Section 29
The text on this page is estimated to be only 28.41% accurate
xxii LIFE OF EUSEBIUS. liberty to think as they please concerning Eusebius, and to term him an Arian, or a favourer of that heresy ; but who can patiently endure St. Jerome, who, not content with calling him heretic and Arian, fre quently terms him the ring-leader of that faction ? Can he be justly termed a ring-leader of the Arians, who, after the Nicene Council, always condemned their opinions ? Let his books De Ecclesiastica Theologia be perused, which he wrote against Marcellus long after the Nicene Council ; and we shall find what we have affirmed, that he condemned those who asserted that the Son of God was made of things not existing ; and that there was a time when he existed not. Athanasius, likewise, in his letter relative td the decrees of the Nicene Council, attests the same fact concerning Eusebius, in the following words : "In this, truly, he was unfortunate : that he might clear himself, however, of the imputation, he ever afterwards opposed the Arians, particularly since their denial of the pre-existence of the Son of God applied equally to his conception or incarnation." With this testi mony, too, Eusebius was favoured by Athanasius, notwithstanding the personal differences between them. But St. Jerome, who had no cause of enmity against Eusebius, who had profited so liberally by his writings, who had translated his Chronological Canon, and his Book de Locis Hebraicis, into Latin, brands, notwithstanding, Euse bius with a calumny, which even his most malignant enemies never fastened on him. The reason of this we cannot conjecture, except it is, that St. Jerome, in consequence of his enmity to Origen, per sisted in an unqualified persecution of all that maintained his opinions, particularly Eusebius. On the other hand, we do not conceal the fact, that Eusebius, though he cannot be deservedly esteemed a ring-leader of the Arian faction, yet after the Nicene Council, was perpetually conversant with the principals of that party, and, together with them, opposed the catholic bishops, as Eustathius, and Athanasius, the most strenuous advocates for the adoption of the term v^™*. Though Eusebius always asserted the eternity of the Son of God, against the Arians, yet in his disapproval of that word,* he seems censurable. It is cer tain that he never made use of that term, either in his books against Marcellus, or in his orations against Sabellius. Nay, in his Second Book against Sabellius, he expressly declares, that since that word is not in the Scriptures, it is not satisfactory to him. On this occasion, • Viz. Voo««-«of.