Circular Letter.

Circular Letter.

CIRCULAR LETTER.

it came down to us from the Lord through The people, therefore, were justly indignant and exclaimed against the proceeding, calling the rest of the magistrates and the whole city to witness, that this novel and iniquitous attempt was now made against the Church, not on the ground of any charge brought against me by ecclesiastical persons, but through the wanton assault of the Arian heretics.

For even if there had been any complaint generally prevailing against me, it was not an Arian, or one professing Arian doctrines, that ought to have been chosen to supersede me; but according to the ecclesiastical Canons, and the direction of Paul, when the people were 'gathered together, and the spirit' of them that ordain, 'with the power of our Lord

Jesus Christ9' all things ought to have been enquired into and transacted canonically, in the presence of those among the laity and clergy who demanded the change; and not that a person brought from a distance by Arians, as if making a traffic of the title of Bishop, should with the patronage and strong arm of heathen magistrates, thrust himself upon those who neither asked for nor desired his presence, nor indeed knew anything of what had been done.

Such proceedings tend to the dissolution of all the ecclesiastical Canons, and compel the heathen to blaspheme, and to suspect that our appointments are not made according to a divine rule, but as a result of His disciples4, That therefore the ordinances which have been preserved in the Churches from old time until now, may not be lost in our days, and the trust which has been committed to us required at our hands; rouse yourselves, brethren, as being stewards of the mysteries of Gods, and seeing them now seized upon by others.

Further particulars of our condition you will learn from the bearers. of our letters; but I was anxious myself to write you a brief account thereof, that you may know for certain, that such things have never before been committed against the Church, from the day that our Saviour when

He was taken up, gave command to His disciples, saying, 'Go ye and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost 6.'

§ 2. Violent and uncanonical intrusion of Gregory.

Now the outrages which have been committed against us and against the Church are these.

While we were holding our assemblies in peace, as usual, and while the people were rejoicing in them, and advancing in godly conversation, and while our fellow-ministers in Egypt, and the Thebais, and Libya, were in love and peace both with one another and with us; on a sudden the Prefect of Egypt puts forth a public letter, bearing the form of an edict, and declaring that one Gregory from Cappadocia was coming to be my successor from the court.

This announcement confounded every one, for such a proceeding was entirely novel, and now heard of for the first time.

The people however assembled traffic and patronage *.

§ 3. Outrages which took place at the time o Gregory's arrival, Thus was this notable appointment of Gregory brought about by the Arians, and such was the beginning of it.

And what outrages he committed on his entry into Alexandria, and of what great evils that event has been still more constantly in the churches', for they very well knew that neither they themselves, nor any Bishop or Presbyter, nor in short any one had ever complained against me; and they saw that Arians only were on his side, and were aware also that he was himself an Arian, and was sent by Eusebius and his fellows to the Arian party.

For you know, brethren, that Eusebius and his fellows have always been the supporters and associates of the impious heresy of the Arian madmen Z by whose means they have ever carried on their designs against me, and were the authors of my banishment into Gaul.

——————— the cause, you may learn both from our letters, and by enquiry of those who are sojourning among you.

While the people were offended at such an unusual proceeding, and in consequence assembled in the churches, in order to prevent the impiety of the Arians from mingling itself with the faith of the Church,

Philagrius, who has long been a persecutor of the Church and her virgins, and is now

Prefect? of Egypt, an apostate already, and a fellow-countryman of Gregory, a man too of no respectable character, and moreover supported by Eusebius and his fellows, and oe 4 Vid. de Syn. § 4. Orat. i. § 8. Tertull. Prescr, Her. § 29.

5 x Cor. iv. 1.

6 Matt. xxviii. 19.

7 Assembling in the Churches seems to have been a sort of protest or demonstration, sometimes eaceably, but sometimes in a more exceptionable manner ;—peaceably, during Justina's persecution at Milan, Ambros. Ep. i. 20. August. Confess. 1X. 1 f but at Ephesus after the third Ecumenical Council the Metropolitan shut up the Churches, took possession of the Cathedral, and succeeded in re9 x Cor. v. 4.

I Orai. i. 8, note.

2 The Prefect of Egypt was called [after 367, see Sievers, p. 119, and Prolegg. ch. v. Appendix, yet see Ajol. Ar. § 83]

Augustalis as having been first appointed by Augustus, after his victories over Antony.

He was 0 the Equestrian, not, as other Prefects, of the Senatorian order.

He was the imperial officer, as answering to Propreetors in the Imperial Provinces. vid. Hotman, in voc. [on Philagrius, see AZod. ¢. Ari. § 72, Prolegg. ch. il. iling the imperial troops.

Churches were asylums, vid. Cod. ih os. ix. 45- § 4. &c. ; at the same time arms were prohibited.

8 Gpevomavirav, vid. note on de Syn. 13.

§ 5 (x) note].

EPISTOLA ENCYCLICA.

AE ae ee ae pee eS ee ee and illustrious entry into the city, the Arian Gregory, taking pleasure in these calamities, and as if desirous to secure to the heathens and Jews, and those who had wrought these evils upon us, a prize and price of their iniquitous success, gave up the church to be plundered by them.

Upon this licence of iniquity and disorder, their deeds were worse than in time of war, and more cruel than those therefore full of zeal against the Church; this person, by means of promises which he afterwards fulfilled, succeeded in gaining over the heathen multitude, with the Jews and disorderly persons, and having excited their passions, sent them in a body with swords and clubs into the churches to attack the people.

What followed upon this3 it is by no means easy to describe: indeed it is not possible of robbers. Some of them were plundering whatever fell in their way; others dividing among themselves the sums which some had laid up there®; the wine, of which there was a large quantity, they either drank or emptied out or carried away ; they plundered the store of oil, and every one took as his spoil the doors and chancel rails; the candlesticks they forthwith laid aside in the wall7, and lighted the candles of the Church before their idols: in a word, rapine and death pervaded the Church.

And the impious Arians, so far from feeling shame that such things should be done, added yet further outrages and cruelty.

Presbyters and laymen had their flesh torn, virgins were stript of their veils 74, and led away to the tribunal of the governor, and then cast into prison; others had their goods confiscated, and were scourged ; the bread of the ministers and virgins was intercepted.

And these things were done even during the holy season of Lent 8, about the time of Easter; a time when the brethren were keeping fast, while this notable Gregory exhibited the disposition of a Caiaphas, and, together with Pilate the Governor, furiously raged against the pious worshippers of Christ.

