemence of his expressions against Nestorius, who was, at all
events, as yet uncondemned by the Church, can neither be
justified nor excused.2 Acacius of Melitene and Theodotus of
du parti contraire. But that he means ' Labbe iii. 445.
primarily the devil is almost certain
fromhis useof thewell known 6 irovijpbs, 2 C. 9. — OZros & iiriKaTdparos 
as well as from a comparison of the 6 fiXaa<pTip.r)<Tas Tb x6yiov toD ©eoC 
"1t|«Te, ypriyopfoaTe, Sti 6 avTiSiKos p.lavp.a fmdpxotv Ka\ alaxpoyevT)s 
vpuv Sii$o\os, &s Xetav upvSp-evos, fiaviav evpdfievos Katcfyv, teal 6\Betay
¦npmeriX, of S. Peter, with the irepi$e$Xrip.4vos — etc.
¦"lpiepX*Taiyh.p S Trovr\pbs, to a.Koip,riTov
Vox of S. Cyril.

258

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK II.

Ancyra also supported the True Doctrine, though friends of
Nestorius. He, meanwhile, after having so far yielded as to
confess that the Blessed Virgin might, in a certain sense, be
termed the Mother of God, so she were also confessed the
Mother of Man, relapsed into worse than his former error, and
persisted in declaring that he would never allow a Child of two
months old to be God.
toopenSthee Wearied out with the delays of John of Antioch, suspecting
council. tkat ke wag pra-posely prolonging his journey, finding that other
Prelates had already arrived from a greater distance, and having
already passed the prescribed time by fourteen days, S. Cyril
and the greater part of the Prelates determined to open the
Council on the twenty-second day of June1; and, on the pre-
rest on the Sunday,) and the detention
which John must have experienced in
passing through his own Dicecese, —
we may conclude that he not only did
not delay, but must have used great
diligence to arrive when he did. It is
true that Bishops more remotely situ
ated than John, arrived at) Ephesus
before him ; but then he was obliged to
wait for some of his Prelates, whose
Sees were situated twelve days' journey
further than Antioch. The Patriarch
in his apology to the Emperor requests
him, by inquiry on the spot, to satisfy
himself that his statement of the dili
gence he had employed was true.
Evagrius, though utterly opposed to
Nestorius, says,'Iwai'i'7jr. . . . direXelipBii
ttjs 6pio-8eiai)s fip.epas oiri eKav, ws
iroXXois dToXoyoip.evos SoKei (i. e., as
is the opinion of many, on hearing
his defence, if the reading be genuine).
H. E. i. 3, and Valesius's note. If
it be urged that John himself re
quested the Council not to suspend
their operations on account of his ab
sence, it may well be answered that he
apparently contemplated merely the
formal opening of the Synod, and
perhaps the production of proofs and
witnesses against Nestorius : not his
final condemnation.
Again, — If John were really anxious

1 We reserve for a note the much
disputed question whether the Fathers
of Ephesus, acting, most undoubtedly,
at the instigation of Cyril, were justi
fied in not waiting for the arrival of
John of Antioch. Had they waited,
the years of confusion which followed
that Synod, nay, possibly the Great
Schism itself, might have been avoided.
Two excuses have been made for Cyril.
The one, that the manifest delay of
John proved that he wished to pro
crastinate the Council : the other, that
the most clear-sighted of the Fathers
were of opinion that much confusion
would be avoided, and Truth more
speedily triumph, by anticipating his
arrival. As to the first argument, John was
unable to leave Antioch till the 18th of
May. The distance is computed at
thirty days. But this reckoning of
course applies to strong and accus
tomed travellers. Even thus, the
Prelates could not have reached Ephe
sus till June 17. If the age of the
Bishops, their inaptitude for travel, the
heat of the weather, and the number of
their company, be taken into conside
ration, to say nothing of the time
which the celebration of the Divine
Offices demanded, (even supposing
that the Prelates did not altogether

SECT. II.] CECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF EPHESUS. 259
ceding morning, they signified, by four Bishops, their resolution to
Nestorius. He, with sevenPrelates who happened to be with him, Protest of
rephed, that he should come or not come, as he should judge of Nestorius,
expedient. He then went to Memnon, and demanded the church
of S. John for himself and those of his party ; the Council being
in possession of that of S. Mary. Memnon, very properly,
refused: and the inhabitants of Ephesus were loud in their
approbation of his conduct. That day was employed by the Jane 21,
Constantinopohtan faction in procuring signatures to a protest
against the opening of the Council, previously to the appearance
of John. It was signed by sixty-eight of the Fathers; but
produced no impression on the majority of the Council.
The next day, the Imperial Commissioner, Candidian, hearing candidian
that Cyril and his partizans were already assembled in theJune23-
church of S. Mary, hastened thither, and represented to them
that his instructions forbade any secret or partial meeting of
the Bishops, and expressly ordered that whatever was concluded
on should be decided by common consent and in full Council.
Cyril demanded to see the Commission, and after much hesita
tion on the part of the Courtier, it was produced. On being
read, however, it was found to be totally irrelevant to the present
question : merely ordering Candidian to be present, without
a dehberative voice, at the Council, and to make arrangements
for the decent order and' uninterrupted quiet of the deliberation.
The Fathers therefore declared themselves resolved to proceed :
Candidian earnestly requested a delay of but four days ; and
for the acquittal of Nestorius, prudence those anathemas he conceived, and
would have suggested the necessity of rightly conceived, the truth to be in-
concluding the whole matter before the volved ; he feared that the influence of
arrival of the Roman Legates, who the Orientals might procure their re-
were known to be ill-disposed towards jection ; by anticipating their arrival
the heretic. As to the suggestion that he he thought that he discovered an easy
was desirous of seeing Nestorius irre- method of escape from the difficulty ;
gularly deposed by Cyril, of then, for and, through a momentary weakness of
that very irregularity, deposing Cyril, faith, instead of trusting the matter
and of thus himself presiding in an entirely into God's hands, he preferred
(Ecumenical Council, it is too absurd to make use of a stratagem, which a
to be for a moment entertained. more simple trust in Providence would
We must therefore rest satisfied with have rejected. That the fault brought
the second excuse, such as it is. Cyril its own punishment in the confusions
knew that John was opposed to the that ensued, is but too plain.
twelve anathemas : in the approval of

260 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK. II.
when this was denied him, he retired in anger, and despatched a
protest the same day to Constantinople.
The council On the departure of the Commissioner, the Prelates took their
session i.' places ; the book of the Gospels being open in the Episcopal
Throne, to signify the Presence of Christ, and the Bishops
being arranged on either side of the church. They were one
hundred and fifty-eight in number, besides Bessula, a deacon of
Carthage, who represented the African Church.
Cyril presided, both by virtue of his own dignity, and as
Legate of Pope Celestin ; Juvenal of Jerusalem was next in
honour ; then Memnon of Ephesus ; and after him Flavian of
Philippi, who appeared for Rufus of Thessalonica. There were
also six other Metropolitans.
When all were seated, Peter, an Alexandrian Priest, and chief
notary, briefly stated the cause for which the Council was sum
moned ; and on Juvenal's demand, the imperial edict convening
it was read. Memnon of Ephesus reminded the Prelates that
sixteen days had elapsed since the period fixed for the first Session;
and Cyril pronounced it to be his opinion that the Council had
now waited with sufficient patience for the Bishops not yet
arrived. This being the general sentiment of the Fathers,
Theodotus of Ancyra inquired why Nestorius was not present.
The Bishops who had carried the citation on the preceding day
gave an account of their proceedings, "and mentioned the un
satisfactory reply which they had received. A second and third
deputation, the first consisting of threeBishops,the second of four,
were sent with a written citation to Nestorius : they found his
house surrounded by soldiers, and could onlyobtain the reply, that
when the Council was fully assembled, by the arrival of John of
Antioch, he would appear before it. The defendant had thus
been, as the Canons ordered, three times admonished; Juvenal
expressed his perfect willingness to do so a fourth time, but said
that as they had no occasion to expect any happier result, the
next thing, in his opinion, was to examine the question of faith.
The Creed of Nicsea was first read, and then the second letter of
S. Cyril to Nestorius. Cyril, when it was finished, said, "You
have heard my letter : I believe it not to be at variance with the
Faith of Nicaea ; if your opinions are different, say so." Juvenal
of Jerusalem, the metropolitans, and a hundred and twenty

SECT. II.] ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF EPHESUS. 261
of the Bishops, severally declared their adherence to the doctrine
of S. Cyril; and the rest of the Council expressed its con
currence by acclamation. The second letter of Nestorius was
then read: when it was finished, Juvenal said, "This epistle
is at variance with the Faith of Nicaea : anathema to them that
hold its doctrine." The Metropolitans briefly agreed with him.
Acacius of Melitene was the only one who spoke at length : he
observed that the writer of that Epistle attributed the Birth and
Passion of our Lord to His Humanity only, and therefore in
effect, destroyed the real Unity of God the Son with our flesh.
When about thirty Bishops had expressed the same sentiments,
the whole Council burst out in different cries, all tending to the
same effect: " Anathema to the heretic Nestorius ! Anathema to
the doctrine of Nestorius! Anathema to him that will not
anathematize Nestorius ! " There was then a call for the letter
of Celestin to Nestorius ; a Greek translation of which was
read; and it was followed by the third epistle of S. Cyril, that
which contained the threat of excommunication if Nestorius
did not retract within ten days, and the twelve anathemas. The
Bishops who had been charged with the delivery of these letters
proved that they had been given to Nestorius in the presence of
all his clergy, after he had celebrated the Holy Eucharist on a
Sunday in his Cathedral ; but that so far from retracting his
doctrine, he had, in his subsequent sermons, re-stated and
enforced it.
Two of his intimate friends, Acacius and Theodotus, were
examined as to whether any change had appeared in his senti
ments since his arrival at Ephesus. They professed that, how
ever dear Nestorius was to them, the Faith of Christ was
dearer ; and their testimony clearly showed, that he had not, iu
the smallest degree, retracted, on the contrary that, by his blas
phemous expression concerning a God of two months old, he
had amplified and strengthened his heresy. Extracts were next
read by the notary on the subject of the Incarnation, from S.
Peter of Alexandria, S. Athanasius, SS. Julius and Felix of Rome,
Theophilus of Alexandria, S. Cyprian, S. Ambrose, S. Basil, S.
Gregory Nazianzen, S. Gregory Nyssen, S. Amphilochius of
Iconium, S. Atticus of Constantinople, — twelve Fathers in all,
of whom one only, Theophilus, is not reckoned among the Saints.

262 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK II.
Twenty articles, extracted from the writings of Nestorius, were
also produced. A letter from Capreolus of Carthage, brought
by his deacon Bessula, was then read : in it he excused his own
and fellow Bishops' absence, on the grounds of shortness of
notice, and the desolate state of Africa; mentioned that S.
Augustine who, on account of his reputation, had been specially
summoned to the Council, had been called to his rest ; and
prayed the Fathers to maintain the Catholic Faith against all
novelties whatsoever.
Sentence was then pronounced against Nestorius to the fol
lowing effect : — Forasmuch as Nestorius hath refused to obey our
citation, and declined to receive the Bishops whom we charged
with it, we have thought it necessary to examine his dogmas ; and
having proved both by his letters and sermons, as well as his
conversations in this city, that he holds and teaches heresy, we
are compelled by the Canons and by the letter of our most holy
Father and colleague, Celestin, Bishop of the Roman Church,
to pronounce with tears this grievous sentence: Our Lord
Jesus Christ, Whom he hath blasphemed, declares by this
holy Council that he is deprived of all Episcopal dignity, and
excommunicate from every Ecclesiastical Assembly.
This sentence was subscribed by Cyril, Juvenal, and all the
Bishops then present ; others, to the number of forty, accident
ally absent, or not yet arrived in Ephesus, afterwards attached
their names to it.
Thus ended the First Session. It had opened at an early hour,
and night had now shut in, although it was one of the longest
days. On issuing from the Church, the Bishops found an
immense multitude collected at the door to learn the sentence.
It was received with expressions of great joy : the men con
ducted the Fathers by torchlight to their several lodgings,
the women went before them with perfumes, and the city was
generally illuminated.
On the following day the sentence was communicated to
Nestorius, and affixed to the principal public places. At the
same time the guardian and treasurer of the Church of Constan
tinople were informed of the deposition of their Bishop, and
desired to take the same charge of the sacred property that
they would do in case of a vacancy. S. Cyril also took the

SECT. II.] ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF EPHESUS. 263
opportunity of writing to those whom he knew to be the
warmest and most influential supporters of the truth in the
Imperial City.
Nestorius and Candidian, for their parts, drew up a memorial
to the Emperor, complaining of the excesses and violences of the
Council, accusing Memnon as the principal author of the dis
turbances, and requesting that the Synod, which they treated as
not having yet commenced, might be held agreeably to the
Canons : that none but Bishops should be admitted thereto ;
that but two Prelates should accompany each Metropolitan ;
and that the confusion attendant on a large and tumultuous
assembly might thus be obviated. It is easy to see that the last
requisition, however plausible in itself, was directed against
Alexandria, that See, as we have observed, possessing no Metro
politan, except the Cathohc of Abyssinia.1
The Acts of the Council were some time in preparation for
the Emperor's eye : and the opposite faction were thus enabled
to present their own account first. The Acts had not only to
be transcribed from the short-hand of the notaries, and furnished
with the necessary apparatus of documents, (no inconsiderable
task in itself, since the matter thus brought together exceeds in
size the present volume,) but the whole was confessedly subjected
to the revision of Cyril. He, no doubt, omitted such parts as were
irrelevant to the matter in hand, such as the protest of Candi
dian: and, it is probable, such also as, in his judgment, made
against himself. It is impossible but that something must have
been said on the subject of the anathemas ; and we have reason
to beheve that the feehng of many of the Bishops was strong
against them. It is hardly likely that not one of the
Prelates raised his voice in favour of Nestorius. We must re
member, however, that such alterations, however much they may
impair to us the value of the original documents, were cer
tainly not regarded by contemporaries as necessarily unfair. No
doubt it was necessary to subject the genuine Acts to a revision:
much, in the heat of the moment, might be said, which the
speakers would afterwards regret having spoken, and be ex-

1 Fleury, (vi. 85,) by a pardonable de metropolitains sous le Patriarche
inaccuracy, says, " car il y avait peu d'Alexandrie."

264

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK II.

June 27.