Going into one of the churches on the Preparation9, in company with the Governor and the heathen multitude, when he saw that the people regarded with abhorrence his forcible entry among them, he caused that most cruel person, the Governor, publicly to scourge in one hour, four and thirty virgins and married women, and men of rank, and to cast them into prison.

Among them there was one virgin, who, being fond of study, had the Psalter in her hands, at the time when he caused her to be publicly scourged : the book was torn in pieces by the officers, and the virgin herself shut up in prison. to set before you a just representation of the circumstances, nor even could one recount a small part of them without tears and lamentations.

Have such deeds as these ever been made the subjects of tragedy among the ancients? or has the like ever happened before in time of persecution or of war? The church and the holy Baptistery were set on fire, and straightway groans, shrieks, and lamentations, were heard through the city ; while the citizens in their indignation at these enormities, cried shame upon the governor, and protested against the violence used to them.

For holy and undefiled virgins¢ were being stripped naked, and suffering treatment which is not to be named, and if they resisted, they were in danger of their lives.

Monks were being trampled under foot and perishing; some were being hurled headlong; others were being destroyed with swords and clubs; others were being wounded and beaten.

And oh! what deeds of impiety and iniquity have been committed upon the Holy Table!

They were offering birds and pine cones 5 in sacrifice, singing the praises of their idols, and blaspheming even in the very churches our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God. They were burning the books of Holy Scripture which they found in the church; and the Jews, the murderers of our Lord, and the godless heathen entering irreverently (O strange boldness!) the holy

Baptistery, were stripping themselves naked, and acting such a disgraceful part, both by word and deed, as one is ashamed even to relate.

Certain impious men also, following the examples set them in the bitterest persecutions, were seizing upon the virgins and ascetics by the hands and dragging them along, and as they were haling them, endeavoured to make them blaspheme and deny the Lord; and when they refused to do so, were beating them violently and trampling them under foot.

6 Churches, as heathen temples before them, were used for ny oaaee At the sack of HORS pee spared the Churches and their possessions ; nay, he himself transported the costl: of St. Peter into his Church. a mr vere 7 év TH Torxiw. [Reference uncertain. ] 7 amouapopicomevar ; see Sophocles' Lexicon under paddprov.

8 Lent and Passion Week was the season during which Justina's persecution of St. Ambrose took place, and the proceedings against St. Chrysostom at Constantinople.

On the Paschal Vigils, vid.

Tertull. ad Uxor. ii. 4. [Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. iv. p. 46] p. 426, note n. Oxf. Tr. ed 9 mapackevy, i.c., Good Friday.

[Apr. x The word was used for Friday generally as early an Ss. ee Strom.

§ 4. Outrageson Good Friday and Easter-day,3 39.

In addition to all this, after such a notable ee ee eee 3 Cf. Hist. Ar. 889 and 10.

Apparent] * Theonas " is meant, ts Fest. jude xi.

Dom whnes es 4 The sister of S. Antony was one of the earliest known inmates of a nunnery, wt. Ant. § 2.3.

'They were called by the Catholic Church by the title, "Spouse of Christ."

407. ad Const. § 33.

5 The @¥os or suffitus of Grecian sacrifices generally consisted of portions of odoriferous trees. vid. Potter. 4 ntigu. ii. 4. Some translate the word here used (arpoBiAous), " shell-fish." vii. p, 877. ed. Pott. vid. Constit. Apostol. v. 13. Pseudo-Ign. ad

Philipp. 13.

CIRCULAR LETTER.

caused his savage associate, the Governor, to prefer an indictment against me, as in the name of the people, before the most religious

Emperor Constantius, which contains odious charges, from which one may expect not only to be banished, but even ten thousand deaths.

The person who drew it up is an apostate from Christianity, and a shameless worshipper of idols, and they who subscribed it are heathens, and keepers of idol temples, and others of them Arians.

In short, not to make my letter tedious to you, a persecution rages here, and such a persecution as was never before raised against the Church.

For in former instances a man at least might pray while he fled from his persecutors, and be baptized while he lay in concealment.

But now their extreme cruelty has imitated the godless conduct of the Babylonians.

For as they falsely accused Daniel5, so does the notable Gregory now accuse before the Governor those who pray in their houses, and watches every opportunity to insult their ministers, so that through his violent conduct, many are endangered from missing baptism, and many who are in sickness and sorrow have no one to visit them, a calamity which they bitterly lament, accounting it worse than their sickness.

For while the ministers of the Church are under persecution, the people who condemn the impiety of the Arian heretics choose rather thus to be sick and to run the risk, than that a hand of the Arians should come upon their heads.

§ 5. Retirement of Athanasius, and tyranny of Gregory and Philagrius.

When all this was done, they did not stop even here ; but consulted how they might act the same part in the other church?, where

I was mostly living during those days; and they were eager to extend their fury to this church also, in order that they might hunt out and dispatch me. And this would have been my fate, had not the grace of Christ assisted me, if it were only that I might escape to relate these few particulars concerning their conduct.

For seeing that they were exceedingly mad against me, and being anxious that the church should not be injured, nor the virgins that were in it suffer, nor additional murders be committed, nor the people again outraged, I withdrew myself from among them, remembering the words of our Saviour, 'If they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another?'

For I knew, from the evil they had done against the first-named church, that they would forbear no outrage against the other also.

And there in fact they reverenced not even the Lord's day3 of the holy Feast, but in that church also they imprisoned the persens who belonged to it, at a time when the Lord delivered all from the bonds of death, whereas

Gregory and his associates, as if fighting against our Saviour, and depending upon the patronage of the Governor, have turned into mourning this day of liberty to the servants of Christ.

The heathens were rejoicing to do this, for they abhor that day ; and Gregory perhaps did but fulfil the commands of Eusebius and his fellows in forcing the Christians to mourn under the infliction of bonds.

§ 6. All the above tilegalities were carried on in the interest of Arianism, Gregory then is an Arian, and has been sent to the Arian party; for none demanded him, but they only; and accordingly as a hireling and a stranger, he makes use of the Governor to inflict these dreadful and cruel deeds upon the people of the Catholic Churches, as not being his own.

For since Pistus, whom Eusebius and his fellows formerly appointed over the Arians, was justly anathematized ° and excommunicated for his impiety by you the Bishops of the Catholic Church, as you all know, on our writing to you concerning him, they have now, therefore, in like manner sent this Gregory to them; and lest they should a second time be put to shame, by our again writing against them, they have employed extraneous force against me, in order that, having obtained possession of the Churches, they may seem to have escaped all suspicion of being Arians.