Session II.
July 10.

tremely sorry to have entered upon record ; there must neces
sarily have been much repetition, and much that would bear
compression. The complaints, therefore, that have been raised
against any alteration are evidently out of place : and on the
question whether S. Cyril took any unfair advantage of the trust
committed to him, we conceive that there are not data to decide.
On the fifth day after the Council, John of Antioch arrived,
accompanied by about fifteen of his Bishops. It appears that
he had received information of what had been done from Count
Irenaeus, who had left Ephesus for that purpose. The Council,
having heard that the Patriarch was entering the suburbs, de
puted several Bishops and Priests as his escort into the city :
but the soldiers by whom he was surrounded would not permit
them to approach him. Immediately after arriving at his lodg
ings, without giving himself time to make any change in his
garments, and covered with dust as he was, he held a Council
of the Prelates whom he had brought with him, and of those
of his faction who were already in Ephesus.
At this disorderly assembly, convened in a private room, sum
moned by no lawful authority, the fraction of a schism, without
citation, examination, witness, or lawful judge, Cyril and Mem
non were deposed. During all this time, the deputies of the
genuine Council were in waiting at the door : they were then
admitted, and allowed to give their message. They received,
however, no other answer than blows, which were inflicted on
them, in the very sight of John, by Irenseus and the soldiers.
Escaping to the Synod, they exposed the marks of the ill treat
ment they had received, and in the presence of the Holy Gospels
related what had passed. On this, the Fathers separated John
from their Communion, till he should make reparation for the
outrage at which he had connived. At this time the sentence
against Cyril and Memnon was not known : for, though sub
scribed by forty-three Bishops, it was not pubhshed in the city,
but privately sent to the Court as the Act of the True Council.
In the mean time the legates Arcadius and Projectus, Bishops,
and Philip, Priest, arrived from Rome ; and the Second Session
of the Council was forthwith held. The proceedings were opened
by the Priest, Philip, who demanded that the letter of Celestin
to the Council, with which they were charged, should be read

SECT. II.] (ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF EPHESUS. 265
and inserted in the Acts. Celestin, though by no means failing
to support the dignity of the Chair of S. Peter, yet freely ac
knowledged in this Epistle, that there must be a concordance of
the various Bishops of the Church for the preservation of the
precious deposit of Divine Truth : he allowed that the charge of
teaching was equally given to all Bishops ; and exhorted them
by then* sound deliberations to maintain the reputation of
that city where S. Paul had preached the Gospel, and S. John
founded the Church. The Council loudly expressed its appro
bation, " Praise to Celestin, another Paul ! to Cyril, another
Paul ! One Celestin, one Cyril, one Faith of the Council, one
Faith over the whole earth !"
The Legates were then formally acquainted with the anterior
proceedings: the Acts were laid at their disposal; and the
Second Session thus terminated.
On the following day, the eleventh of July, the Fathers again session hi.
assembled ; the Legates declared their perfect accordance with
the determination of the Council, and their approbation of the
Canonical method of their procedures. The whole of the Acts
ofthe First Session were then pro forma read, and the Legate,
Philip, after dwelling on the Primacy of S. Peter's Chair, then
speaking by himself and his fellow Legates, announced his
assent and consent to them; the two other Legates did the
same, and at the request of S. Cyril, all three subscribed the
sentence of the deposition of Nestorius. Synodal letters were
written to the Emperor, and to the Clergy and People of Con
stantinople. Five days afterwards, the Fourth Session was held. As the session iv.
business was peculiarly connected with S. Cyril, Peter, the yl
notary, as a member of the Church of Alexandria, abstained
from conducting the proceedings, as before : but Hesychius, a
Deacon of Jerusalem, informed the Council, that the most holy
Bishops of Alexandria and Ephesus wished to present a memo
rial, which they held in their hand. Juvenal of Jerusalem de
sired that it might be read.
It set forth the uncanonical proceedings of the Council held
by John of Antioch ; the deposition of Cyril and Memnon with
out citation, or opportunity of defending themselves ; the bad
character of the Bishops who had pronounced it, some of them

266 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK II.
having even been deposed; and finally conjured the Council to
oblige John of Antioch to appear before them in person, and
there to give account of himself and of his proceedings. Acacius
remarked, that the idea of any Council then assembled in Ephe
sus, except the Catholic Council at which he was assisting, was
perfectly absurd, and that, for his own part, the request of
Memnon and Cyril seemed superfluous; as, however, they
thought otherwise, he proposed that John of Antioch should be
forthwith summoned by three Bishops whom he named. The
deputies went as they were desired; and on their return in
formed the Council that, when arrived at the lodging of John,
they were refused admittance by soldiers who were posted at the
door : that when their errand was known, they were insulted,
ill-treated, and had, not without danger, escaped the swords of
the military, and the stones of the populace. A second citation
was made with as little effect ; and the Council then declared,
that as John had not appeared to defend his own proceedings,
they were null and void.
session v. On the following day, S. Cyril complained that the schismati
cal party had published a paper derogatory to the Council, and
accusing its members of Apollinarianism : he therefore desired
that John should be a third time cited to answer for all these
violences. The citation was again carried by three Bishops, who
reported that on approaching the house of John, the clerks who
surrounded it began, as usual, to insult them, but were restrained
by the soldiers, who, it appears, were acquainted with the person
of Commodus, one of the Legates, as having been posted in his
See, Tripolis1 of Lydia. That the Archdeacon of Nestorius, on
hearing their errand, gave them a paper as from his own Coun
cil ; and on their refusal to accept it, declined all further com
munication. On hearing this account, the Council pronounced
John of Antioch, and his accomplices, to the number of thirty-
five in all, excommunicate, and concluded the Fifth Session with
subscribing the sentence, of which information was given as
before to the court of Constantinople, as also to S. Celestin. It

1 Situated near the Mseander, and against the opening of the Council till
now in ruins. Commodus was one of the arrival ofthe Orientals.
the Bishops who had signed the protest

SECT. II.] ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF EPHESUS. 267
is remarkable that in the signatures Juvenal of Jerusalem, who
seems to have presided on this and the former Session, sub
scribes before the Roman Legates.
The Sixth Session was taken up by matters of general import- session vi.
ance : principally by the condemnation of an erroneous formula
of Faith, to which some converted Asiatic heretics had been
compelled to subscribe, and the proposition of an explanation of
the Creed of Nicaea. It was decreed, in the Seventh and last session vn.
Session, that the bounds of the jurisdictions of Metropolitans
should remain as they were; a complaint having been made
by the Bishops of Cyprus that the See of Antioch had usurped,
of late years, the authority of ordaining in that island. As John
of Antioch was not present to defend the rights of his own see,
the Council guardedly decreed, that if the assertions of the
Cyprian Bishops were true, they should remain, as in time past,
free. The fact was, that the claims of Antioch in this instance
were well founded.
Thus the deliberations of the Council ended : but its troubles
were yet to begin. The Count John arrived from Constantino
ple as the Emperor's Commissioner, and gave orders that the
Bishops of both parties should appear on the following day at
the house where he was lodged. The animosity between them
was so great, that he considered it necessary to post a body of
troops between the quarters of the two factions. On the next
morning, Nestorius came first before the Commissioner ; shortly
afterwards John of Antioch and his followers ; and lastly S.
Cyril, with all the Cathohc Bishops, except Memnon. The
greater part of the day was spent in a series of useless disputes.
The Catholics would do nothing while Nestorius, nor the schis
matics while Cyril was present. The Count John at length, but
not until evening, settled the matter, by obliging both of those
Prelates to retire. To the rest of the Bishops he then read the
Emperor's letter, which was so drawn up, as if both the false
and the true Council were the same Assembly to which the acts
of both were to be attributed, and was addressed to Pope Celestin,
and to Rufus of Thessalonica, neither of whom were personally
present. Its purport was that the deposition of Nestorius, of
Cyril, and of Memnon, met with the approbation of the Emperor.
The schismatics were overjoyed at this result; the Catholics as

268 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK II.
much depressed, and John, to avoid a popular tumult, arrested
the three Bishops in question, committing them to proper
guards. After this act, and attending prayers in the great
church, the Commissioner gave a report of his proceedings in a
letter to the Emperor ; and with this went a strong remon
strance from Juvenal of Jerusalem, and the other Bishops who
had assisted at the genuine Council : and who now exerted
themselves in every way, both by fresh epistles to the Emperor,
and by addressing the Bishops who then happened to be in
Constantinople, to set their cause in its right point of view. So
great was the prejudice excited against S. Cyril, that even S.
Isidore of Pelusium, whose locality would naturally render him
favourable to Alexandria, thought necessary to exhort him not
to follow the bad example, and to be sharer in the violence, of
his uncle Theophilus.
During the whole of these negociations, S. Cyril was in consi
derable danger. He was strictly guarded by the soldiers ap
pointed for that purpose, who even slept at the door of his
chamber : nor could he be certain that any moment might not
bring the Emperor's sentence for his banishment into some
inhospitable region, where he could never more in this world
hope for justice, nor for a return to the possession of his own
See. It is not our intention to pursue with minuteness the tedious
course of negociations which followed the Council of Ephesus.
The Catholics of Constantinople manfully exerted themselves for
their distressed brethren : and the Abbats and Monks were
more particularly distinguished by the freedom with which they
addressed Theodosius.
At length, in the month of August, the Emperor desired that
a deputation from each of the Councils should wait on him.
Both parties obeyed : and eight Commissioners were sent from
each : on the Catholic side, Juvenal and Acacius, with the legate
Phihp, possessed the greatest influence; in the party of the
schismatics, John of Antioch, and Theodoret. The instructions
given to the former were carefully to avoid all communion with
John of Antioch and his followers, at least until they had sub
scribed to the deposition of Nestorius, anathematized his doc
trine, and asked pardon of the Council ; they were also charged

SECT. II.] ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF EPHESUS. 269
with a letter of thanks to the Bishops at Constantinople, com
mending their zeal for the Council, and requesting them not to
relax their efforts in its behalf. The instructions of the
schismatics were far more general; the only point in which
their deputies were restricted, was the forbidding them, on any
pretext, to agree to the twelve anathemas of S. Cyril. This
Father, in the meantime, employed himself in drawing up a
defence of his anathemas, in which he shows that they are free
from any taint of the heresies which were attributed to them,
and exerts himself to reconcile the Oriental Prelates to himself
and to his writings.
As soon as the Commissioners were on their journey, Nesto
rius was banished by the Emperor from Ephesus, with a per
mission, however, to go where he chose. This came to the know
ledge of the deputies on their arrival at Chalcedon, for they were
not permitted to cross the strait ; and was a severe blow to the
hopes of John of Antioch and of his party. On the fourth of
September, both parties had an audience of Theodosius : in
which, while nothing definite was settled, the schismatics ob
tained the grant of a church, while they should remain at Chal
cedon. The deputies on both sides wrote to their respective
Councils, and gave such accounts as might raise the hopes of
their friends.
Theodoret preached more than once to the assembled deputies
of his party, and was attended by a number of the inhabitants
of Constantinople, whom the fame of his eloquence attracted
across the strait. He expresses, in the fragments we possess,
horror at the thought of a passible God ; not distinguishing, or
not choosing to distinguish, between this expression, and belief
that the Divinity was passible. But he had the better grounds
for his mistake, if, as is reported, Acacius of Melitene, one of
the deputies, had advanced the latter proposition. He also
speaks of Nestorius as the legitimate pastor of Constantinople,
and expresses his firm belief that, at no distant period, he would
be restored to that dignity.
At length, after five audiences, in which the Catholics confined
themselves strictly to the facts of the case, and much to the
chagrin of their opponents, would not dispute on points of doc
trine, the Emperor announced his final determination in a letter

270 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK II.
to the Council. While expressly forbearing to condemn the
Orientals, he ordered the Bishops, including Memnon and Cyril,
to return to their own Dicecese, and exhorted them to cultivate
peace to the utmost of their ability. At this result, confirming
in fact the deposition of Nestorius, the schismatical deputies
were frantic with disappointment. They despatched memorial
after memorial to Theodosius ; they conjured him to alter his
judgment ; they protested that they shook off the dust of their
feet against him, and were clear from his blood. But their
threats and lamentations were to no purpose ; and their only
remaining consolation was to vilify the character of Cyril in the
last letter which they addressed to their friends at Ephesus.
The Catholic deputies and Bishops at Constantinople proceeded
to the election of another Bishop for that See, and consecrated
Maximian, who had greatly distinguished himself by his efforts
in behalf of the Council, to the dignity.1 In the meantime S.
Cyril returned in triumph to Alexandria, which he reached on
Oct. 30. the thirtieth of October, after an absence of rather more than
half a year. It is said by his enemies that he did not wait for
the Emperor's permission, but escaped from his guards before
his final acquittal had been pronounced.

SECTION III.
RECONCILIATION OF ANTIOCH WITH ALEXANDRIA.
The Sees of Antioch and Alexandria were now out of Commu
nion, and John, during and on his return to the former, again
deposed, in two separate Councils, S. Cyril, and the seven Bishops
who had assisted in the consecration of Maximian. The latter, on
the other hand, in a letter to the Archbishop of Alexandria, gave
him the highest praise. "Thy desire," — so he wrote, — "0
Servant of God, is fulfilled : thy labours for the cause of the
Faith accomplished : the wishes of thy piety brought to a close :
thou hast been made a spectacle to Angels and to men, and to
all the Priests of Christ. Thou hast not only believed in
Christ, but hast borne for Him all kind of ills. Thou alone hast
1 Socrat, H. E. vii. 35. And see Pagi, 431. xxxvii.

SECT. III.] RECONCILIATION WITH ANTIOCH. 271
been accounted worthy to bear His marks on thy body. Thou
hast merited to confess Him before men, that He might confess
thee before the Father, in the Presence of the Angels. Thou
hast been able to do all things in Christ, Which strengthened
thee : thou hast overcome Satan through patience : thou hast
despised torments : thou hast trampled on the fury of rulers :
thou hast counted hunger to be nothing, because thou didst
possess that Bread which, coming down from Heaven, imparteth
Celestial Life to men1." And S. Celestin, a few months later
writing to the clergy and people of Constantinople, speaks as
strongly: "In no work of an Apostle," says he, "was that
apostohc man wanting : he conjured, he admonished, he
rebuked." And comfort like this Cyril needed. The whole
of the East was in the greatest confusion : and it was a happy
circumstance that four out of the five great Sees remained firm
to the True Faith. The Prelates, ordained in the place of Nes
torian Bishops, were not everywhere favourably received; in
some places they had to call in the secular arm, in others they
could not estabhsh themselves at all. Theodosius consulted
Maximian, and a few other Bishops, of whom some were, it
would appear, the Deputies from the Council, as to the best
means of restoring unity. They all agreed that John of Antioch
must approve of the deposition, and anathematize the doctrine
of Nestorius ; and that Cyril must forgive what had passed at
Ephesus. There was a plan proposed, for the meeting of the A-D- 432-
two, in the Emperor's presence at Nicomedia; but it was dropped,
on account of the repugnance which John felt towards it. There
was, however, a Council holden at Antioch, in which six propo
sitions were drawn up, which S. Cyril was required to sign as a
preliminary step to union. We know not what they were,
further than may be gathered from Cyril's reply. " He could
not," he said, " retract what he had written previously to the
Council ; he was ready to declare the sufficiency of the Creed of
Nicaea, only against those who explained it heretically its true
meaning must be boldly stated ; that he was perfectly wilhng to
forgive all the insults he had himself received, but that the See
of Antioch must anathematize the heresy of Nestorius : he repu
diated the doctrines of Arius and ApoUinaris; he held the
• Labbe, iii. 1061.

272 patriarchate of Alexandria. [book ii.
Divine Word to be Impassible; he acknowledged that the
Saviour's Body was informed by a reasonable Soul, and he
promised, when peace should be restored, to give full satisfaction
on the subject of the twelve anathemas.
The reception of this letter was different among the Eastern
Bishops, as their tempers or prejudices varied. But John of
Antioch, the most important among all, thought that it afforded
a ground for reconciliation. He despatched Paul of Emesa to
Alexandria, with a Confession of Faith, and a letter, in which he
stated his personal friendship for Cyril, his longing for peace,
his ardent hope that the anathemas would be given up, and his
joy that they had a common ground on which to argue, namely,
the letter of S. Athanasius to Epictetus on the Incarnation.1
This treatise was much insisted on by Paul, until Cyril by a
reference to the original copy, preserved in the archives of Alex
andria, proved that it had been altered by heretics. Indeed he
was by no means satisfied with this communication, though con
fessing the orthodoxy of the Creed of John. Far from being an
apology for the past, it was rather, he said, a new offence. Paul,
who was well skilled in negociations, used all his efforts to persuade
him that this was not the case ; he, however, could hardly pre
vail on the Bishop of Alexandria to admit himself to his com
munion, and only after signing a Confession of Faith, drawn up
in the form of a letter to S. Cyril. Having done this, he
preached in the great church of Alexandria on Christmas Day :
and in the early part of his sermon, after dwelling on the
peace to men which the Gloria in Excelsis promises, having pro
nounced the words, " Mary, the Mother of God, brings forth
Emmanuel," he was interrupted by the acclamations of the
people : " The True Faith ! the same Faith ! welcome, orthodox
Bishop ! welcome, like to like ! " His discourse, which was
very short, was continually interrupted by such exclamations as
these : and on the succeeding feast of the Circumcision, he had
the opportunity of explaining his sentiments at greater length.
Paul was anxious that the declaration he had himself signed
might be accepted for John of Antioch also : but to this S. Cyril
would by no means consent, and drew up another formula which
he required that Prelate as a condition of Communion to sub-
1 Labbe, iii. 1128.