But in this too they have been mistaken, for none of the people of the Church are with them, except the heretics

With these acts of violence has the Governor seized upon the churches, and has given them up to Gregory and the Arian madmen.

Thus, those persons who were excommunicated by us for their impiety, now glory in the plunder of our churches ; while the people of God, and the Clergy of the Catholic Church are compelled either to have communion with the impiety of the Arian heretics, or else to forbear entering into them.

Moreover, by means of the Governor, Gregory has exercised no small violence towards the captains of ships and others who pass over sea, torturing and scourging some, putting others in bonds, and casting them into prison, in order to oblige them not to resist his iniquities, and to take letters 4 from him.

And not satisfied with all this, that he may glut himself with our blood, he has z (On the difficulties of this part of the history, see Prolegg. ch. ii. $§ 6 (x) ad fin., and ch. v. §3, c.

It must be noted that according to the following passage Ath. had left the 'other church' before Easter Day.

It was probably that of 'Quirinus,' Hist, Ar. 10.) Cf. Ag. Fug. 11, and Matt. x. 23.

— 3 Easter Day [Apr. 15].

4 i.e. letters of communion.

5 Dan. vi, 13.

6 Apol. c. Ar. §§ 19, 24

EPISTOLA ENCYCLICA.

year], before these things had happened, and on account of their former misdeeds, wrote letters to call a Council, that these evils might be set right (fearing which, Eusebius and his fellows took care previously to throw the Church into confusion, and desired to destroy me, in order that they might thenceforth be able to act as they pleased without fear, and might have no one to call them to account), how much more ought you now to be indigwant at these outrages, and to condemn them, seeing they have added this to their former misconduct. only, and those who have been excommunicated on divers charges, and such as have been compelled by the Governor to dissemble.

This then is the drama of Eusebius and his fellows, which they have long been rehearsing and composing; and now have succeeded in performing through the false charges which they have made against me before the Emperor?

Notwithstanding, they are not yet content to be quiet, but even now seek to kill me; and they make themselves so formidable to our friends, that they are all driven into banishment, and expect death at their hands.

But you must not for this stand in awe of their iniquity, but on the contrary avenge: and shew your indignation at this their unprecedented conduct against us.

For if when one member suffers all the members suffer with it, and, according to the blessed Apostle, we ought to weep with them that weep ®, let every one, now that so great a Church as this is suffering, avenge its wrongs, as though he were himself a sufferer.

For we have a common Saviour, who is blasphemed by them, and Canons belonging to us all, which they are transgressing.

If while any of you had been sitting in your Church, and while the people were assembled with you, without any blame, some one had suddenly come under plea of an edict as successor of one of you, and had acted the same part towards you, would you not have been indignant? would you not have demanded to be righted?

If so, then it is right that you should be indignant now, lest if these things be passed over unnoticed, the same mischief shall by degrees extend itself to every Church, and so our schools of religion be turned into a markethouse and an exchange.

I beseech you, overlook not such proceedings, nor suffer the famous Church of the Alexandrians to be trodden down by heretics.

In consequence of these things the people and their ministers are separated from one another, as one might expect, silenced by the violence of the Prefect, yet abhorring the impiety of the Arian madmen. If therefore Gregory shall write unto you, or any other in his behalf, receive not his letters, brethren, but tear them in pieces and put the bearers of them to shame, as the ministers of impiety and wickedness.

And even if he presume to write to you after a friendly fashion, nevertheless receive them not.

Those who bring his letters convey them only from fear of the Governor, and on account of his frequent acts of violence.

And since it is probable that Eusebius and his fellows will write to you concerning him, I was anxious to admonish you beforehand, so that you may herein imitate God, Who is no respecter of persons, and may drive out from before you those that come from them; because for the sake of the Arian madmen they caused persecutions, rape of virgins, murders, plunder of the Church's property, burnings, ana blasphemies in the Churches, to be committed by the heathens and Jews at such a season.

The impious and mad Gregory cannot deny that he is an Arian, being proved to be so by the person who writes his letters.

This is his secretary Ammon, who was cast out of the Church long ago by my predecessor the blessed Alexander for many misdeeds and for impiety.

§ 7. Appeal to the bishops of the whole Church to unite against Gregory.

You are acquainted with the history of the Arian madmen, beloved, for you have often, both individually and in a body, condemned their impiety ; and you know also that Eusebius and his fellows, as [ said before, are engaged in the same heresy; for the sake of which they have long been carrying on a conspiracy against me.

And I have represented to you, what has now been done, both for them and by them, with greater cruelty than is usual even in time of war, in order that after the example set before you in the history which I related at the beginning, you may entertain a zealous hatred of their wickedness, and reject those who have committed such enormities against the Church.

If the brethren at Rome? [last For all these reasons, therefore, vouchsafe to send me a reply, and condemn these impious men; so that even now the ministers and people of this place, seeing your orthodoxy and hatred of wickedness, may rejoice in your concord in the Christian faith, and that those who have been guilty of these lawless deeds against the Church may be reformed by your letters, and brought at last, though late, to repentance.

Salute the brotherhood that is among you.

All the brethren that are with me salute you.

Fare ye well, and remember me, and the Lord preserve you continually, 'most truly beloved lords.

1 Apol.c. Ar. 3.

8 x Cor. xii. 26; Rom. xii. 15.

_ 9 Apol. Ar, 22, 30, Hist.Ar.9.

[The word répvow, 'last year, is absent from the best MS. used by Montfaucon.']

APOLOGIA CONTRA ARIANOS.

"Tuis Apology," says Montfaucon, "is the most authentic source of the history of the Church in the first half of the fourth century.

Athanasius is far superior to any other historians of the period, both from his bearing for the most part a personal testimony to the facts he relates, and from his great accuracy and use of actual documents.

On the dther hand, Rufinus, Socrates, Sozomen, Theodoret, must not be used without extreme caution, unless they adduce documents, which is seldom the case."

The ' Apology' is a personal defence by Athanasius against the charges laid against him by the Eusebian party, and does not directly concern matters of doctrine.

After.the Council of Niczea, the Eusebian policy had been to oust the principal opponents from their sees on personal grounds, so as to pave the way for the abrogation of the Nicene formula.

The attack upon Athanasius began in 331, but without success.

It was renewed at Cesarea and Tyre in 334—335, and resulted in the exile of Athanasius to Treveri, 336.

His return in 337 was followed by a Synod at Antioch which ' deposed' him (close of 338), and by his expulsion in favour of Gregory (339).

Then follow the intervention of Julius (339—340), and the Council of Sardica (343), which resulted in the eventual return of Athanasius in the autumn of 346.

(The details are given more fully in the Prolegomena, ch. ii. §&§ 4—6).

After this latter date, and before the relapse of Valens and Ursacius which followed upon the death of Constans, Athanasius drew up a collection of documents in proof of his innocence, connecting them together by an explanatory narrative.

(1) Zhe charges against him related to events alleged to have occurred before the year 332 (extortion of money, subvention of the rebel Philumenus, the chalice of Ischyras, murder and mutilation of the bishop Arsenius): the principal evidence as to their falsehood was comprised in the proceedings of the Councils of Tyre and Jerusalem, and of the commission of enquiry sent by the assembled bishops to the Mareotis.

(2) The judicial investigations which proved the innocence of Athanasius took place first at Rome under Julius, secondly at Sardica under Hosius; and were followed by the recognition of his innocence on the part of the Emperor Constantius, of bishops in various parts of the world, and lastly of some of his chief accusers.

The method of defence now adopted by Athanasius was jirstly to show how complete that recognition had been: this he does by a series of documents from the eve of his departure to Rome down to the recantation of Ursacius and Valens soon after his return to Alexandria: these documents cover eight years (339—347) previous to the composition of the Apology

(§§ 158).

Having shewn the completeness of his acquittal, he next gives the evidence upon which it was based.

Accordingly the second part (§§ 59—90) of the Apology deals with facts and documents earlier than those comprised in the first.

Hence the inversion of chronological sequence (pracposterus ordo, Montf.) as between the two parts.

Referring the reader to the Prolegomena for a connected view of the history of which this Apology is the primary source, it will suffice for our present purpose to enumerate the documents quoted, with the briefest possible statement of their contents and bearing upon the general purpose of the work.

It should be noted that while in the first part the documents follow one another in strict chronological order, those of the second part fall into groups

VOL.

IV.

APOLOGIA CONTRA ARIANOS.

SELLA LL

AE EEA OES

At AN ee re ee within which the matters are arranged as best suits the argument, and not in order of time.

In the following list the probable or approximate date of each document is given.

A. DOCUMENTS IN THE FIRST PART (general subject, the vindication of Athanasius before the bishops of the Christian world).

(i.) DocUMENTS PRIOR TO THE COUNCIL OF SARDICA (§§ 1—35)-

§§ 3—19 (end of 338 or beginning of 339).

Circular of Egyptian bishops reciting the election of Athanasius, the plots and charges against him, the history of the Mareotic Commission, the testimony available in his defence, and requesting all bishops to join in vindicating him.

§§ 20—35 (340 A.D.).

Letter of Fulius to the Eusebian bishops (at the request of a Roman Council) remonstrating with their discourteous reply to a former letter, reciting the history of the intrigues against Athanasius, pressing them with their disrespect to the Synod of Niczea, with their evasion of the invitation to the Council at Rome, vindicating Athanasius (on the ground of documentary proof of his innocence, and on that of the irregularity of the proceedings against him) and Marcellus

(upon his own statement of belief), lastly, insisting on the propriety of a reference of the questions at issue to the whole Church, and upon the precedent giving the Roman Church a decisive voice in questions affecting that of Alexandria.

(ii.) Councit oF SARDICA (§§ 36—50).

3. §§ 36—40 (A.D. 343) Letter of the Council to the Church of Alexandria, reciting the intrigues against Athanasius, and the confirmation by the council of his acquittal by Julius, encouraging the Alexandrine Church to patience, and announcing that they have requested the Emperors to give effect to their decisions.

4- §§ 41—43 (same date). Letter of the Council to the bishops of Egypt and Libya: identical with No. 3, except that it omits the reference to certain presbyters of Alexandria, and mentions several Arian leaders by name.

§§ 44—50 (same date).

Circular letter of the Council, reciting the occasion of its assembling, the behaviour of the Eastern bishops, the violence inflicted by them upon orthodox bishops, the breakdown of the charges brought by them against Athanasius, and the purgation of Marcellus and Asclepas, who are pronounced innocent, while the Arian leaders are deposed and anathematised.

The signatures follow of over 280 bishops, most of whom signed afterwards while the letter was in circulation.

(iii.) DocUMENTS FORMING A SEQUEL TO THE COUNCIL OF SARDICA (§§ 51—58).

6—8.

§ 51.

Letters of Constantius to Athanasius before and after death of Gregory.

6 (A.D. 345).

Expressing sympathy with his sufferings, and inviting him to court; he has written to Constans to ask him to allow Athanasius to return.

7 (same year, later).

Urging the same invitation.

8 (346, winter, or early spring).

A similar summons, but more pressing, 9.

§ Ag: ge reaaiee Fulius to the Church of A lexandria, eulogising Athanasius, complimenting y, and congratulating them upon his return. io.

§ oe ares Metter Z Constantius to the Church ae /arge, announcing the restoration eek uke ie oe ae oO all decrees against him, with indemnity to all in his communion. an pus rae se aaa to the Church of Alexandria. Announcement of the restoraeed

Wott ae & ae ortation to peace, and vena against disturbances. peu pee a 'heh ve * resect of Egypt ape other oficials. Revocation of decrees against those

OA, heey ee aes aaa a eed of their immunities.

° "

° them on the restoration of Aiea | lat oie pallies ha Penge 14.

§ sa iets sea of Valens and Ursacius to Fulius unreservedly withdrawing their allegations

5 nathematizing Arius and his heresy, and at the same time promising to take —, af consequences of their offence if required by Julius to do so.

- 1b.

(same year), Letter of the s, y i i

SR hes ELEN a eve pee with a greeting and assurance that they are in

B. DOCUMENTS IN THE SECOND PART,

(i.) Lerrers or ConsTanTINE PREVIOUS To THE CoUNCIL OF TYRE (S$ 5963).

16.

§59 (A.D.

331). A ; :

; f ey 2 331). 4 fragment, urging Athanasius with threats to admit to communion all (Arians) who 17. § 61 (same year).

"wets ae to the beople of Alexandria, remonstrating with them for their dissensions g sing the calumnies against Athanasius (about the affair of Philumenus).

DEFENCE AGAINST THE ARIANS.

(ii.) 18. § 64 (332).

Confession of Ischyras, that he had been compelled by the violence of certain Meletians to fabricate false charges against Athanasius,

iii.) THE AFFAIR OF ARSENIUS (§§ 65—70).