SECT. III.] RECONCILIATION WITH ANTIOCH. 273
scribe, founded on John's own Confession. He at the same
time carried on a negociation at Constantinople, for the
purpose of bringing about the wished-for reconciliation; and
the influence of the Princess Pulcheria was highly useful
in the furtherance of his views. John, finding that his cause
lost ground, was glad to come to terms : and signed the
Confession of Faith which Cyril required, and which was the
same which he had previously sent by Paul. J In it he
expressed his belief, that "our Lord Jesus Christ is the Only
Son of God : perfect God and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul
and of flesh subsisting : according to his Divinity, begotten of
the Father before the world ; according to His Humanity, born
in these last days for our Salvation, of the Virgin Mary : con
substantial to the Father, according to His Godhead, and consub
stantial to us, according to His Manhood : and in that the Two
natures have been united, we acknowledge one Lord, one Christ,
one Son. Wherefore we confess that the Blessed Virgin is the
Mother of God : because the Word of God was incarnate and
made man." The formula concluded by an approbation of the
deposition of Nestorius, -and an acknowledgment of Maximian
as the rightful possessor of the Throne of Constantinople.
The anxiety consequent on the prolongation of this affair, had g1"*"^'
already cost S. Cyril two severe illnesses : one before Christmas, at
the time of the arrival of Paul, — the other a few weeks later,
which prevented him from announcing in person the time of
Easter, according to his custom. And that during the whole
of this year he suffered from ill health, the commencement of
his twenty-first Paschal Letter sufficiently shews.
S. Cyril announced the happy news of his reconcihation with a.d. 433
John, in a sermon which he delivered on the twenty-third of
April, in which he took occasion to explain his own tenets, and
to vindicate them from certain objections which had been raised
against them. For some members of the Latin Church took
exception at this reconciliation, as if it had been brought about
by a retractation, or at least suppression of the truth on the part
of Cyril ; and Isidore of Pelusium now as hastily accused him
of a disposition to compromise the truth, as, during the Council
1 Tillemont, xiv., 531, who is much more accurate in the statement of these
tedious negociations than Fleury. T

1

274 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK II.
of Ephesus, he had complained of his obstinacy in defending it.1
On the other hand, some, — the precursors of the destructive heresy
of the Jacobites^ — complained that though he denied the existence
of two Persons, he still allowed John of Antioch to confess two
Natures in the Saviour. The Orientals, when once satisfied
that he was not implicated in the error of ApoUinaris, were
glad to profess their unity of faith with the Bishop of Alexan
dria : the Emperor and the Pope expressed their approbation of
the happy reunion : and thus the difference, which at one time
threatened such serious consequences, was quietly composed.
Heresy, indeed, still prevailed in the far East, and Chaldaea was
not many years afterwards separated — as it still remains — from
the Church Catholic : the followers of Nestorius keeping up
their succession of Bishops from that day to this. Theodoret
was one of the last to forsake the heretical party : and though
some of his expressions on the Incarnation were always held
unsound, or at least suspected, he thenceforward lived, as he
finally died, in the Communion of the Church.
With respect to the conduct of the Oriental Bishops through
out this whole affair, we may remark- that it has been usually
characterized in much harsher terms than truth allows. One or
two of the companions of John fell away into open heresy ; — but
the greater part, as soon as Cyril gave proof that he was not an
Apolhnarian, thankfully accepted his Communion. Had it not
been for these men, the Monophysites, in the next phase of
that controversy, by which the Church was harassed for two
hundred and fifty years, would have reaped a fearful advantage :
when, in fact, they did use or abuse, even notwithstanding this
safeguard, many of the expressions of the Alexandrian Patriarch.
S. Cyril was much taken up in the business of composing,
both by writings and by negociation, the divisions of the East ;
but he also found time for the arrangement of a Paschal Cycle
of ninety-five years. That Alexandria was still considered, by
the larger majority of Christians, the Second Church, we have
a.d. 437. a striking proof in a letter of Pope Sixtus to a Council of
Illyria, wherein he draws a distinction between the Decrees of
the Council of Constantinople on matters of Faith, and on points
of Discipline. 1 Baron. 433. iv.

SECT. III.] RECONCILIATION WITH ANTIOCH. 275
After this time we find Cyril vainly attempting to procure the
condemnation of Theodore of Mopsuestia: and from time to
time interposing in the Oriental disputes on the Incarnation.
In the course of his labours in this way, he once visited Jeru- June 27,
salem. At length, worn out rather with labour than years, he Death
departed to his reward on the twenty-seventh day of June,
a.d. 444.
The character of S. Cyril, like that of S. Gregory VII., S.
Thomas of Canterbury, Nikon, and our own Laud, is precisely
that which the world will never be able to comprehend. That a,nd
r character of
he should have laboured and suffered, and spoken and written s' c>ril-
so earnestly in defence of an abstract point of doctrine, should
have excommunicated, and should have been excommunicated for
its sake ; and, in obtaining the victory should have been content,
although a heresy, yet existing, thereby had birth, — all this is
mystery and scorn to those who have not learnt to value Ca--
tholic doctrine on the subject of the Incarnation, as closely con
nected with the Sacrament ofthe holy Eucharist, and with our own
Resurrection, or who have learnt to despise dogmatic teaching
under the lax influence of a faithless age. But Cyril, "while
he knew the value of the great deposit which he guarded, was
willing to yield every thing of a personal nature to his adversa
ries, and insisted on nothing which he did not deem essential to
the preservation of the truth in its fulness and purity. It is
true, that in youth his temper had been hasty, and his manner
perhaps overbearing : so much the more is it to his praise, that
in the great act of his life, the Council of Ephesus, where the
one was severely tried, and the other closely observed, the defects
of his earlier years are in vain sought. Again : his calm and
moderate statement of Truth is worthy of notice. Pressed by
adversaries who asserted the doctrine of Two Persons in our
Lord, it would have been most natural for him to fall, as his
Mowers did, into the opposite error of denying the existence of
Two Natures. This he never did. The same writings, which
had crushed one heresy in the Council of Ephesus, crushed its
opposite in that of Chalcedon : they have indeed been quoted
by the Jacobites, as testimonies in their favour, but only in
detached portions, and with a manifest perversion of their sense.
If, in any of his voluminous works, he speaks in a manner
t 2

276 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK II.
which may seem to give advantage to the Monophysite creed,
it must be remembered that many of his writings were falsified
when the Church of Alexandria, with all its archives, was in the
power of that sect. The letter of S. Leo, which was with respect
to Monophysitism what the anathemas of S. Cyril were with
respect to Nestorianism, was approved by the Fathers of Chal
cedon expressly on the ground of being consonant with them.
And Theodoret, with a candour which does him the highest
honour, makes use of the works of his great rival as a sword
against the Apollinarians, with whom he once confounded him,
and against the Monophysites, who professed, and still profess,
to be his followers. If, nevertheless, any casual expression may
fairly be quoted as favouring the tenets of Eutyches, we must
say with the Catholics in their great conference with the Seve-
rians, that if such expression seems at variance with the
Twelve Anathemas, and S. Cyril's defence and explanation
of them, we neither approve nor condemn it. If we com
pare S. Cyril's conduct with that of others, who have been
placed in a similar position, it will but shine the more
hrightly. It is no derogation from the veneration due to the
memory of a most glorious Doctor of the Church, to say, that
S. Augustine, in defending the doctrine of Divine Grace against
the Pelagians, sometimes trembled on the verge of heresy : and,
as matter of fact, the worst errors of Calvinism are defended by
quotations, (unfair, it is true, and distorted quotations) from the
writings of that Father. Again, S. Jerome, in his writings
against Vigilantius and his fellows, while elevating Virginity,
gave great countenance to those who regarded marriage as a
tolerable evil, rather than as being honourable in all. And, as
we have seen, S. Dionysius, in opposing Sabellianism, gave
great occasion to the Arians to blaspheme. And yet S.
Cyril's temptations to defend one truth at the expense of
another, were stronger than in any of the above cases. There
may be other Fathers whose writings will be more generally in
teresting, and in these days more profitable, (though at the pre
sent time, when many openly refuse, in unconscious heresy, to
bestow on the Blessed Virgin the title of Mother of God, they
seem pecuharly appropriate,) but we shall not be wrong, while
bestowing the first place among the defenders of Divine Truth

SECT. III.] RECONCILIATION WITH ANTIOCH. 277
on S. Athanasius, in allotting the second to S. Cyril. His cou
rage was, doubtless, his most distinguishing feature : but his
moderation in his conduct with John of Antioch, and his
acquiescence in the creed proposed by the latter, notwithstand
ing the comparative unsatisfactoriness of some of its expressions,
are truly praiseworthy. And if at Ephesus he may be thought
to have carried matters with a high hand, it must be remem
bered that his moderation was chiefly visible in his prosperity,
his impetuosity in his adversity. And even in that action which
may be considered the great weakness of his life, his precipita
tion of the Council of Ephesus, he still evinced the same dis
regard of personal danger in the prosecution of a great cause.
His humility is amply proved by the patience with which he
received the unjust rebukes of S. Isidore of Pelusium. Thus,
with S. Eulogius, we shall call him " the ardent, the pious, the
learned, the never-vacillating"; with Anastasius, "the most
celebrated and blessed light of the Fathers"; with the Menology,
"the glory of all Priests, the defender of the most Holy
Synod"; with Sabbas of Palta, we shall regard him as one
that, by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, followed the doc
trine and expressions of the Fathers; with S. Celestine, as the
generous defender of the Faith, as he that made good all that S.
Paul requires in a teacher ; even though we may not entirely
subscribe the affectionate exaggeration of S. Sixtus III., that
" Cyril surpassed all persons in all things.1 "
It remains to say a few words on the fate of Nestorius.
After having resided for some time at his monastery of S.
Euprepius, near Antioch, he was banished by the Emperor to
Petra. But Theodosius appears to have changed his determi
nation, and the great Oasis was chosen as the final place of his
exile. The end of his life was miserable. Driven by the barba- End of
rians from the Oasis, seeking, in extreme old age, a refuge in Nestonu9'
Panopolis, hurried thence, by the inhumanity of the governor
to Elephantine, recalled before arriving there, brought back to
1 Of the internal government of his said to have been the first to institute
Church, S. Cyril has left few memo- Festival Stations at Alexandria : and
rials. He was accused by his enemies Makrizi reports that he was also the
of Simoniacal consecrations, apparently first to erect images in the churches of
without the shadow of reason. He is Egypt.

278 patriarchate of Alexandria. [book ii.
Panopolis, half dead with fatigue, and suffering from the effects
of a fall, and again exiled to a neighbouring town, he was
seized with a mortal disease ; and according to some his tongue,
according to others his whole body, being eaten of worms, he
gave up the ghost. By his followers he is, of course, esteemed
a glorious Saint and Confessor : the Jacobites have a tradition
that the dews of heaven visit not the grave of the heresiarch.1

SECTION IV.
the rise and progress of eutychianism.
The bright days of Alexandria are past : and we are about to
trace the decline of a Church, which we have followed through
her various stages of increasing splendour, till, in S. Athanasius
and S. Cyril, she reached the zenith of her reputation. It was
reserved for a disciple of the latter to commence the downward
course.
Dioscorus, On the death of S. Cyril, his Archdeacon Dioscorus succeeded
Pat. XXV.
a.d. 444. ' to the chair of S. Mark, although, as it would appear, not with
out some opposition. For it was afterwards asserted2 that he
had been ordained by two Bishops only : and this report, though
probably exaggerated, seems to indicate a diversity of sentiment
from the outset as to the merits of the Bishop-elect.
He had hitherto been accounted a man of excellent disposition,
and was much beloved for his humility.3 But the asperity
with which he claimed from the heirs of S. Cyril certain money
which he alleged to be due to the See, procured him many ene
mies ; nor was it accepted as a satisfaction by the people, that
] We learn from Gregory Barhe- vented by the officiousness of a Nesto-
brseus, (Asseman Bibl. Orient, ii. 316,) rian monk, who affirmed that in a
that in later times, Gabriel, a cele- vision it had been revealed to him that
brated Nestorian physician, in Syria, the Jacobites were wasting their fury
who had heard from a friend of the on a cenotaph, and that the resting place
insults to which the tomb of Nestorius of Nestorius was unknown to mortal
was exposed, obtained an order from man.
the Caliph, requesting the Sultan of 2 Epist. Ep. Prov. Pont.
Egypt to send the bones of that Pre- 3 Theod. Ep. 60. Baron. 444. xix.
late to Bagdad. But this was pre-

SECT. IV.] RISE AND PROGRESS OF EUTYCHIANISM. 279
these sums were employed by the Patriarchan enabling the sellers
of bread and wine to furnish the poor with subsistence at a
lower rate.
In the answer which Pope S. Leo wrote to the letter, in which,
according to custom, Dioscorus announced his election and con
secration, we find the first attempt on the part of the Church of
Kome, to intermeddle with the affairs of that of Alexandria. He s.Leo writes
... . to him :
gave the new Bishop instructions as to the rites to be observed
at Ordinations and in Festivals, prefacing his advice with_the
apologetic, and indeed half-playful, remark, that doubtless the
observances of the two Churches were the same, inasmuch as S.
Peter must have taught S. Mark the same discipline which he
himself observed. And in point of fact, there was, as we have
already had occasion to notice, a great similarity between the
ceremonies of the two Churches. One remarkable point of
discipline wherein they agreed, is pointed out in this letter of
Leo : that even on the greatest Feasts, such as Easter, the
Holy Eucharist was only celebrated in one church of the city,
although it might be repeated as often as there was occasion,
from the multitude of the people who attended in several distinct
congregations. The new Bishop, however, soon shewed that personal holiness ,
formed no part of his character. His palace was disgraced by/hi!.iinm0-
the pubhc dancers of Alexandria, and the too celebrated Irene .>
was notoriously entertained as the Patriarch's concubine.2
Theodoret had been, previously to the death of S. Cyril, appa
rently much esteemed by Dioscorus, as indeed the tone of the
letter addressed by the former to the latter on his elevation suffi
ciently proves. But after that event, the Archbishop of Alex
andria thought fit to change his conduct to his early friend.
He, in the meanwhile, continued his writings on the subject
of the Incarnation, and particularly opposed himself to the
teaching of those who, through an excessive zeal against the
errors of Nestorius, maintained that there existed only One
Nature in the Saviour. Whatever, in other passages, may
1 S. Leo. Ep. xi. Ed. Cacciari. "Elphvn irdvTeaatv" eirlaKoiros elirev
2 Gibbon quotes, with a malicious 4ire\Bt&v •
pleasure, an epigram of some unknown T\Sis SiWtoh Traaiv t^v jUvos evBov
Alexandrian, not deficient in wit : «XE1 i

280

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK 11 .

A.D. 447.

and
violence.