19.

§ 67 (probably 332). wtercepted letter of the presbyter Pinnes to fohn Arcaph, warning him of the discovery of the plot, and begging him to drop the matter.

20.

§ 68 (same year).

Letter of Constantine to Athanasius, expressing indignation at the charges concerning Arsenius and Ischyras, and bidding him publish this letter in vindication of himself.

21.

§ 66 (same year).

Letter of Alexander, Bishop of Thessalonica, praising Serapion, the son of an old friend, and congratulating Athanasius on the exposure of the plot about Arsenius.

22.

§69 (same year).

Letter of Arsenius to Athanasius, offering submission and requesting communion with the Church.

23.

§70(same year).

Letter of Constantine to Fohn Arcaph accepting his reconciliation to Athanasius, and summoning him to court. iv.)

PRocEEDINGS AT TYRE IN 335 (§§ 71—83).

24.

§ 77. Address to the Council by the Egyptian Bishops, complaining of the presence of partizan judges, of the rejection of their evidence, and of the proposed constitution of the Mareotic Commission.

25.

§ 71. (Written A.D. 327, but put in as evidence at Tyre by Athanasius in the matter of Ischyras, after the exposure of the plot concerning Arsenius).

List of Meletian Bishops and Clergy presented to Alexander of Alexandria shortly before his death, and ot containing the name of Ischyras.

26.

§78.

Protest addressed by the Egyptian Bishops to Count Dionysius, repeating the above complaints

(in No. 24), and requesting him to stop the irregularities, 27.

§80.

Alexander of Thessalonica to Dionysius, warning him of the conspiracy against Athanasius, and of the character of the Mission to the Mareotis.

28.

§81.

Letter of Dionysius to the Council, strongly remonstrating against their proceedings,

29.

§79.

Letter of the Egyptian Bishops to Dionysius appealing to the Emperor.

30—32.

Protests made by Egyptian Clergy against the proceedings of the MAREOTIC COMMISSION.

30. § 73. Clergy of Alexandria to the Commissioners, protesting against the exclusion of all independent persons from the proceedings.

31. §$ 74, 75.

Clergy of the Mareotis to the Council, giving an account of the facts concerning Ischyras, and of the ex-farte character of the proceedings of the Commission.

32. § 76. The same to the Prefect and other officials of Egypt (dated Sep. 8, 335), denying upon oath the tale of Ischyras, and requesting them to forward their statement to the Emperor.

{v.) DocuMENTS SUBSEQUENT TO THE COUNCIL OF TYRE (§§ 84—88).

33- § 86 (335).

Constantine to the Bishops assembled at Tyre, summoning them to give an account of their proceedings.

34- § 84.

The Council of Ferusalem to the Church of Alexandria, announcing that Arius has been received to communion.

35.

§ 87 (June 17, 337).

Constantine II. to the Church of Alexandria (upon the death of Constantine, whose purpose he claims to be carrying out), announcing the restoration of Athanasius.

36. § 85 (perhaps in 337, but possibly as early as 335).

Order by Flavius Hemerius for the erection of a church for Ischyras.

The two concluding sections (89, 90) of the Apology are a postscript added during the troubles under Constantius (about 358, see Introd. to Hist. Av.)

He points to the sufferings which many bishops, including Hosius and Liberius, had endured rather than surrender his cause, as fresh evidence of their belief in his innocence.

He refuses to see any detraction from the force of this argument in the fall of the two bishops mentioned.

The importance to the historian of this collection of documents need not be dwelt upon.

If the charges in dispute seem trivial and even grotesque, they none the less illustrate the temper of the parties concerned, and the character of the controversy during the very important twenty years which end with the death of Constans and the reign of Constantius over the undivided Empire.

DEFENCE AGAINST THE ARIANS.

Dalmatia, Siscia, Pannonia, Noricum, Italy, Picenum, Tuscany, Campania, Calabria, Apulia, Bruttia, Sicily, the whole of Africa, Sardinia, Spain, Gaul, and Britain.

INTRODUCTION.

1. I supposed that, after so many~proofs of my innocence had been given, my enemies would have shrunk from further enquiry, and would now have condemned themselves for their false accusations of others.

But as they are not yet abashed, though they have been so clearly convicted, but, as insensible to shame, persist in their slanderous reports against me, professing to think that the whole matter ought to be tried over again (not that they may have judgment passed on them, for that they avoid, but in order to harass me, and to disturb the minds of the simple); I therefore thought it necessary to make my defence unto you, that you may listen to their murmurings no longer, but may denounce their wickedness and base calumnies.

And it is only to you, who are men of sincere minds, that I offer a defence: as for the contentious, I appeal confidently to the decisive proofs which I have against them.

For my cause needs no further judgment; for judgment has already been given, and not once or twice only, but many times.

First of all, it was tried in my own country in an assembly of nearly one hundred of its Bishops *°; a second time at Rome, when, in consequence of letters from Eusebius, both they and we were summoned, and more than fifty Bishops met*; and a third time in the great Council assembled at Sardica by order of the most religious

Emperors Constantius and Constans, when my enemies were degraded as false accusers, and the sentence that was passed in my favour received the suffrages of more than three hundred Bishops, out of the provinces of Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis, Palestine, Arabia, Isauria, Cyprus, Pamphylia, Lycia, Galatia, Dacia, Moesia, Thrace, Dardania, Macedonia, Epirus, Thessaly, Achaia, Crete, ee ee ee Added to these was the testimony? of Ursa:'ius and Valens, who had formerly calumniated me, but afterwards changed their minds, and not only gave their assent to the sentence that was passed in my favour, but also confessed that they themselves and the rest of my enemies were false accusers ; for men who make such a change and such a recantation of course reflect upon Eusebius and his fellows, for with them they had contrived the plot against me.

Now after a matter has been examined and decided on such clear evidence by so many eminent Bishops, every one will confess that further discussion is unnecessary ; else, if an investigation be instituted at this time, it may be again discussed and again investigated, and there will be no end to such trifling.

2. Now the decision of so many Bishops was sufficient to confound those who would still fain pretend some charge against me.

But when my enemies also bear testimony in my favour and against themselves, declaring that the proceedings against me were a conspiracy, who is there that would not be ashamed to doubt any longer?

The law requires that in the mouth of two or three witnesses ? judgments shall be settled, and we have here. this great multitude of witnesses in my favour, with the addition of the proofs afforded by my enemies; so much so that those who still continue opposed to me no longer attach any importance to their own arbitrary 3 judgment, but now have recourse to violence, and in the place of fair reasoning seek to injure+ those by whom they were ® Vid. infr. § 58. This was A.D. 347.