Council of
Constanti nople :
Eutyches
condemned.

have been the soundness of his expressions, he was here, at
least, maintaining the Catholic doctrine; and among other
witnesses in its favour, he cited Theophilus and Cyril, who
could neither of them be suspected of any partiality for the
heresy of Nestorius. Theodoret was accused of dividing the
Person of our Saviour into two Sons, and Dioscorus, probably
wishing to imitate Cyril, wrote to Domnus of Antioch, in which
city Theodoret had promulgated his opinions. The latter addressed
a letter to his accuser in his defence, in which, after satisfactorily
explaining his faith, he concluded by anathematizing those who
should say that the Blessed Virgin was not the Mother of God.
But Dioscorus paid no manner of attention to this defence ; he
not only, in the Church of Alexandria, delivered Theodoret over
to an anathema, but made a formal complaint of him to Flavian
of Constantinople. Theodoret loudly complained of this step,
as in contravention of the Canons of Nicaea. " The province of
Alexandria," so he wrote to Flavian, "is Egypt and Egypt
alone ; if that city has the chair of S. Mark, Antioch has that
of S. Peter, the Master of S. Mark." Domnus, for his part,
also sent a deputation to Constantinople, to defend himself
against the charges of Dioscorus ; regardless of the taunts of
the latter, that Antioch was thus giving precedence and juris
diction to Constantinople, and abandoning its high post of the
Church third in dignity.
It was evident, that although Alexandria and Antioch pro
fessed the same faith, there was a substantial difference in their
tenets ; and an occasion soon presented itself of bringing them
into collision. There was one Eutyches, Abbat of a large mo
nastery near Constantinople, who had been a friend of S. Cyril,
and was considered by him as one of the staunchest defenders of
the Truth against Nestorius. This man was accused by Euse
bius of Dorylaeum, (who by a singular coincidence had been the
first opponent of Nestorius,) of renewing the Apollinarian
heresy, by asserting that the Divinity and Humanity of the Son
of God formed but One Nature, and that the former as well as
the latter had suffered. This heresy had often been imputed to
S. Cyril, but was now clearly brought home to Eutyches, before
a Council of about thirty Bishops at Constantinople. They
heated him with the utmost patience; but finding him invincibly

SECT. IV.] RISE AND PROGRESS OF EUTYCHIANISM. 281
wedded to his errors, proceeded, Flavian being the president, to
anathematize himself and his tenets. This proceeding threw
the East into confusion : Flavian was stigmatized as a Nestorian
in disguise : even Pope S. Leo, afterwards the great bulwark of
the Church against the Eutychians, was not at first fully satis
fied J : and the Emperor was finally persuaded to summon an
CEcumenical Council at Ephesus. Several letters were addressed
by Theodosius on the subject : one to the future Council, mark- convocation
nig out tne question to be debated, namelv the differences which menicai
i i • i . J Council at
had arisen between Ilavian and Eutyches; one to the two com- Ephesus.
missioners, whom he appointed for the maintenance of order; ' '"9"
and one to Dioscorus, appointing him President, Flavian being
required to appear as a party, not as a judge. Leo was also in
vited to attend : but excused himself on account of the shortness
of notice. He however sent three legates: Julius,2 Bishop of
Puteoli ; Renatus, a Presbyter ; and Hilarus, Archdeacon of the
Roman Church, and addressed a most important letter to
Flavian, on the subject of the Incarnation; which, from its
subsequent reception by the Church, may be considered an
embodiment of Cathohc teaching on this point.
As it was the rejection or adoption of this Epistle which in
fluenced the whole future fortunes of the Church of Alexandria ;
as a great part of its subsequent history is nothing else than an
account of the struggle between the heresy condemned, and the
truth supported by Leo; and as without a clear understanding of
the exact and dogmatical decision of the Church on this subject,
much that will occur in the following pages will be unintelligible,
it seems well to give a translation, in this place, of the doctrinal
portion of this celebrated Epistle.3
Leo Bishop, to his Beloved Brother Flavian, Bishop
of Constantinople.
Having perused the letters of your love, at the lateness of'i'omeofs.
which we marvel, and having gone through the Episcopal Acts
1 S. Leo, Ep. xx. (ii. 23)....nondum Cacciari, (torn. ii. 114 — 138,) who
agnoscimus, qua justitia a. communione makes it the twenty-fifth Epistle. It
Ecclesia? fuerit separatus, &c. is necessary to premise this, because
2 Cacciari, ii. 89, note M. several of the readings in the various
3 The reader will bear in mind that editions differ considerably.
we are translating from the Edition of

282 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK II.
in order, we have at length become acquainted with the scandal
which has fallen out, and which has risen among you against the
integrity of the Faith, and those matters which aforehand
appeared to be hidden, have at length been opened and made
manifest to us. By which it appears to us, that Eutyches, who
was beforetime honourable from the name of Priest, is exceed
ingly imprudent and unlearned; so that the saying of the
Prophet may refer also to him,1 He hath left off to be wise, and
to do good, he imagineth mischief upon his bed. For what
more wicked, than to give the mind to impiety, and to refuse
trust to the wiser and more learned ? but into this folly they
fall, who, when they be by any obstacle hindered from the
knowledge of the Truth, seek not to the voice of the Prophets,
nor to the letters of the Apostles, nor to the authority of the
Evangelists, but to themselves : and are therefore masters of
error, because they were not disciples of Truth. For what eru
dition hath he acquired from the sacred pages of the New and
Old Testament, who understandeth not even the principles of
the Creed itself. That wliich is uttered through the whole world
by the mouths of all Catechumens, is not yet received in the
heart of this aged man.
He then, ignorant what he ought to believe concerning the In
carnation of the Word of God, and unwilling to labour in the ex
tent of Holy Scripture, that he might merit the lightof intelligence,
must at least have received by continual hearing that common and
consentient confession, by which the whole multitude of the faith
ful professes, That they believe in God the Father Almighty,
and in Jesus Christ His Only Son our Lord, Who was born
by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary. By which three sen
tences the engines of well-nigh all heretics are destroyed. For
since God, Almighty and Eternal, is asserted to be the Father,
it is proved that the Son is Co-Eternal with Him, differing in no
thing from the Father, because He is God of God, Almighty
of Almighty, Co-Eternal Son of the Eternal ; not later in time,
not inferior in Power, not dissimilar in Glory, not divided in
Essence ; and the Same Eternal and Only Begotten Son of the
Eternal Father was born of the Holy Ghost, and the Virgin
Mary. Which temporal Nativity in no way detracted from that
divine and eternal Nativity, in no way added to it; but expended
] Psalm xxxvi. 3, 4.

SECT. IV.] TOME OF S. LEO. 283
itself wholly1 in restoring man, who had been deceived, and
in conquermg death, and destroying by its virtue the Devil, who
had the power of death. For we could not have overcome the
author of Sin and Death, unless He, Whom neither sin could
contaminate, nor death detain, had taken upon Himself our
Nature, and made it His. For He was conceived of the Holy
Ghost in the womb of the Virgin Mary, who bare Him, even as
she had conceived Him, without loss of Virginity.
But if from this most pure Fount of the Christian Faith he
was not able to draw true knowledge, because he had, by his own
blindness, darkened the splendour of manifest truth, he should
have betaken himself to the doctrine of the Evangelists, seeing
that Matthew saith, The Book of the generation qf Jesus
Christ, the Son of David, the Son qf Abraham. He should
have sought instruction from the preaching of the Apostle ; and,
after reading in the Epistle to the Romans, Paul, a Servant qf
Jesus Christ, called to be an Apostle, separated unto the
Gospel of God, which He had promised afore by His Prophets
in the Holy Scriptures, concerning His Son Jesus Christ
our Lord, Which was made of the Seed of David according
to the flesh, he should have turned his pious attention to the
pages of the Prophets, and he would have found the Promise of
God to Abraham, In thy seed shall all the nations ofthe earth
be blessed. And that he might not doubt concerning the pro
priety of this Seed, he should have followed the Apostle, where
he saith, Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises
made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many ; but as qf
One, And to thy Seed, Which is Christ.2 " He should have
apprehended by the hearing of his heart the preaching of the
Prophet Isaiah, Behold a Virgin shall conceive and bear a
Son, and shall call His Name Immanuel, which being inter
preted is God with us.3 He should have read with faith the
words of the same Prophet, For unto us a Child is born; unto
us a Son is given ; and the Government shall be upon His
Shoulder ; and His Name shall be called Wonderful, Coun
sellor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince
1 It seems much better, with Quesnel 2 Gal. iii. 16.
and the Ballerini, and the Greek, to read
totam se, than, with Cacciari, totum Se. s Isaiah vii. 14.

284 patriarchate of Alexandria. [book ii.
of Peace.1 Nor did he speak in vain, when he said that the
Word was made Flesh, as if Christ, born of the Virgin's
womb, had the form of a man, and not the verity of His
Mother's Body. Or did he think that our Lord Jesus Christ
was not of our nature, because the Angel, sent to the Blessed
and Ever- Virgin Mary, saith, The Holy Ghost shall come
upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow
thee : therefore also That Holy Thing Which shall be born of
thee shall be called the Son of God2: as if, since the concep
tion of the Virgin was a Divine Act, the Flesh of the Conceived
was not of the nature of the conceiver ? But we are not to
understand that Generation, singularly admirable, and admirably
singular, in such sort, as if, by the novelty of That Which was
created the propriety of kind were removed.
For the Holy Ghost gave fecundity to the Virgin : but the
Verity of the Body was taken from her body; and Wisdom
building Herself an House, The Word was made Flesh and
dwelt among us3: namely, in That Flesh which It took from
man, and animated with the spirit4 of rational life. The pro
priety then of Each Nature and Substance being preserved, and
both uniting so as to form One Person, humility was assumed by
Majesty, infirmity by Virtue, mortality by Eternity, and to pay
the debt of our condition, inviolable was united to passible nature :
that (which was in congruity with our remedy) One and the Same
Mediator of God and Man, the Man Christ Jesus, might be able
to die from the one, might not be able to die from the other.
Therefore in the whole and perfect Nature of Very Man, Very
God was born, altogether God, altogether as we. But in saying
" as we," we mean in those things which the Creator formed
in us at first, and which He undertook to restore. For what
the Deceiver introduced, and deceived man committed, of these
things there was no trace in the Saviour. Nor did He, because
He participated in human infirmities, therefore participate in
human guilt. He assumed the form of a servant, without
spot of sin, honouring humanity, not dishonouring Divinity;
because that emptying of Himself, by which, being Invisible,
He made Himself Visible, and being Creator and Lord of all
1 Isaiah ix. 6. « We read, with the Greek and
2 S. Luke i. 35. Quesnel, spirits.
3 S. John i. 14.

SECT. IV.] TOME of S. LEO. 285
things, condescended to be a Mortal, was the inclination of His
Compassion, not the failure of His Power. For He, Who
remaining in the Form of God made man, The Same, in the
form of a slave, was made man. Each Nature holds without
defect its own propriety ; and as the Form of God destroys not
the form of a servant, so the form of a servant diminishes not
the Form of God. For because the Devil boasted, that man,
deceived by his arts, was without divine gifts, and deprived of his
dowry of immortality endured the hard sentence of death, and
in his miseries he had found some consolation from the fellowship
of another transgressor (viz. man), and that God, the principle of
justice so requiring, had changed His Own designs touching
man, whom He had formed in so great honour ; need was there
of the dispensation of a secret council, that God, Who cannot
change, and Whose Will cannot be deprived of its benignity,
should fulfil towards us, by a hidden Sacrament, the Dispensa
tion of His Mercy, and that man, driven into sin by the craft of
the maliee of the Devil, might not perish, contrary to the Will
of God.
The Son of God therefore enters this lower world, descending
from the Heavenly Seat, yet not departing from the Glory of His
Father, begotten after a new sort, by a new Nativity. After
a new sort : because, invisible among His Own, He condescended
to become Visible among us : the Incomprehensible conde
scended to be comprehended : He That existed before time, to
be born in time ; the Lord of the Universe took upon Himself
the form of a servant, having veiled the immensity of His
Majesty : the Impassible God disdained not to be a passible
man : the Immortal to be subject to the laws of death. By a
new Nativity: because inviolate Virginity was ignorant of
concupiscence, and yet ministered the material of Flesh. From
the Mother of the Lord, nature, not sin, was assumed ; and in
our Lord Jesus Christ, born of the Virgin's womb, because
His Nativity was wonderful, it followeth not therefore that His
Nature is dissimilar from ours. For He That is Very God, the
Same is also Very Man ; and there is no deceit in this Union,
while the humility of man and the Majesty of God meet
together. For as God is not changed by the Mercy displayed,
so man is not consumed by the dignity bestowed. For each form

286 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK II.
acts after its proper sort while in communion with the other :
the Word working that which is proper to the Word, and the
Flesh accomplishing that which is proper to the Flesh. The one
is glorious with miracles, the other yields to injuries^: and as the
Word recedeth not from the equahty of the Father's Glory,
so the Flesh leaveth not the nature of our race. For, — which
is often to be repeated, — He is One and the Same : Very Son of
God, Very Son of Man. God : — because it is written, In the
beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God,
and the Word was God1: Man: for the Word tvas made
Flesh, and dwelt among us.2 God : for all things were
made by Him, and without Him was not anything made
that was made.3 Man : for He was made qf a Woman,
made under the Law.* The Nativity of the Flesh is a proof
of Human Nature : the pregnancy of a Virgin, testimony of
Divine Virtue. The Infancy of the Babe is shown by the
humility of the cradle; the Majesty of the Most High is
declared by the songs of Angels. He was in form as the
infants whom Herod sought to slay ; but He is the Lord of all,
Whom the Wise Men rejoice, as suppliants, to adore. When
He came to the Baptism of John His Forerunner, lest it should
be hidden from sight that Divinity was concealed by the veil of
the Flesh, the Voice of the Father thundered from Heaven, and
said, This is My Beloved Son in Whom I am well pleased.5
To Him, Whom as man the craft of the Devil tempteth, to the
Same as God, the services of Angels minister. To be an
hungered, a-thirst, to be weary, to sleep, is evidently human.
But to feed five thousand with five loaves, and to give to the
Samaritan Woman Living Water, which whoso drank should
never thirst, to walk the sea with unsinking footsteps, and to
still the lifting up of the waves by rebuking the tempest : this,
without doubt, is Divine. As therefore, — to pass over many
things, — it is not of the same Nature to weep for Lazarus, a
departed friend, and by the command of the Voice to raise him
from the dead, having rolled away the stone of the four days'
sepulchre ; or to hang on the $ree, and to turn day into night,
and shake the elements ; or to be pierced with nails, and to open
1 S. Johni. 1. 1 Gal. iv. 4.
" S. John i. 14.
3 S. John i. 2. 6 S. Matt. iii. 17.

SECT. IV.] TOME OF S. LEO. 287
the gates of Paradise to the faith of the thief: — so it is not of the
same Nature to say, land the Father are One,1 and the Father
is greater than I.2 For, albeit in our Lord Jesus Christ
there is One Person of God and Man, yet that whence con
tumely is common to both, and that whence glory is common to
both, differs. From our Nature He hath the Humanity, which
is less than the Father; from the Father He hath the
Divinity, which is equal with the Father.
On account then of this unity of Person to be understood of
both Natures, we read that the Son of Man descended from
Heaven, since the Son of God took Flesh of that Virgin of
whom He was born. And again, we read that the Son of God
was crucified and buried, though He suffered these things, not
in His Divinity, in which He is Only-Begotten and Co-Eternal
Son, and Consubstantial with the Father, but in the Infirmity
pf His Human Nature. Wherefore we all, even in the Creed,
confess that the Only-Begotten Son of God was crucified and
buried, according to that saying of the Apostle, For had they
known it they would not have crucified the Lord of Glory.3
And when our Lord and Saviour Himself was instructing by
His questions the faith of His Disciples, Whom, said He, do
men say that I the Son of Man am ? And when they had
related the divers opinions of divers persons, But ye, saith He,
Whom say ye that I am ? Whom say ye that I, Who am
the Son of Man, and Whom ye see in the form of a servant,
and in the verity of Flesh, Whom say ye that I am ? Then
blessed Peter divinely inspired, and about, by his confession, to
profit all nations, Thou art, saith he, the Christ, the Son
of the Living God.4 And not without reason was he pro
nounced blessed by the Lord ; and he, who by revelation of the
Father confessed the same to be the Son of God, and Christ,
drew from the Corner Stone the firmness both of his virtue and
of His Name : because one of these things confessed without
the other, had not profited to salvation; and it was equally
dangerous to acknowledge the Lord Jesus Christ to be God
alone, and not Man, or Man alone and not God. But after the
Resurrection of the Lord, which was the Resurrection of a true
' S. John x. 30. 3 2 Cor. ii. 8.
2 S. John xiv. 25. 4 S. Matt. xvi. 16.