2 Deut. xvii. 6.

3 ds 70¢Anoay. vid, infr. § 14. de Deer. $3. de Syn. $13. Ep 'g- §5.

_ 10 The Council of Sardica says eigh ; which is a usual n in Egyptian Councils.

(vid; Themen 8. p.

74 yr eo about ninety Bishops in Egypt, the Thebais, and Libya.

The piset Council was held [at the end of 338 or ossibly at the beginning of 339].

Its synodal Epistle is contained below. § 3, and is particularly addressed to Pope Julius, § 20. eos 32 This was held in 340.

Julius's Letter is found below, § 2z.

'There were | , 4 This implies that Valens and Ursacius were subjected to some kind of persecution, which is natural [most improbable].

They relapsed in 351, when Constantius on the death of Constans came into possession of his brother's dominions; and professed to have been forced to their former recantation by the latter Emperor.

DEFENCE AGAINST THE ARIANS.

IOI rinse nce eercarg econ remerrmneereeravoe estas acta ae saeco exposed.

For this is the chief cause of vexation to them, that the measures they carried on in secret, contrived by themselves in a corner, have been brought to light and disclosed by Valens and Ursacius; for they are well aware that their recantation while it clears those whom they have injured, condemns themselves. consequence we prevailed with ourselves. to remain silent.

Since, however, after all his severe sufferings, after his retirement into Gaul, after his sojourn in a foreign and far distant country in the place of his own, after his narrow escape from death through their calumnies, but thanks to the clemency of the Emperor,—distress which would have satisfied even the most cruel enemy,—they are still insensible to shame, are again acting insolently against the Church and Athanasius; and from indignation at his deliverance venture on still more atrocious schemes against him, and are ready with an accusation, fearless of the words in holy Scripture, 'A false witness shall not be unpunished ;' and, 'The mouth that belieth slayeth the soul;' we therefore are unable longer to hold our peace, being amazed at their wickedness and at the insatiable love of contention displayed in their intrigues.

Indeed this led to their degradation in the Council of Sardica, as mentioned before ; and with good reason; for, as the Pharisees of old, when they undertook the defence of Pauls, fully exposed the conspiracy which they and the Jews had formed against him ; and as the blessed David was proved to be persecuted unjustly when the persecutor confessed, 'I have sinned, my son David °;' sO it was with these men; being overcome by the truth they made a request, and delivered it in writing to Julius, Bishop of Rome.

They wrote also to me requesting to be on terms of peace with me, though they have spread such reports concerning me; and probably even now they are covered with shame, on seeing that those whom they sought to destroy by the grace of the Lord are still alive.

Consistently also with this conduct they anathematized Arius and his heresy; for knowing that Eusebius and his fellows had conspired against me in For see, they cease not to disturb the ear of royalty with fresh reports against us; they cease not to write letters of deadly import, for the destruction of the Bishop who is the enemy of their impiety.

For again have they written to the Emperors against him; again they wish to conspire against him, charging him with a butchery which has never taken place; again they wish to shed his blood, accusing him of a murder that never was committed (for at that former time would they have murdered him by their calumnies, had we not had a kind Emperor) ; again they are urgent, to say the least, that he should be sent into banishment, while they pretend to lament the miseries of those alleged to have been exiled by him.

They lament before us things that have never been done, and, not satisfied with what has been done to him, desire to add thereto other and more cruel treatment. behalf of their own misbelief, and of nothing else, as soon as they had determined to confess their calumnies against me, they immediately renounced also that antichristian heresy for the sake of which they had falsely asserted them.

The following are the letters written in my favour by the Bishops in the several Councils ; and first the letter of the Egyptian Bishops.

Encyclical Letter of the Council of Egypt.

The holy Council assembled at Alexandria, out of Egypt, the Thebais, Libya, and Pentapolis, to the Bishops of the Catholic Church everywhere, brethren beloved and greatly longed for in the Lord, greeting.

So mild are they and merciful, and of so just a disposition; or rather (for the truth shall be spoken) so wicked are they and malicious ; obtaining respect through fear and by threats, rather than by their piety and justice, as becomes Bishops. They have dared

3. Dearly beloved brethren, we might have put forth a defence of our brother Athanasius, as respects the conspiracy of Eusebius and in their letters to the Emperors to pour forth language such as no contentious person would employ even among those that are without ; they have charged him with a number of murders and butcheries, and that not before a Governor, or any other superior officer, but before the three Augusti; nor shrink they from any journey however long, provided only all greater courts may be filled with their accusations.

For indeed, dearly beloved, their business consists in accusations, and that of the most solemn character, forasmuch as the his fellows against him, and complained of his sufferings at their hands, and have exposed all their false charges, either at the beginning of their conspiracy or upon his arrival at Alexandria.

But circumstances did not permit it then, as you also know; and lately, after the return of the Bishop Athanasius, we thought that they would be confounded and covered with shame at their manifest injustice: in 5 Acts xxiii. 9.

6 x Sam, xxvi. a1.

7 Prov. xix. 5 ; Wisd. i. rz

APOLOGIA CONTRA ARIANOS.

I02 their conduct was dishonourable, or rather their words untrue, besides exposing them for what they have now advanced. tribunals to which they make their appeal are the most solemn of any upon earth.

And what other end do they propose by these investigations, except to move the Emperor 5. We are indeed ashamed to make any defence against such charges.

But since our reckless accusers lay hold of any charge, and allege that murders and butcheries were committed after the return of Athanasius, we beseech you to bear with our answer though it be somewhat long; for circumstances constrain us. No murder has been committed either by Athanasius or on his account, since our accusers, as we said before, compel us to enter upon this humiliating defence.

Slaughter and imprisonment are foreign to our Church.

No one did Athanasius commit into the hands of the executioner; and the prison, so far as he was concerned, was never disturbed.

Our sanctuaries are now, as they have always been, pure, and honoured only with the Blood of Christ and His pious worship.

Neither Presbyter nor Deacon was destroyed by Athanasius ; he perpetrated no murder, he caused the banishment of no one.

Would that they had never caused the like to him, nor given him actual experience of it! No one here has been banished on his account ; no one at all except

Athanasius himself, the Bishop of Alexandria, whom they banished, and whom, now that he is restored, they again seek to entangle in the same or even a more cruel plot than before, setting their tongues to speak all manner of false and deadly words against him. to capital punishment P 4. Their own conduct therefore, and not that of Athanasius, is the fittest subject for lamentation and mourning, and one would more properly lament them, for such actions ought to be bewailed, since it is written, 'Weep ye not for the dead, neither bemoan him: but weep sore for him that goeth away, for he shall return no more,'

For their whole letter contemplates nothing but death; and their endeavour is to kill, whenever_they may be permitted, or if not, to drive into exile.

And this they were permitted to do by the most religious father of the Emperors, who gratified their fury by the banishment of Athanasius 9, instead of his death.

Now that this is not the conduct even of ordinary Christians, scarcely even of heathens, much less of Bishops, who profess to teach others righteousness, we suppose that your Christian consciences must at once perceive.

How can they forbid others to accuse their brethren, who themselves become their accusers, and that to the Emperors? How can they teach compassion for the misfortunes of others, who cannot rest satisfied even with our banishment?

For there was confessedly a general sentence of banishment against us Bishops, and we all looked upon ourselves as banished men: and now again we consider ourselves as restored with Athanasius to our native places, and instead of our former lamentations and mourning over him, as haying the greatest encouragement and grace,— which may the Lord continue to us, nor suffer

Eusebius and his fellows to destroy?

For, behold, they now attribute to him the acts of the magistrates; and although they plainly confess in their letter that the Prefect of Egypt passed sentence upon certain persons, they now are not ashamed to impute this sentence to Athanasius; and that, though he had not at the time entered Alexandria, but was yet on his return from his place of exile.

Indeed he was then in Syria; since we must needs adduce in defence his length of way from home, that a man may not be responsible for the actions of a Governor or Prefect of Egypt.

But supposing Athanasius had been in Alexandria, what were the proceedings of the Prefect to Athanasius? However, he was not even in the country ; and what the Prefect of Egypt did was not done on ecclesiastical grounds, but for reasons which you will learn from the records, which, after we understood what they had written, we made diligent enquiry for, and have transmitted to you.

Since then they now raise a cry against certain things which were never done either by him or for him, as though they had certainly taken place, and testify against such evils as though they were assured of their existence; let them

Even if their charges against him were true, here is a certain charge against them, that against the precept of Christianity, and after his banishment and trials, they have assaulted him again, and accuse him of murder, and butchery, and other crimes, which they sound

In the royal ears against the Bishops.

But how manifold is their wickedness, and what manner of men think you them, when every word they speak is false, every charge they bring a calumny, and there is no truth whatever either in their mouths or their writings!

Let us then at length enter upon these matters, and meet their last charges.

This will prove, that in their former repreSentations in the Council? and at the trial

SS 8 Jer. xxii. 10.

9 Hist.

Ar.

Y Of Tyre.

CaaEN See below, § 71.

DEFENCE AGAINST THE ARIANS.

inform us from what Council they obtained their knowledge of them, from what proofs, and from what judicial investigation?

But if they have no such evidence to bring forward, and nothing but their own mere assertion, we leave it to you to consider as regards their former charges also, how the things took place, and why they so speak of them.

In truth, it is nothing but calumny, and a plot of our enemies, and a temper of ungovernable mood, and an impiety in behalf of the Arian madmen, which is frantic against true godliness, and desires to root out the orthodox, so that henceforth the advocates of impiety may preach without fear whatever doctrines they please.

The history of thé matter is as follows :— means of shewing their enmity and hatred towards him, and spreading false reports for the sole purpose of thereby vilifying his character.

However, the very misrepresentations which they now are making do but convict their former statements of being falsehoods, and a mere conspiracy against him.

For they say, that 'after the death of Bishop Alexander, a certain few having mentioned the name of Athanasius, six or seven Bishops elected him clandestinely in a secret place:' and this is what they wrote to the Emperors, having no scruple about asserting the greatest falsehoods,

Now that the whole multitude and all the people of the Catholic Church assembled together as with one mind and body, and cried, shouted, that Athanasius should be Bishop of their Church, made this the subject of their public prayers to Christ, and conjured us to grant it for many days and nights, neither departing themselves from the Church, nor suffering us to do so; of all this we are witnesses, and so is the whole city, and the province too.

Not a word did they speak against him, as these persons represented, but gave him the most excellent titles they could devise, calling him good, pious, Christian, an ascetic 5, a genuine Bishop.

And that he was elected by a majority of our body in the sight and with the acclamations of all the people, we who elected him also testify, who are surely more credible witnesses than those who were not present, and now spread these false accounts.

6. When Arius, from whom the heresy of the Arian madmen has its name, was cast out of the Church for his impiety by Bishop Alexander, of blessed memory, Eusebius and his fellows, who are the disciples and partners of his impiety, considering themselves also to have been ejected, wrote frequently to Bishop

Alexander, beseeching him not to leave the heretic Arius out of the Church 2.

But when Alexander in his piety towards Christ refused to admit that impious man, they directed their resentment against Athanasius, who was then a Deacon, because in their busy enquiries they had heard that he was much in the familiarity of Bishop Alexander, and much honoured by him.

And their hatred of him was greatly increased after they had experience of his piety towards Christ, in the Council assembled at Nicza3, wherein he spoke boldly against the impiety of the Arian madmen.

But when God raised him to the Episcopate, their longcherished malice burst forth into a flame, and fearing his orthodoxy and resistance of their impiety, they (and especially Eusebius 4, who was smitten with a consciousness of his own evil doings), engaged in all manner of treacherous designs against him. They prejudiced the Emperor against him; they frequently threatened him with Councils; and at last assembled at Tyre; and to this day they cease not to write against him, and are so implacable that they even find fault with his appointment to the Episcopate 5, taking every

But yet Eusebius finds fault with the appointment of Athanasius,—he who perhaps never received any appointment to his office at all; or if he did, has himself rendered it invalid®, For he had first the See of Berytus, but leaving that he came to Nicomedia.

He left the one contrary to the law, and contrary to the law invaded the other; having deserted his own without affection, and holding possession of another's without reason; he but that, fortifying himself in his position, he sent in his election to the Emperor, and by this means obtained its confirmation. #. 2. ii, 16.

It appears, in matter of fact, that S. Athan. was absent at the time of his election; as Socrates says, in order to avoid it, or as Epiphanius, on business at the Court; these reasons are pa laa (Cf. Prolegg. ch. ii. § 4, and Gwatkin's note, quoted there.

5 It is contested whether S. Athan. was ever one of S. Antony's monks, the reading of a passage in the commencement of his Vit.