288 patriarchate of Alexandria. [book ii.
Body, because the Same arose from the dead, Who had been cru
cified and buried, what else was performed by the delay of forty
days, than that the integrity of our Faith should be purged from
all darkness ? For conversing, and dwelling, and eating with
His Disciples, and allowing Himself to be examined by the
diligent and curious touch of those, who yet doubted; He
therefore both entered, when the doors were closed, and by
breathing on them bestowed on them the Holy Ghost, and gave
them the light of understanding, and opened to them the
mysteries of the Holy Scriptures, and also showed them the
Wound in His Side, and the prints of the nails, and all the signs
of His recent Passion, saying, Behold My Hands and My
Feet, that it is I Myself; handle Me and see, for a spirit
hath not flesh and bones, as ye see Me have l: that the pro
prieties of the Divine and Human Natures might be acknow
ledged to remain in Him undivided ; and that we may thus know,
that the Word is not that which the Flesh is, but might confess
that the One Son of God consisteth of the Word and the Flesh.
Of which Mystery of Faith this Eutyches is to be repu
ted altogether ignorant, who has neither acknowledged our
nature in the Son of God, neither by the humility of mortality,
nor by the Glory of Resurrection ; nor feared the saying of the
blessed Apostle and Evangelist S. John, where he saith, Every
spirit that, confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the Flesh
is of God : and every spirit that divideth2 Jesus is not of
God: and this is Anti-Christ. But what is it to divide
Jesus, except to separate from Him the Human Nature, and
by impudent fictions to make void the Mystery of Faith, by
which alone we are saved? For he that is ignorant with respect
to the Nature of the Body of Christ must also be possessed
with the folly of the same ignorance with respect to His Passion.
For, if he beheves that the Cross of the Lord was not imagi
nary, and that the Sufferings undertaken for the Salvation of the
world were real, let him acknowledge His Flesh, Whose Death
he beheves. Let him not deny that He was a Man with a
Body like our own, Whom he allows to have been passible ; for
1 S. Luke xxiv. 39. Greek Version has to Siaipovv. The
2 1 S. John iv. 4. " Divideth," present Greek text reads, 6 pij SpoXoyet
solvit, or as others read, scindit. The tou 'lt)aovv.

SECT. IV.] RISE AND PROGRESS OF EUTYCHIANISM. 289
a denial of His Flesh is a denial of His Corporeal Passion. If
therefore he embraces the Christian Faith, and turns not away
his ears from the preaching of the Gospel, let him see what
Nature it was that hung transfixed with nails on the wood of the
Cross ; let him understand, when the Side of the Crucified was
opened by the spear of the soldier, whence the Blood and Water
flowed forth, that the Church of God might be refreshed by the
Laver, and by the Chalice. Let him hear also Blessed Peter the
Apostle preaching, that Sanctification of the Spirit is through
sprinkling of the Blood of Jesus Christ. Let him read atten
tively the words of the same Apostle, where he saith. Foras
much as ye know that ye were not redeemed by corruptible
things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received
by tradition from your fathers : but with the Precious Blood
of Christ, as of a Lamb without blemish and without spot.
Let him not fight against the testimony of Blessed John the
Apostle, where he saith, And the Blood of Jesus Christ His
Son cleanseth us from all sin. And again: This is the victory
that overcometh the world, even our Faith. Who is he that
overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the
Son of God ? This is He That came by water and blood,
even Jesus Christ, not by water only, but by water and blood.
And it is the Spirit That beareth witness, because the Spirit
is Truth ; for there are three that bear witness, the Spirit,
and the Water, and the Blood, and these three are one. The
Spirit, that is, of Sanctification, and the Blood of Redemption,
and the Water of Baptism, which three are one, and remain un
divided; and none of them is disjoined from its connexion
because the Cathohc Church fives and makes progress in this
Faith, that neither in Christ Jesus must Humanity be believed
without Very Divinity, nor Divinity without Very Humanity. l
Dioscorus, on the receipt of the Emperor's letter, sailed from
Alexandria to Ephesus, to take the presidency of the Council,
just as S. Cyril, eighteen years before, had done. But here the
resemblance ends : Cyril went to support Catholic Truth,
Dioscorus to give for a while the victory to error.
1 The concluding section is taken up Constantinople, and does not treat im-
with the proceedings of the Council of mediately of the Incarnation.
U

290 patriarchate of Alexandria. [book ii.

SECTION V.

THE

The time for the opening of the Council approaching, Dioscorus
arrived at Ephesus with ten of his Bishops : — the mandate of the
Emperor, requiring ten metropolitans, being, in his case, incapa
ble of being obeyed. His cause, on first consideration, seemed
fair. The friend of S. Cyril had been condemned in a hastily
summoned Synod at Constantinople ; and that friend an Abbat,
venerable for his age, illustrious for his sanctity, distinguished
for the opposition which he had offered to the first fury of Nes
torianism. Many of those who clamoured against him had also
calumniated S. Cyril : the charge of Apollinarianism was the
same in both cases : the Prelate by whom he was condemned was
openly accused by the Emperor as the origin of the troubles.
One hundred and twenty-eight Bishops, besides the deputies of
absent Prelates, with a large number of Priests and Abbats,
assembled in the church of S. Mary : and Dioscorus presided,
as well by virtue of his dignity, as by the express command of
the Emperor. Next to him came Julian, Bishop of Puteoli, the
Thrones of Antioch, Jerusalem, and Constantinople : the last-
named See being thus unaccountably degraded to the fifth place.
council It was on the eighth of August, seven days after the appointed
August s, time, that the Council was opened. Though Dioscorus was
President, yet the Emperor's letter charged Juvenal of Jerusa
lem, and Thalassius of Caesarea, with a share in the conduct of
affairs ; though, in truth, their colleague allowed them little
else than nominal authority.
John, a presbyter of Alexandria, and chief of the notaries,
briefly stated the cause of the assembling of the Synod, and
read the Epistle of the Emperor convoking it. Immediately on
its conclusion, Julius the Roman Legate, interpreted by Floren-
tius, Bishop of Sardis, informed the Council that Leo had
also been summoned, and Hilarus, a Roman Deacon, the third
of the Legates, (the Priest Renatus, who was one of them, having

SECT. V.] THE " ROBBERS' MEETING " AT EPHESUS. 291
died on the journey,) stated that it was not the custom for the
Roman Pontiff to appear in person at an (Ecumenical Synod ;
but they had an epistle addressed by him to the Council, which
they were desirous to present to it. " Let the letters of our
holy brother, Leo," said Dioscorus, evidently by a preconcerted
plan, "be given in." As they were being handed forward, John
the Notary, as if he had not heard the demand of the Legates,
said that there were further letters of the Emperor, which it
might be well to read. " Let them be read," said Juvenal of
Jerusalem, " and inserted in the Acts." This communication
requested that Barsumas, a Syrian Abbat, characterized as a man
of great piety, (and who had come accompanied by a thou
sand monks,) should be present in the Synod, as the represen
tative of all the Eastern Archimandrites. " The same notification
has been made to me," remarked Juvenal; "and the Holy
(Ecumenical Council will probably do well to admit the Abbat."
Dioscorus inquired if the Emperor's Commissioners, Elpidius
and Eulogius, had any information to give on the subject ?
Elpidius spoke, and spoke well, on the grave responsibility of
the Fathers. " To-day," said he, " the Lord and God of all,
the Word and Saviour, submits Himself to your judgment,
and honours you with the power of deciding His Cause ; that,
if He find you judging rightly here, He may both honour you
on earth, and confess you before the Father when He shall
come to judge the world. But if any come with a deceitful
heart, to shake the foundations of the Faith, or to call in question
the Doctrine of the Holy Fathers, woe to him from both, from
God and from the Emperor ! Good were it for that man that
he had never been born ; who, when the thief, and the publican,
and the harlot, and the Syrophoenician confessed, refuses to ac
knowledge Him Who is in the Glory of the Father, and Who
humbled Himself for our sakes." These reflections were evi
dently levelled at Flavian; and their object was made more
manifest when the Imperial letters, having been read, were found
openly to accuse that holy Prelate as the source of the present
calamities. At its conclusion, Thalassius proposed that till the
Faith was decided, nothing else, in compliance with the Caesar's
will, should be treated. " My instructions are the same," re
marked Julius. Elpidius proposed the examination of the Acts
u2

292 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK II.
of the Constantinopolitan Council, and of the deposition of
Eutyches. Dioscorus at once assented. "We must decide,"
said he, "whether they are consonant to the decrees of the
Fathers. Ye would not wish to innovate on their Faith ? '
" Anathema," cried the Council, " to him that shall innovate !
Anathema to him that shall call into question ! Keep we
the Faith of the Fathers ! " And the notaries of Dioscorus
added several exclamations in praise of that Prelate, which seem
to have had no real existence, but which were inserted in the
Acts. " Then," said Elpidius, " since the Council is unanimous
in the confession of Faith, let the Archimandrite Eutyches be in
troduced, and heard in his own defence." There was a token
of general approbation. Juvenal gave orders that the Archi
mandrite should be allowed to enter, and to produce his docu
ments ; and Thalassius, when he appeared, informed him that he
was at liberty to bring forward anything which might serve his
cause with the Great and Holy Synod.
Eutyches Eutyches, after uttering the words, " I commend myself to
defence; the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and to your jus
tice," handed in a memorial, which he requested the Council to
consider, and which was accordingly read to them by John the
Notary. It commenced with the Nicene Creed ; after the pro
fession of which, "This is the Faith," proceeded the aged
Abbat, " in which I was born : — in which I was forthwith dedi
cated to God : in which I have lived : — and in which I hope to
die." He then appealed to Cyril in defence of his position :
accused, he said, by Eusebius of Dorylaeum, of a heresy which
could not be defined, because he objected to a new definition of
the Faith, and clave to the Creeds of Nicaea and Ephesus, and
to those alone. Vainly, he continued, had he appealed from the
unjust judgment of Flavian to the future Council : vainly
pointed to his hoary hairs, grown gray in warfare against heresy :
unheard, unheeded, he was deposed by a sentence drawn up long
before, anathematized, and delivered over to public indignation,
as a heretic and a Manichaean. " To the judgment of your
Blessednesses," concluded the Archimandrite, " I appealed from
the beginning : and now again I confess, in the Presence of
Jesus Christ, Who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good con
fession, that I thus hold, and believe, and understand, as the

SECT. V.] THE " ROBBERS' MEETING" AT EPHESUS. 293
Holy Fathers who assembled in Nicaea defined the Faith :
which definition was confirmed by the former Council of
Ephesus." The memorial having been finished, Flavian spoke : " The
accused has been heard : the accuser, Eusebius of Dorylaeum,
ought to be heard also." Elpidius interposed. The function
of the present Council, he said, was not to re-open the question,
but to judge at Ephesus those who had judged at Constanti
nople. The rest of the acts of that Council ought to be read.
Elpidius, said Dioscorus, has spoken well. And he called on the
other Bishops for their opinions. Juvenal of Jerusalem, Stephen
of Ephesus, Cyrus of Aphrodisias, Thalassius of Caesarea, and
thirteen other Prelates, of whom the last, Uranius of Himeria in
Osrhoene, spoke in Syriac, gave their sentence for reading the
Acts : — and then the whole Synod, by acclamation, called for
them. This unanimity of sentiment in so manifestly unjust a
proceeding, might have been considered a fabrication of Dios
corus, had it not been allowed to pass unquestioned, when the
Acts of the Robbers' Meeting were read at Chalcedon. Dios- the Acts at
¦ tt • iii Constanti-
corus, after the acclamation, turning to Juhus, inquired whether nopie reads
he, as Vicar of the most holy Bishop Leo, also opined for the
Acts ? We will that they are read on this condition, replied
Juhus, that the Epistle of the Pope be first heard. " Since,"
said Hilarus, "the most holy Bishop of the Roman Church,
on a perusal of the documents which ye now desire to hear, has
written and sent" — Eutyches interrupted. The Roman Legates
were suspected men : — they had lodged with Flavian : — he hoped
that their testimony would not be received to his prejudice. Dios
corus insisted that the Acts should be first read, and then the
Epistle of Leo : and the notary obeyed. The Acts were inter
rupted, as was usual, by various exclamations of the Council.
The name of S. Cyril having been accidentally mentioned in the
memorial presented by Eusebius to Flavian, there was a confused
cry, "The memory of Cyril is eternal!" "Dioscorus and
Cyril are of one mind!" "The Synod beheves as Cyril!"
"Anathema to him that adds I" " Anathema to him that sub
tracts ! " " Anathema to him that innovates ! " Juhan said,
" It is the Faith of the Apostolic See." The Acts of Constan
tinople included the Second Letter of Cyril to Nestorius, part

294 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK II.
of the Acts of the First Council of Ephesus, and the Epistle of
Cyril to John of Antioch, on the conclusion of the misunder
standing between their Churches. This was brought forward at
Constantinople for the purpose of shewing that Cyril held,
definitely and unreservedly, the doctrine of Two Natures Incar
nate : and, as soon as it was finished, Eusebius, Bishop of Be-
rytus, endeavoured to neutralize the effect which it might have
produced on the Ephesine Synod. Cyril of blessed memory, he
said, had been, by the wise ordering of Divine Providence, mis
interpreted in his life, and so compelled to explain what might
appear doubtful by what was more clear. Thus, though in the
letter recited above, he appeared to allow Two Natures after the
union, yet in other Epistles, to Valerian of Iconium, to Acacius
of MeKtene, to Successus of Diocaesarea, he had used these ex
press words, — "We must not then imagine Two Natures, but
One Incarnate Nature of God the Word.1" And this statement
has the authority, real or fictitious, of S. Athanasius. The
reading of the Acts at Constantinople proceeded again, with
hardly an interruption, till it came to a question put by Eusebius
to Eutyches, in order to press him to declare that Two Natures
remain after the Incarnation, and that Christ, according to the
Flesh, is Consubstantial with us; then the Egyptian Bishops cried
out, " Out with Eusebius ! burn him ! burn him alive ! sever
him in two ! as he divided, let him be divided ! " " Will you
endure," said Dioscorus, " that Two Natures should be spo
ken of after the Incarnation?" "Anathema," cried his own
Prelates, " to him that shall say so ! " "I want your voices
and your hands," continued the President : " if any cannot
speak, let him stretch out his hand." And the obedient Egyp
tians again shouted anathema.2 The remaining Acts of Con-

1 This famous saying is believed to sense of Person. But if he were ever
have come originally from ApoUinaris , betrayed into error by the pseudo-Atha-
not from Athanasius. Doubtless it is not nasius, his testimony to the Doctrine
only patient of, but as the faith is now of Two Natures is clear and distinct in
defined, positively involving an heretical other places; and the confession of
sense. Nevertheless, it is possible that Faith with which he was satisfied in the
Cyril cited it, simply because he be- Orientals was, as we have seen, branded
lieved it to have come from Athanasius, as Nestorian,
and employed the word ipucris in the 2 It is necessary to read the Acts of

SECT. V.] THE " ROBBERS' MEETING" AT EPHESUS. 295
stantinople having been read, and the proceedings subsequent to
the deposition of Eutyches, a conversation ensued as to whether
the Acts of the Synod had been falsified. Flavian in vain en
deavoured to obtain a hearing : and Dioscorus imperiously
called on the Prelates to vote.
It is necessary to bear in mind the state of the Synod. Dios
corus, in the plenitude of his power, openly threatened depriva
tion and exile to those who should dissent from him : the Impe
rial troops blocked up every avenue to the church ; the thousand
monks of Barsumas were ready for any deed of violence; the
Parabolani were ready to obey the least nod of their Master.
That a sentence thus pronounced was not Canonical, is most
certain : it is only marvellous how more than one hundred Pre
lates could so basely prefer their safety or their Sees to the
Truth with which they were entrusted. Somewhat may be said
in their favour. Eutyches came before them as the friend of S.
Cyril; the archdeacon of S. Cyril presided in the assembly; the
words of S. Cyril had just been quoted, " We confess One Na
ture after the Incarnation " : the case had been prejudged by
the Emperor; the Creed of Eutyches might be looked on as
not so utterly opposed to that of his opponents ; they affirmed
that Christ was Consubstantial to us, according to the flesh,
and he confessed that Christ was Incarnate of the Blessed
Virgin, and that she was consubstantial to us : this, in a judg
ment of charity, might be supposed to neutrahze the pertinacity
of Eutyches in defending One Nature. Partly then terrified, Eatycnes
. J ' acquitted.
partly ignorant, partly, perhaps, persuaded, the assembled Fathers
set their hands to the acquittal of Eutyches, and thus the Mono-
physite heresy was born in the Church. Juvenal of Jerusalem,
Domnus of Antioch, Stephen of Ephesus, and Thalassius of
Caesarea, led the way in this foul injustice ; and, contrary to
usual custom, all the Prelates gave their opinions separately,

the Latrocinium with the Commentary with t) ayla avvoBos elirev, ''Apov, Kavaov
of the Fathers of Chalcedon, at their re- k.t.X. But when this was read at
lection in that Synod, in order that Chalcedon, — oi avaToXMol, koI oi abv
we may not receive the assertions of avrols evXafrearaToi 4irlaKowoi i$6t\<rav,
Dioscorus for the words of the Council Tavra oiiSels elite- TaSra AiiaKopos "eme-
of Ephesus. The anathema to Euse- Tavra oi Aiyvirrioi ehtov.
bius is, in the Ephesine Acts, prefaced

296

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK II.

there being no acclamation at the end. The Roman Legates
would appear to have opposed the acquittal of Eutyches.1
The Protonotary proceeded to inform the Council, that he held
in his hands a memorial addressed to it by the Monks who com
posed the Religious House over which Eutyches had presided.
It was found to contain, on being read, a complaint of the injus
tice suffered by them in common with Eutyches, and a prayer
for redress. Their confession of faith was demanded, and de
clared orthodox, and they were accordingly absolved from all
censure. Dioscorus, having carried this point, determined on a still
bolder step. The Acts of the sixth Session of the Council of

1 The constancy or apostacy of the
Roman Legates in the matter of the
acquittal of Eutyches is a very impor
tant question. The evidence seems to
stand thus in their favour : — 1. S.
Leo, in his Epistle to Pulcheria of Oct.
13, 449, says : — " Our Legates — of
whom one, (i. e. Hilarus) escaping the
violence of the Bishop of Alexandria,
who grasped at every thing, has faith
fully related to us the order of events,
— protested in the Synod, as it was
termed, against the judgment, it were
more true to say the fury, of one man."
Hilarus himself writes, apparently at
the same date, to Pulcheria, " I could
not participate in the will and decision
of Dioscorus." 2. Hilarus was after
wards elevated to the chair of S. Peter:
which could hardly have been the case
had any shadow of imputation rested
on his orthodoxy. 3. The Acts of the
Latrocinium make no mention of the
consent of the Papal Legates ; — a very
strong argument in their favour. 4. It
is certain that Hilarus protested against
the condemnation of Flavian. These
considerations appear perfectly satisfac
tory as to the firmness of Hilarus.
The case is different with Julius and
Dulcitius as to the condemnation of
Flavian. 1. From the very fact that

the Contradicitur of Hilarus is in
serted in the Acts, it seems to follow,
that, had the other Legates protested,
their protest would also have been
noticed. 2. Hilarus had to fly at
once, for the sake of avoiding danger :
it is hardly likely that his fellow Le
gates, had they followed his example,
would have been suffered to remain
peaceably. Few, we imagine, will
agree with the argument of Baronius,
Si autem adeo gravia Hilarus Legatus
passus est fugiens, quamam, putas,
fuit conditio remanentium ? 3. There
is a marked silence preserved by S.
Leo, as to the conduct of his other
Legates, while he loses no opportunity
of praising the courage of Hilarus.
If it be objected that he speaks of the
constancy of his messengers, the use of
the plural for the singular is too com
mon to render it safe to found an argu
ment on that peculiarity. It has been
argued by some, and Baronius (449. c.)
has fallen into the error, that Renatus,
at least, stood firm, because a letter of
Theodoret's is addressed to him, prais
ing his courage at Ephesus. But, as
Pagi (449 ix.) shows, Renatus died at
Delos on his passage out : and the letter
of Theodoret's must have been misdi.
rected by some of the copyists.

SECT. V.] THE " ROBBERS' MEETING" AT EPHESUS. 297
Ephesus were, at his request, publicly read ; and he then de
manded, whether those, whose tenets were in opposition to those
of that Synod, or of Nicaea, or who had added anything to, or
subtracted anything from them, deserved condemnation or not ?
The Bishops declared that they deserved condemnation: the
legates affirmed the same thing ; still, though uselessly, pressing
that the letter of Leo might be read to the Council. Dioscorus Dioscorusoroooscs tlie
proceeded, that the Holy Councils of Nicaea and Ephesus had condemna-
already laid down the Faith; that Flavian and Eusebius had Flavian:'
been convicted of adding to the Creed of those Councils, to the
subversion of all good order, and the scandal of the faith; and that
therefore these two Prelates were deprived of all dignity both
Episcopal and Sacerdotal. The whole Council was thrown into an
uproar: Flavian exclaimed, "I appeal": and Hilarus, Contra-
dicitur. Onesiphorus, Bishop of Iconium, with several others,
threw himself at the feet of Dioscorus, beseeching him to proceed
more slowly. "Flavian is deposed," replied Dioscorus : " were
my tongue to be cut out for them, I would say no other words."
And in the mean time, the Bishops went on signing the sen
tence. Onesiphorus, rendered desperate, urged his request in
the strongest language : Dioscorus rising, cried, " Where are he caiis in
the Counts?" A body of armed men rushed in : swords waved,
staves fell, and chains clanked, among the Bishops. Barsumas
and his herd of followers fell on his opponents, insulting,
wounding, and maiming them. The greater part were terrified
into subscription : some stood firm till evening, and then yielded ;
a few, who were impracticable, were sent into exile. Flavian s. Flavian
and Eusebius were thrown into prison: Hilarus escaped. Of
all this violence, the Acts, as amended by Dioscorus, say not a
word: they give the sentences of the various Prelates in the
usual way : — and it is certain that through terror, or by persua
sion, many signed, among whom were Juvenal of Jerusalem,
Domnus of Antioch, and the thrones of Ephesus and Caesarea.
Of the conduct of the Legate Juhus, we are not informed : if he
did not acquiesce, it is certain that he offered no vigorous resist
ance. Three days afterwards, Dioscorus caused Domnus of An
tioch to be excommunicated in the Council : and on his way
home, excommunicated S. Leo himself: causing this latter sen
tence to be subscribed by the ten Egyptian Bishops whom he had

298

PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK II.

S. Leo re
jects the
Council.

A.D. 450.
Marcian,Emperor.

brought with him. From this time the power of the See of
Alexandria dechned, never to rise again.
When Leo was informed of the result of the Council of
Ephesus, for which he waited with anxiety during a long time,
as Hilarus was compelled to choose the most circuitous routes
for his return, he assembled a Synod at Rome, wherein all its
Acts were condemned. He wrote strongly on the conduct of
Dioscorus to Theodosius, who paid no great attention to this
communication, but requested Leo to communicate with Ana
tolius, the successor of the deposed Flavian. The latter was
dead in banishment, having never recovered the violence of Bar
sumas : and he is reckoned by the Church among the Martyrs.
On the propriety of acceding to the request of Theodosius, S.
Leo suspended his judgment, but did not fail to instigate Valen
tinian, Emperor of the West, to demand the assembling an
(Ecumenical Council. Shortly after the receipt of this letter,
Theodosius departed this life ; his sister Pulcheria gave her
hand to Marcian, who was forthwith raised to the imperial
dignity. The new Emperor was strictly orthodox : and from the very
beginning of his reign determined to repair the faults of his
predecessor. A Council was held at Constantinople, in which
Anatolius anathematized Eutyches and his adherents, the Pope's
Legates assisting : the body of S. Flavian was translated with
all honour to his own church. Marcian wrote to S. Leo, pro
posing the convention of an (Ecumenical Council : the Pope was
not so well inclined to the project, on account of the then dis
turbed state of the West ; but the resolution of the Emperor
prevailed. An imperial edict assembled Bishops from all parts
of the East, at Nicaea. Legates were despatched by Leo, who
also wrote four letters on the subject, two to Marcian, one to Ana
tolius, and one to the Council. He recommends that no discus
sion should be allowed on points already ruled in the three
(Ecumenical Synods : that the Bishops deposed by the second
Council, or as it was generally termed, the Robbers' Meeting of
Ephesus, should be restored to their Sees : and that the greatest
lenity should be shown to those who should renounce the
Eutychian heresy, and express their sorrow for the past.

299

SECTION VI.
THE (ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON.
The Fathers were assembled at Nicaea, when they received a a.d. 451.
¦n • 1 -it TheFathers
letter from the Emperor, requestmg them to suspend then deli- assemble at
jNlCSSii !
beratjpns till he could be present ; and on their soon after repre
senting to him, that this detention from their flocks was ex
tremely inconvenient to them, he requested them to come to
Chalcedon, alleging that he could not on account of the threat
ened attacks of the Huns, absent himself for any time, or to
any great distance, from Constantinople.
To Chalcedon, therefore, the Fathers resorted ; and found that they repair
the church of S. Euphemia, situated at a little distance from don.
the city, and on the borders of the sea, was the place appointed
for their meeting. Historians dwell with delight on the ravish
ing beauty of the prospect. The ground in front, well wooded
in some parts, in others laid out in beautiful meadows, or
rich with harvests, sloped down to the Propontis : beyond
the strait, sometimes like a mirror of glass, sometimes rippling
in the wind, rose, with its abbeys, its palaces, and its churches,
conspicuous among which were those of the Holy Resurrection
and of the Divine Wisdom, the Imperial city of Constantinople :
behind was a stately amphitheatre of mountains, clothed with
forest trees to the summit. The number of the assembled
Fathers was far larger than in any other (Ecumenical Council ;
at Nicaea there had been three hundred and eighteen ; at Con
stantinople, a hundred and fifty ; at Ephesus, more than two
hundred : but at Chalcedon there were six hundred and thirty.
The magistrates, to the number of nineteen, were seated before
the Altar rails ; on the left, the Catholic Bishops, in order thus :
the legates of the Pope, the Thrones of Constantinople, An
tioch, Caesarea, and Ephesus : with the Bishops of Asia, Pontus,
and Thrace. On the opposite side were Dioscorus of Alexan
dria, Juvenal of Jerusalem, and the Bishops of Illyria, Palestine,

300 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK II.
and Egypt. The Book of the Gospels, symbolising the Presence
of the Saviour, was, as at Ephesus, placed in the middle.
session i., The first session took place on the eighth of October. It was
a.d. 45i. opened by a protest on the part of the legates, that Dioscorus
ought not to be admitted to the Council. By the order of the
magistrates, the accused Bishop left his place, and seated himself
as defendant in the midst of the assembly. Eusebius of Dory
laeum advancing as plaintiff, conjured the Fathers that the me
morial which he had drawn up might be read ; in it he charged
Dioscorus with having violated the Faith of Nicaea, condemned
himself and Flavian unjustly, and supported the heresy of
Eutyches : it concluded with a demand that the Acts of the
Pseudo-Council of Ephesus might be read. Dioscorus at first
agreed in this demand ; but instantly after urged the previous
discussion of the question of Faith. The magistrates, however,
decided that the Acts should be read : they were accordingly
begun when Theodoret, by the command of the civil authority,
took his place in the Council. His entrance gave the signal for an
uproar. "Out with the Nestorian!" cried the Egyptian Pre
lates : " the Faith is violated : Theodoret is banished from the
Council by the Canons : long life to the Empress ! out with
Theodoret, who anathematized Cyril ! " " Out with Dioscorus !"
shouted the Oriental Prelates : " out with the murderer ! with
the man who summoned the Counts ! the man who made us sign
a blank paper ! " Theodoret stood firm in the midst, and de
manded a patient hearing : the magistrates, having with diffi
culty appeased the tumult, decided that he should be received as
a plaintiff : observing that this could in no way violate the rights
of the Council. The tumult increased: the magistrates at length
composed it by commenting on the want of Episcopal dignity
which it involved : and the acts of the Pseudo-Council were read,
though not without many interruptions. The Prelates who had
signed the deposition of Flavian protested that they had done
so through fear : Stephen of Ephesus in particular stated, that
the number of soldiers and monks employed in intimidating the
assembly was about three hundred1 : and that he had not been
1 This seems to be at variance with imagine three hundred persons only to
what other historians say of the thou- have entered the church, the others
sand monks of Barsumas. But we may remaining outside.

SECT. VI.] ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON. 301
allowed to leave the church, until he subscribed a sheet of blank
paper, afterwards attached to the sentence of deposition. All
bore witness to the violence of the conduct of Dioscorus ; to his
refusal to hear the letters of Leo ; to the effacing the true Acts
of the Council, by breaking the tablets of the notaries of some
of the Catholic Bishops. Dioscorus taunted his accusers with
their confession of having done through terror that which their
conscience disapproved. The Orientals three times confessed
their fault, and begged for pardon.
It must be confessed, that however grievous had been the
fault, and unwarrantable — even had it been exercised for the
Truth — the conduct of Dioscorus, he deserves at least the credit
of great courage and presence of mind, and of not having been
wanting to himself in his great extremity. During the whole
time consumed in the reading of the Acts, he defended himself
in every defensible action, put the fairest gloss on his violent de
meanour, and turned the confession of his adversaries to the
best account. Each succeeding step, however, only served the
more clearly to expose his guilt : the creed of Flavian, as ex
posed in the Council of Ephesus, was found perfectly orthodox,
and in conformity with that of S. Cyril; and towards the con
clusion of the session, Juvenal of Jerusalem passed over to the
side of the Catholic Prelates, amidst loud acclamations : Peter
of Corinth followed his example, and was received with shouts
of Peter holds the Faith of Peter : and he was imitated by
the Bishops of Macedonia, and even by some of Egypt. Dios
corus, reduced to despair, exclaimed, " They are condemning
the Fathers as well as me ; I have passages from Athanasius
and from Cyril which forbid us to speak of Two Natures after
the Incarnation." The Acts of Ephesus were continued : Dios
corus, knowing that the conclusion of that Synod would tell
more fearfully against him than anything else, remarked that,
as it was growing dark, it would be better to postpone the con
clusion to another time : the magistrates would not consent ;
and the Acts were concluded by torch-light.
When they were finished, the Oriental Prelates cried out as
one man, " Anathema to Dioscorus ! Let the deposer be de
posed! Long life to Leo! long life to the Patriarch!" The
magistrates announced that the question of the Faith would be

302 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK II.
examined in another session : and proceed to pronounce sentence
to the following effect : That as from the Acts of the Council of
Ephesus it appeared that Flavian of blessed memory, and the
holy Bishop Eusebius, had, been unjustly deposed, it appeared
good to themselves, as well-pleasing to God, if the Emperor
consented, that Dioscorus of Alexandria, Juvenal of Jerusalem,
and the Bishops of Caesarea, Ancyra, Berytus, and Seleucia,
should, as presidents or chief movers of that Council, undergo the
same penalty, and be deprived, according to the Canons, of Episco
pal dignity. It seems to have been understood, that the depriva
tion of the five latter Bishops would only, in case of acknowledg-
Dioscorus ment of their fault, be inflicted pro forma. The first Session
Hzans terminated by the reiterated confession of their fault by the
Bishops of Illyria, and a confused outburst of exclamations.
" Long years to the Senate ! " " Holy God, Holy and Mighty,
Holy and Immortal, have mercy on us ! " " Long years to the
Emperor and Empress !" " Christ hath deposed Dioscorus ! "
" Christ hath deposed the homicide ! " " God hath vindicated
His Martyrs ! "
session il. At the beginning of the Second, which was held two days
afterwards, the question of faith was debated. The creeds of
Nicaea and Constantinople were first read, — then the letters of
S. Cyril to Nestorius and to John of Antioch : and at the end
of each, the Fathers professed their entire acquiescence in its
Tome of s. doctrines. After these preliminaries, a Greek Translation of the
Leo read. famous letter of S. Leo to S. Flavian was read, and some ex
ceptions were made to the passages where it states, in strong
terms, the doctrine of Two Natures. The parts which gave
offence were in the third and fourth sections.1
The orthodoxy of these disputed passages was proved by a re
ference to the works of S. Cyril, in the first two instances by
Aetius, Archdeacon of Constantinople; and in the third by
Theodoret. At the conclusion of the letter, the Fathers ex
claimed, " It is the faith of the Apostles ! our Creed is the
same ! Anathema to them that gainsay ! S. Peter hath spoken
1 Ante, p. 284. "To pay the debt to p. 286, "the other yields to inju-
of our condition," down to "might ries": and p. 287, "For, albeit"
not be able to die from the other" ¦ p. down to " equal with the Father."
285, ad fin. " For each form," down

SECT. VI.] (ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON. 303
by Leo \" Some of the more cautious Prelates, however, re
quested time for the more careful comparison of this letter with
other writings of the Fathers, and in particular with the Twelve
Anathemas of S. Cyril : and five days were allowed for this pur
pose, Anatohus having it in charge to hold public meetings, for
the further explanation of Leo's sentiments, and the clearing up
any difficulty which might occur to the minds of the more scru
pulous or less-informed among the Bishops. The Session ended
in confusion. The Eutychianizing party shouted, " The Fathers
to the Synod !" " Dioscorus to the Council ! " " Dioscorus to
the churches !" — Their opponents were equally ready with " Dios
corus to exile !" " The Egyptian to exile ! " " He that commu
nicates with Dioscorus is a Jew ! " — Order having been restored
by the magistrates, the Session terminated.
The third Session was held three days later : the five days session in.,
. Oct. 13.
fixed by the magistrates having nothing to do with the judgment
of Dioscorus, which wa3 now to come on, but only with the
pure question of Faith. The magistrates were not present : and
Dioscorus absented himself. Aetius, Archdeacon of Constanti
nople, opened the Session by informing the Council that Euse
bius of Dorylaeum had drawn up a memorial, which he requested
might be read. In it he represented the great violence which
had been done both to the Canons and to justice, in the depo
sition of himself and of Flavian, and petitioned the Council
that the punishment inflicted on Dioscorus might be signal,
to serve as a warning to future offenders. Dioscorus was ordered
to attend: Aetius informed the Council that he had already
been advertised of its Session, and had promised to come, if his
guards would allow him. On this, search was made for him out- Dioscorus
.,-_,, 1 , TT , . cited a first,
side the Church, but to no purpose. He was then canonically
cited a first time by three Bishops, and refused to come ; firstly,
on the ground that the guards would not permit him, and
secondly, that the magistrates were not present at the Session, as
they ought to be, he said, in order that the accusations against
him might be fairly examined. A second citation was met by the jV^ second
same excuse, joined to which was a plea of illness. He further
inquired if Juvenal and the other deposed Bishops were assist
ing at the Council : the deputies replied, that on this point they
were not instructed to answer.

304 PATRIARCHATE OF ALEXANDRIA. [BOOK II.
His accusers The Council being acquainted with these proceedings, received,
in the next place, a deputation of clerks and of laics from Alex
andria, charged with several memorials against Dioscorus. The
accusations brought against him were of a very serious character:
they included wanton destruction of property, homicide, wilful
misappropriation of the Church's goods to his own pleasures,
overbearing and cruel conduct to his Priests, and, lastly, an openly
licentious life. Nor did the executors of S. Cyril fail to bring
forward the hardships and injustice they had suffered at his
hands.
Dioscorus Dioscorus was then, for the third and last time, summoned to
time, a appear : the citation was in writing : and bore in addition, that if
the defendant did not appear, he would be condemned as contuma
cious. Dioscorus replied, that he had nothing to add to what he
had already said, and repeated this answer seven times. On the
commissioners' report, the legates pronounced sentence to the
following effect : That whereas Dioscorus had been guilty of vari
ous excesses, clearly proved to the Council : had admitted to his
Communion Eutyches, deprived by his Bishop : had persisted in
defending, instead of asking pardon for, his conduct at Ephesus ;
had excommunicated Pope Leo ; and being duly cited thrice, had
refused to appear and answer for his misdeeds ; therefore the
Most Holy Archbishop of Rome, with the Apostle S. Peter, by the
and deposed. Legates, and the assembled Council, adjudged him to be deprived
of all Episcopal Dignity, and the sacerdotal office. This sentence
was subscribed by the Legates, the Patriarchal Thrones, and the
Bishops in order : and with it terminated the third Session of
the Council of Chalcedon.

END OF VOL. I.

J. MASTERS, PRINTER, ALDERSGATE STREET, LONDON.

INDEX

VOLUME I.

Abilius, S., Patriarch
Abreha and Atzbeha, SS.
Achillas, S,, Patriarch
^milian assumes the purple at Alexandria
Mm of Martyrs
Agrippinus, S., Patriarch
Alexander, S., Patriarch .
encyclic epistle of, against Arius
his Tome
his death
writes to S. Alexander of Byzantium
Alexandria, Church of, founded by S. Mark
the Third See .
Great Plague at
Council of
Council of
Council of, against Arius
Second ditto
Third ditto
Arian persecution at
Ambrose, the friend of Origen
Anastasius teaches that S. Mary is not Theotocos
Anathemas, the Twelve, of S. Cyril .
Andronicus excommunicated by Synesius
Anomoeans, their rise
Anianus, S., his conversion
he succeeds S. Mark
Antony, S., his birth
he embraces the solitary life
his temptations
in the Castle .

Page. 13
155
113 77
89 15
115126
129 151
130 3
209 78
173
193117
119 135
186 26
235251224189 6
13
107 108
109109

306

INDEX TO VOLUME I.

1

Page.

Antony, S., his disciples ....

. Ill

visits S. Paul ....

177

his death ....

. 187

Antioch, Great Schism at .

205

Council of . . . . .

. 175

Apollonia, S., her Martyrdom

42

Apollonius, S., his Martyrdom ....

91

Apostates, reception of

50

Arabic Canons of Nicaea ....

. 149

Arcaph, John, the Meletian

161

Arianism, causes of its rapid rise

. 120

Arius joins Meletius ....

92

elevated to the Priesthood

114

rise of his heresy ....

116

he is anathematised

. 120

in Palestine ....

124

his death .....

170

Arsenius, Bishop of Hypsele, his pretended murder

161

Asclas, S., his Martyrdom ....

94

Athanasius, S-, his education

118

Patriarch ....

. 152

his canonical election .

153

visits his Dioeeese

. 157

is threatened by Eusebius

158

he goes to Tyre ....

. 163

is accused of fornication

164

is acquitted

. 165

produces Arsenius

165

deposed

. 167

goes to Constantinople

168

is banished ....

. 169

at Treves ....

170

returns to Alexandria

172

goes to Rome

174

returns to Alexandria

. 175

goes again to Rome

175

is recalled ....

. 182

goes to Antioch

183

to Alexandria

183

goes into the desert

188

his letter to the Monks

190

returns to Alexandria .

192

again exiled

195

returns

196

again exiled

197

returns

198

death of

200

Athenagoras

18

Axum, Metropolis of Ethiopia

. 156

INDEX TO VOLUME I.

Basileides, S., his Martyrdom
Basil, S., his opinion of S. Dionysius
Besas, S.,
Bithynia, Pseudo Council of
Brothers, the Long, at Constantinople
Bull, Bishop, defends S. Dionysius

307
Page. 22 75
44
128
219 81

Cajsarea, Council of .
Candidian protests against the Council of Ephesus
Caracalla, his orders for a massacre at Alexandria .
Cassian in Egypt
writes on the Incarnation . •
Catechetical School of Alexandria .
Celadion, S., Patriarch
Celestine, Pope, S., applied to by Nestorius
condemns Nestorius .
Cerdo, S., Patriarch
Chalcedon, Council of, Fourth (Ecumenical
Clement of Alexandria
Coluthus, his schism
he recants
Coluthium, in the Mareotis
Confessors in the Decian persecution .
Constantine, Emperor
his letters to Alexander and Arius
Constantine, his death • • •
Constantinople, Council of, Second (Ecumenical
Council of Alexandria against Origen
Creed of Eusebius
Nicsea . . . •
Cronion, S. .
Cyrilla, S., her Martyrdom
Cyril, S., his early studies
his election
attacks Novatians
quarrels with Orestes
received to Communion with Rome
attacks Nestorianism in his XVII. Paschal Epistle
his first letter to Nestorius .
his second letter
his third letter
goes to Ephesus
. imprisoned returns to Alexandria
negotiations with John of Antioch
is reconciled with him

Cyrus and John, SS., their Martyrdom

162
259 24
229250 19 15
247 250 13
299 19
116
135 67
46
133
134 171
208 28
143
145 44
103
226225226 227
228
237246 248
251 256
268 270
271
273 275 112

x2

308

INDEX TO VOLUME I.

Decius, his persecution
Demetrius, S., Patriarch .
remonstrates with Alexander
his death
Didymus, S. his vision
Diocletian, commencement of his persecution
he abdicates
Dionysia, S.
Dionysius, S., Patriarchhis polemical powers
leaves Alexandria
writes to Origen on Martyrdom
confesses before ^milian
attacked by Germanus
accused of Arianism to Dionysius of Rome
condemned in Council
composes an apology .
acquitted
his letter to Paul of Samosata not genuine
his death
Dioscorus, S., his confession
Dioscorus, Patriarchhis immorality
his violence
presides at Ephesus
is deposed
Donatus, S., and his companions, their Martyrdom
Ephesus, Council of, Third (Ecumenical .
First Session
Second Session
Third and Fourth Session .
Robbers' Meeting at
Epiphanius, S., assists Theophilus against S. Chrysostom
Eumenius, S., Patriarch
Eusebius, Christian charity of
Eusebius of Nicomedia, his character
his intrigues at Nicaea
deposes S. Eustathius
Eusebius of Dorylamm attacks Nestorius
Eustathius, S., of Antioch
Eutychius, his account of the twelve Presbyters
Eutyches, rise of his heresy
Evangelical See, a title of Alexandria
Fabius of Antioch ....
Flavian, S., of Constantinople, condemns Eutyches .
is condemned ....

,

Page.

43

16

27
29
95
196
93
97
45
39
40
43
47
65
67
e
72
72
73
75
82
83
41
278
279
. 280
290
. 304
133
. 256
260
264
265
290
220
14
77
123
,
143
159
238
139
9
280
5
54
. 280
297
INDEX TO VOLUME I.
Flavian, S., is murdered
Frumentius, S., goes into Ethiopia .
is appointed Metran
George, Arian Bishop of Alexandria
he is murdered
Gregory of Cappadocia, Arian Bishop of Alexandria
his outrages
Heraclas, S., is associated with Origen
Patriarch
Hexapla, the
Hilarion, S. . .
Homousion, the, proposed
Hosius goes to Alexandria
Hypatia, her murder
Hypostases, Question of One or Three
Irene, the courtezan .
Isidore of Scete, S. .
[< it
Ischyras, his history
Jerome, S., his account of the twelve Presbyters
John of Antioch expected at Ephesus
deposes S. Cyril
Julian, S., Patriarch .
his Martyrdom
Julian the Apostate, Emperor .
Juhus, Pope, S., his reception of S. Athanasius
his negociations with the Eusebians
Justus, S., Patriarch
Kefro, Desert of
Leo, S., writes to Dioscorus
his celebrated Letter to S. Flavian
opposes the convocation of an (Ecumenical^Council
Leonidas, S., his Martyrdom
Licinius, his persecution .
Lucius, Arian Bishop of Alexandria
persecutes the Catholics
Macar, S. .
. Macarius, S. .
Marcian, S., Patriarch
Marcian, Emperor
Marius Mercator
Mareotis, Commission of Inquiry in
Mark, S., goes to Egypt

309
Page. 298 154
154 188
192 175176" 23 30 31
178144
134
228 194
279 111 179 159 10
257264 15
44
191180181 1466
279 281
298 19
132
201 202 45
111 15
298232 66 6

310

INDEX TO VOLUME I.

Mark, S., goes to Rome .
his Martyrdom
Maximus, S., Patriarch
Maximin, his persecution
Melania, S., in Egypt
Melas, S., of Rhinocorura
Meletian schism, rise of
Meletius condemned
Metras, S., his Martyrdom
Moyses, Bishop of the Saracens
Mysticism, tendency of Alexandria to
Nestorius, his early life
he is consecrated Patriarch of Constantinople
origin of his heresy
replies to S. Proclus .
his first letter to S. Cyril
his second ....
admonished
condemned his miserable death
Nicaea, Council of
Nile-gauge removed from the Temple of Serapis
Novatian, his schism
is joined by the Confessors
answered by S. Dionysius
Nubia, Church of, its origin doubtful

Page. 7
8
8531
205202 91
146 41
205 37
234 235
236242246 248
251261
277 137
213 48
49 51
157

Oak, Synod of the
Orestes attacked by S. Cyril
Origenian controversy
Origen, his birth
his education
succeeds to Alexandrian school
his mistaken zeal
he goes to Rome
visits Arabia
his misunderstanding with Demetrius
ordained Priest
condemned
his orthodoxy and errors
Oxyiinchus, City of, its holiness

222
228216 18
18
202223 24 25
27 2833
230

Paganism destroyed in Egypt
Palestine, Martyrs in
Pambo, S.
Pantaenus, S. goes to India

214 102 179 18
20

INDEX TO VOLUME I.
Paphnutius, S. .
Paschal letters, their origin
Paschal Cycle of S. Dionysius .
Paulinus, Bishop of the High Catholic party at Antioch .
Paul the Simple, S. .
Paul, S., the first hermit
his death ....
Paul of Samosata, his heresy
Peter, S., Patriarch, his birth
his penitential Canons
his Martyrdom
Peter, S., his Martyrdom .
Peter II., Patriarch ....
goes to Rome
recalled consecrates Maximus
dies ....
not reckoned among the Saints
Phileas, S., his exhortation on Martyrdom
his Martyrdom
Philip, Augustal prefect
his Martyrdom .
Philumenus aspires to the empire
Philemon, S., his Martyrdom
Pisper, Mount ....
Pistus, Arian Bishop of Alexandria .
Potamiaena, S., her Martyrdom .
Primus, S., Patriarch
Proclus, S., a candidate for the Throne of Constantinople
preaches on the Incarnation

311
Page. 147 67
68
193 177 48
177 8190
98
105113
200203206 206207207 5798 1617
159 95
110
173 21 14
233 239

Quinta, S., her Martyrdom

41

Rimini, Council of

Sabellian heresy, its rise .
Sardica, Council of
Selden, his Commentary on Eusebius
Seleucia, Council of
Serapion, S., his Martyrdom
Serapis, Temple of, its destruction
Severus, persecution of
Sheba, Queen of, founds the Salomonaean Dynasty
Siderius, Bishop of Palebisea
Simon the Canaanite, S., preaches the Gospel in Egypt
Socrates, legend of
Synesius, Bishop of Ptolemais .

190

69
181 10
190 42
211 17
lp5 198 5
103
223

312

INDEX TO VOLUME I.

Theodoret supports Nestorius
Thalia, the, of Arius . 1
Theodora, S. . . .
Theonas, S., Patriarch
his Epistle to Lucian
his death
Theonas, Meletian Bishop
Theophilus, Patriarchdestroys the Temple of Serapis
goes to Constantinople .
consecrates S. John Chrysostom
attacks the Anthropomorphites
his cruelty to Isidore
goes to Constantinople
deposes S. Chrysostom
flies for his life
his death
Therapeutae, the
Timothy, Patriarch
goes to Constantinople
dies
Tyre, Council of
Valens, persecution of
Valerian, his persecution .
his death

Page. 254 128 9585 86
88
153
210213 215215217218220221
223 225 5
208209
210 163 197 65 76

INDEX
TO
VOLUME II.

Page.

Aaron-al Raschid .....

184

Aba Hamoul of Wissim, confession of

57

Abbot, Archbishop, his first letter to Cyril Lucar

. 387

Abdel-Aziz persecutes the Jacobites
a ti ti

7983
175

Abdel Messiah, Patriarch ....

Abdel Messiah, Patriarch ....

. 213

his Canons . . . .

213

he is thrown into prison

. 219

Abunegiah, Martyrdom of . . . .

202

Abubeker, CaJiph .....

69

Acephali . . . . . .

10

the greater part join the Jacobites

29

jElurus, see Timothy the Cat . . . .

12

Agatho, Patriarch .....

78

Ahbasidae, Rise of .... .

114

Alexander, Patriarch ....

90

carried through the country to obtain a ransom

92

visits his dicecese ....

95

dies . . . . .

97

Alexander II. Patriarch . ...

. 210

Alexandria taken by Cosroes ....

60

Capture of, by the Saracens

72

Catholic See of, Vacant for seventy years

75

restored

. 107

Sack of, by the Spaniards

140

Capture of, by Peter of Cyprus

. 330

Alfter, Patriarch . . . . .

270

Ali, rehgious disputes with respect to

. 119

Almamon, Caliph . • •

143

Amru enters Egypt .

. 71

Antioch, schism with the Jacobite See of

120

Anastasius Apozygariui, Patriarch

50

Andronicus, Patriarch . . ¦ ¦ ¦

55

Apollinarius, attempt of

33

ApoUinaris, Patriarch •

41

Apostacy, Canons concerning .

. 216

Apostacy, general

329

Arabia, state of, at era of Mahomet

67

314

INDEX TO VOLUME II.

Page.

Armenians, toleration of their Schism by the Jacobites

. 246

Arsenian schism ....

311

Arsenius, Patriarch ....

. 198

Asabah, sacrilege and death of

91

Athanasius, Patriarch ....

24

Athanasius III., Patriarch ....

310

his negociations with the Arsenians for the reunion

. 315

his adventures in Greece

321

Athanasius IV., Patriarch ....

. 308

Aziz, Sultan ......

272

Baldwin, King of Jerusalem, in Egypt

. 239

Barreto, Nuno, Latin Patriarch ....

353

Barsanuphians, their reunion with the Jacobites

. 137

Basiliscus the Emperor, his circular letter

16

Beccus, Patriarch of Constantinople

. 319

Benjamin, Patriarch .....

61

receives a letter of safety from Amru

73

Benjamin II., Patriarch ....

327

Bermudez, Latin Patriarch ....

. 347

Bethlehem, Council of

. 464

Bogomili, heresy of the ....

. 241

Bondocdar, Sultan .....

315

Brzesc, Council of

. 361

Cairo, Council of, against Cyril-ben-laklak

. 302

Cairo, Council of, against Rome ....

384

Caliphate, decline of the ....

. 161

Cat, Timothy the .... .

12

C'hail I., Patriarch ....

111

imminent danger and courage of

115

he is put to the torture

. 116

pronounces the prayer of absolution

117

is set at liberty ....

. 117

his firmness . ...

121

dies .....

. 122

Chail I., Patriarch .....

157

Chail II. , Patriarch ....

. 154

Chail II., Patriarch .....

164

his crimes ....

. 236

Chail III., Patriarch .

169

he deposes the Bishop of Saka

. 170

is thrown into prison

170

raises money by Simony

. 171

dies .....

174

Chail IV., Patriarch ....

. 231

Chail V., Patriarch .....

249

Chail VI., Patriarch ....

. 340

Chenouda I., Patriarch ....

157

he is accused of heresy

. 159

INDEX TO VOLUME II.

315

Chenouda I., retires into the country

Page.
. 160

is committed to prison

164

dies .

. 169

Chenouda IL, Patriarch

208

his perjury

. 209

and Simony

210

Chiracou, General in Egypt

253

Christopher, Patriarch

138

Claudius, Emperor .

. 349

his defeat and death

354

Confessional Controversy, rise of

. 261

Constantinople, false Council of, against Images

127

Constantinople, Council of, sixth (Ecumenical

80

Corrupticolae, their origin

30

Cosmos I., Patriarch

97

a prisoner ....

113

Cosmas I., Patriarch

108

goes to Damascus

109

Cosmas II. , Patriarch ....

155

Cosmas III. , Patriarch

177

Cosroes, conquests of

63

takes Alexandria

60

defeated by Heraclius

60

Covilhaa in Ethiopia ....

339

Crete, state of, in the sixteenth century

. 357

Crusade, the first .

333

Cyril II., Patriarch ....

. 222

Canons of

228

Cyril II. , Patriarch ....

238

Oyril-ben-laMalc, Patriarch

297

his Crimes ....

. 299

he ordains a Bishop for Jerusalem

300

imprisoned .

. 302

his Canons , .

304

wretched death

. 305

Cyril Lucar, his birth ....

356

goes to Alexandria

. 358

ordained Priest

361

legate in Poland ....

. 363

becomes acquainted with Von Haga

364

goes to Constantinople

. 365

begins to embrace Protestant tenets

366

corresponds with Uytenbogaert

. 367

goes to Wallachia

369

progress of his apostasy

. 369

at the Holy Mountain

383

anathematizes the Roman Missionaries

. 384

his first Letter to Abbot

385

to de Dominis ....

. 390

316 INDEX TO VOLUME II.

Page.

Cyril Lucar, his intimacy with Le Leu Wilhem

401

shuts himself up during the great Plague at Cairo

Patriarch of Constantinople

4U4

attacks the Jesuits

410

banished to Rhodes

414

recalled

. 417

his confession

424

his friendship with M. Leger

. 431

his interview with De Marchville

439

banished to Rhodes

442

restored ....

449

his murder

. 454

and character

455

Cyrus at Constantinople

71

Cyrus, Patriarch . ...

62

his false union with the Jacobites .

53

Damianus, Patriarch

45

Damietta, capture of, by John de Brienne

285

loss of

. 291

capture of, by S, Louis

307

loss of

. 309

David of Payoum, his intrigues for the Patriarchate

282

defeated

. 283

he again intrigues

289

is again defeated

. 291

is successful, and takes the name of Cy

ril . 297

Dionysius, Jacobite Patriarch of Antioch

. 145

Dioscorus II.

29

Dositheans, condemned by S. Eulogius

47

Dunaan, persecution of

31

Ecthesis, the ....

70

Egypt, invasion of, by the Spanish Ommiadae ..

139

Election of Jacobite Patriarchs, method of

99

Elesbaan, Saint, defeats Dunaan

32

his character

32

Elias, Patriarch ....

271

"

. 190

Elmacinus, character of his history

242

England, conversion of

49

Ephraim, Patriarch ....

190

murder of

. 192

Ethiopia, attempt to increase the number of Sees in

247

Eulogius, S., Patriarch

46

condemns the Dositheans

47

corresponds with S. Gregory

49

his death

51

Eulogius IL, Patriarch

240

Eustathius, Patriarch

136

INDEX TO VOLUME II.

317

Eutychians, difference between, and Monophysites .

Page. 8

Eutychius, Patriarch

181

his writings

. 182

his disputes with his people

184

Famine, a horrible . .

220

Fatimidee, rise of the

188

they conquer Egypt

. 189

fall of the .

252

Florence, Council of ...

. 335

Francis, S., in Egypt

286

Gabriel I., Patriarch

. 175

his exactions

176

Gabriel II. , Patriarch

243

his Canons

248

Gabriel VI., Patriarch

. 340

Gabriel VII., Patriarch .

354

Gaianus, Anti-Patriarch

34

Gaianites, rebaptized by the Jacobites

95

Gama, Christopher de, his expedition

. 349

his death

351

George, Patriarch

60

tt <(

204

Gerasimus Spartaliotes, Patriarch

. 404

his firmness

431

Gregory I., Patriarch

. 297

Gregory II., Patriarch

326

Gregory III., Patriarch

. 327

Gregory IV., Patriarch

331

Gregory V., Patriarch

. 347

GregoryS., of Antioch, falsely accused

48

Gragne, death of

. 352

Hakem, his superstition .

200

his madness

. 200

he is adored as a divinity

200

Hamarowia, Emir

. 172

marries his daughter to the Caliph

173

is murdered

. 174

Heikeliet, the ....

101

Helena, Regent of Ethiopia

. 340

Homeritae, church of the

31

embrace Nestorianism

75

Honorius, Pope, anathematized

81

Iconoclastic Controversy

. 124

Isaac, Patriarch

81

his death ....

83

Isaac, Patriarch

187

318

INDEX TO VOLUME II.

Jacob I., Patriarch
Jacobites, their various Sects
origin of the name
James the Just, of Aragon
Jeremiah S., Martyrdom of
Joachim, Patriarch
Job, Patriarch
John Talaia, Patriarch
he is banished
vain endeavours for his restoration
John I. , Patriarch
John I., Patriarch
John II., Patriarch
John, S. the Almoner, Patriarch his almsdeeds
his justice
anecdotes of .
he leaves Alexandria
his death
John III., Semnudaus, Patriarch
he dies
John of Nicius, deposed for cruelty
John III., Patriarch
John IV., Patriarch
John V., Patriarch
John VI, Patriarch
John VII., Patriarch
John VIII., Patriarch
John IX., Patriarch
JohnX., Patriarch .
John XI., Patriarch
John XII., Patriarch
John XIII., Patriarch
Kahad, martyrdom of
Kamel, Sultan his justice
Kilus, Abuna of Axum
his imposition
his degradation
Korban, form of
Lalibala, Saint .
Le Leu Wilhem, his intimacy with Cyril Lucar
Leger, M., his friendship with Cyril Lucar
Leontius, Patriarch
Louis, S., in Egypt
Lyons, Council of
Macarius of Antioch condemned

Page. 142 10
33
323203
347 187 19
21 2125
44
26 52
5356
5758
59 78
81 85
219 129
249 270
313322327
329 336347
347
203 284
295 276
277277
204
278 401
481210307
316 81

INDEX TO VOLUME II.

319

Page.

Macarius, Patriarch ....

. 183

Macarius II., Patriarch ....

237

Maffudi, defeat and death of

. 345

Mahometanism, rise of

67

Makrizi, character of his history

. 333

Malabar, deputation from, to Alexandria

88

Mamelukes, accession of ... .

. 310

Marianus, commander of the Roman forces

71

Mark -ben -Kunbar maintains confession .

. 262

is excommunicated

263

submits ....

. 263

joins the Catholics

265

recants ....

. 266

again joins them .

266

dies ....

. 266

Mark II., Patriarch ....

136

charity of

. 189

Mark II. , Patriarch ....

273

Mark III., Patriarch ....

. 270

Mark III., Patriarch

340

Mark TV., Patriarch ....

. 327

Marriage, heresy respecting

87

Married Patriarch, attempt to intrude one

147

Martin, Saint, confession of

77

Matthew, his mission to Portugal

. 343

his misfortunes ....

344

his honourable reception

. 345

Maximus, S., attacks the Monothelites

77

his death ....

77

Melchites, origin of the term

7

Melee Segued, Emperor ....

. 354

Meruan, the last of the Eastern Ommiadae

117

his defeat and death ....

. 118

Metaxa, Nicolas, his arrival at Constantinople .

423

his imminent danger

. 429

taken under the British protection

429

Metrophanes Critopulus, Patriarch

. 446

Metropolitans, creation of .

160

Michael I., of Antioch, on Confession

. 264

Minas I., Patriarch ....

122

Minas II, Patriarch ....

. 187

Misra, Council of ...

87

origin of

89

Council of ... ¦

121

Council of

. 226

Emirate, defects of the .

76

Monophysites, difference between, and Eutychians

8

Monothelitism, rise of

63

decline of ¦

76

320

INDEX TO VOLUME II.

Page.

Moscow a Patriarchate

359

Moses of Wissim threatens Kacem

. no

his firmness in persecution

112

ti n a

115

Naod, Emperor

. 343

Nekam, his apostaey

215

his martyrdom

. 216

Nicaea, II. Council of (so called) VII. (Ecumenical . . 131

Nicolas I.,. Patriarch

. 278

his correspondence with Innocent III.

279

his correspondence with Honorius

. 294

Nile, miracle said to have been wrought by Chail I. . . 119

Niphon, Patriarch

. 329

Nubia, its first ecclesiastical mention .

82

(Ecumenical Judge, origin of the appellation

204

Oil and salt, question of mingling in the oblations

. 214

Omar, Caliph ....

69

Ommiadae, downfal of

114

Paul, Patriarch .

35

his tyranny

38

and deposition

38

Persecution I. under Abdel-Aziz

83

II. under Asabah

90

III. under Abdallah

92

IV. under Korah and Theodore

95

V. under Asama

96

VI. under Hafiz

112

VII. under Mutewakel

. 155

VIII. under Abdallah

160

IX. under Ahmed

. 164

X. under Hakem

199

XI. under Nacer ben Kelaoun

. 322

XII.

328

Peter Mongus, Patriarch

17

he receives the Henoticon

21

he persecutes the Catholics

23

Peter, Catholic Legate in Trullo

85

Peter II., Patriarch

71

Peter, Metropolitan of Axum

178

he is made Regent of Ethiopia

. 178

he is banished

179

Peter V., Patriarch .

327

Phantasiasts, origin of the name

30

Philotheus. See George

204

Philotheus, Patriarch

192

his crimes

. 196198

his miserable death

INDEX TO VOLUME II.
Philotheus, Patriarch
his negotiation for the reunion
his rejection of it
Piga, Meletius, goes to Alexandria
Patriarch .
his correspondence with Sigismund III.
Politian, Patriarch .
goes to Bagdad
Portuguese first visit Ethiopia
Prester, John, origin of the name
Proterius, Saint, his consecration
his correspondence with S. Leo
his martyrdom .
Psoi'us, murder of

321
Page. 333335337
356 359
362 128
136
339 177 5
10 12
38

Reformation, articles of, for Jacobites

303

Saada, Empress of Ethiopia . . . . .197
Sabas, Patriarch ..... 228
Saladin, Vizir ...... 255
Saladin, commencement of .... 269
Sultan ...... 261
his virtues ..... 268
his death . . . . . .271
Schisms, the various, between the Jacobites of Alexandria and Antioch 28
Schism, the great, between the East and West . . .217
Seljukidae, rise of the . . . . . 231
Sendafa, apostacy of the Bishop of ... 305
Severus, Bishop of Aschumin, his works . . . 191
Severus, Metropolitan of Axum .... 224
Silvester, Patriarch ..... 356
Simon, Patriarch . . . . , .83
his asceticism " . . . . , 84
his death . . . . , .90
Simon II., Patriarch .... 146
Simony justified by a Council of Jacobite Bishops . . .211
Solar years, computation by, forbidden . . 238
Sophronius, Patriarch ..... 146
Sophronius II. . . . . . . 185
Sophronius II., Patriarch ..... 250

Tecla Haimanot founds the Monastic Life in Ethiopia
Theodore Scribo, Patriarch his murder
Theodore, Patriarch
dies ....
Theodore Balsamon, applied to by Mark of Alexandria
Theodosians and Gaianites, false concordat between
Theodosius, Patriarch

74
51 5298
109
273 4333

322

INDEX TO VOLUME II.

Page.

Theodosius, Patriarch ....

235

Theodosius II., Patriarch ....

321

Theophanius, Patriarch ....

186

he is seized with frenzy

. 186

and is put to death

187

Theophylactians, Catholics so called

86

Three Chapters condemned by Justinian

39

by the Fifth (Ecumenical Council

41

Tiberias, battle of ... .

269

Timothy the Cat sent into exile

14

goes to Constantinople

15

returns to Egypt

17

Timothy Saloaciolus, Patriarch

15

Timothy II., Patriarch ....

30

Treasure, discovery and misuse of

93

Tredda Gabez, Empress of Ethiopia

. 197

Trullo, Council in ... .

85

Turks, a body-guard formed of, by the Caliphs

. 168

Two Grooms of the Chamber, church of

, 85

Type, the publication of ... .

77

Uniates, rise of .

361

Urban VIII., his interrogatories to Cyril Lucar

. 419

Uytenbogaert, bis correspondence with Cyril Lucar

366

Vasah, his early history ....

. 193

his conversion ....

194

his works .....

. 195

Vigilius goes to Constantinople

40

his vacillation ....

41

Vizir .....

255

Von Haga becomes acquainted with Cyril Lucar

. 364

Wilna, Council of .

361

Wine, use of it forbidden to the Christians

. 156

Woggora, battle of ...

351

Yufab, Patriarch .....

. 148

Yucab is persecuted by the Caliph

153

Zacharias, King of Nubia, his negociations with the Caliph

. 150

Zacharias, Patriarch ....

199

he is exposed to lions

. 202

he dies ....

207

3 9002 00747 2708