Ant., which would decide the question, varying in different MSS, The word '' ascetic" is used of those who lived a life, as afterwards followed in Monasteries, in the Ante-Nicene times.

[See D.C.B. x.

181%, and Prolegg, ch. il. § 1 ad_fim, and Introd. to Vit. Ant.) 6 The Canons of Nicw#a and Sardica were absolute against translation, but, as Bingham observes, Antiqu. vi. 4. § 6. only as a general rule.

The so-called Apostolical Canons except "'a reasonable cause" and the sanction of a Council; one of the Coun. cils of Carthage prohibits them when subserving ambitious views, and except for the advantage of the Church.

Vid. list of trans. lations in Socr. Ast. vii. 36. Cassiodor. Hést. xii, 8. Niseph.

Hist. ait 39.

Coteler. adds others ad Can. Apost. 14. [cf Ast Ari. 7.

2 Cf. de Syn. 17.

3 Cf. Socr. i. 8.

4 Cf. Nicomedia.

5 The Eusebians alleged that, fifty-four Bishops of the two parties of S. Alexander and Meletius being assembled for the election, and having sworn to elect by the common voice, six or seven of these broke their oaths in favour of S. Athanasius, whom no one had thought of, and consecrated him in secret to the re surprise and aeacaal of both ecclesiastical and lay persons. vid. Socr. il. 17.

Philostorgius (A.D. 425) adds particulars, explanatory or corrective of this statement, of which the Bishops in the text do not seem to have heard; viz., that Athanasius with his party one night seized on the Church of St. Dionysius, and compelled two Bishops whom he found there to consecrate him against their will; that he was in consequence anathematized by all the other Bishops,

APOLOGIA CONTRA ARIANOS.

no le a the Bishop Athanasius.

For their former statements resembled those they now falsely make, viz., that disorderly meetings were held at his entrance ?°, with lamentation and mourning, the people indignantly refusing to receive him.

Now such was not the case, but, quite the contrary, joy and cheerfulness prevailed, and the people ran together, hastening to obtain the desired sight of him.

The churches were full of rejoicings, and thanksgivings were offered up to the Lord everywhere; and all the Ministers and Clergy beheld him with such feelings, that their souls were possessed with delight, and they esteemed that the happiest day of their lives.

Why need we mention the inexpressible joy that prevailed among us Bishops, for we have already said that we counted ourselves to have been partakers in his sufferings? lost his love for the first in his lust for another, without even keeping to that which he obtained at the prompting of his lust.

For, behold, withdrawing himself from the second, again he takes possession of another's ®, casting an evil eye all around him upon the cities of other men, and thinking that godliness7 consists in wealth and in the greatness of cities, and making light of the heritage of God to which he had been appointed; not knowing that 'where' even 'two or three are gathered in the name of the' Lord, 'there' is the Lord 'in the midst of them ;' not considering the words of the Apostle, 'I will not boast in another man's labours ;' not perceiving the charge which he has given, 'Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed.'

For if this expression applies to a wife, how much more does it apply to a Church, and to the same Episcopate; to which whosoever is bound ought not to seek another, lest he prove an adulterer according to holy Scripture.

8. Now this being confessedly the truth of the matter, although it is very differently represented by them, what weight can be attached to that Council or trial of which they make their boast?

Since they presume thus to interfere in a case which they did not wimess, which they have not examined, and for which they did not meet, and to write as though they were assured of the truth of their statements, how can they claim credit respecting these matters for the consideration of which they say that they did meet together? Will it not rather be believed that they have acted both in the one case and in the other out of enmity to us? For what kind of a Council of Bishops was then held? Was it an assembly which aimed at the truth? Was not almost every One among them our enemy?? Did not the attack of Eusebius and his fellows upon us proceed from their zeal for the Arian madness? Did they not urge on the others of their party?

Have we not always written against them as professing the doctrines of Arius?

Was not Eusebius of Czsarea in Palestine accused by our confessors of sacrificing to idols?? Was not George proved to have been deposed by the blessed Alexander3?

Were not they charged with various offences, some with this, some with that?

7. But though conscious of these his own misdoings, he has boldly undertaken to arraign the appointment of Athanasius, to which honourable testimony has been borne by all, and he ventures to reproach him with his deposition, though he has been deposed himself, and has a standing proof of his deposition in the appointment of another in his room.

How could either he or Theognius § depose another, after they had been deposed themselves, which is sufficiently proved by the appointment of others in their room?

For you know very well that there were appointed instead of them Amphion to Nicomedia and Chrestus to Niczea, in consequence of their own impiety and connection with the Arian madmen, who were rejected by the Ecumenic Council.

But while they desire to set aside that true Council, they endeavour to give that name to their own unlawful combination9; while they are unwilling that the decrees of the Council should be enforced, they desire to enforce their own decisions ; and they use the name of a Council, while they refuse to submit themselves to one so great as this.

Thus they care not for Councils, but only pretend to do so in order that they may root out the orthodox, and annul the decrees of the true and great

How then could such men entertain the purpose of holding a meeting against us?

Council against the Arians, in support of whom, both now and heretofore, they have ventured to assert these falsehoods against 10 On his return from Gaul, Nov. 23, a.p.

337.

[Prolege. ch. ii §6(2).

SN PAs aeigiegitaas ats 2 At the Council of Tyre, Potamo, an Egyptian Bishop and Confessor asked Eusebius what had happened to is in prison during the persecution, Spiel Her. 68, 7, as if hinting at his cowardice.

It appears that Eusebius was prisoner at Czsarea with S. Pamphilus; yet he never mentions the fact himself, which is unlike him, if it was producible. [The insinuation of Potammon was groundless: see Dic. C. Biog. ii. 311.]

6= je. Constantinople, on the expulsion of Paul.

7 x Tim. vi. 5; Matt. xviii. 20; 2 Cor. x. 15; 1 Cor. vii. 27.

8 Or Theognis; he was, as well as Eusebius, a pupil of Lucian's, and was deposed together with him after the Nicene Council for communicating with Arians.

[They were not ecclesiastically dePosed, but exiled by the Emperor, see Prolegg. ch ii. §§ 3. (1) and (2) c, 6 (z).] Constantine banished them to Gaul; they were recalled in the course of two or three years.

He was dead by the date of the Council of Sardica, 9 Eusebian Council of Tyre, a.p. 335+ 3 George, Bishop of Laodicea, had been degraded when a priest by S. Alexander, for his profligate habits as well as his Arianism.

Athan. speaks of him elsewhere as reprobated even by his party. de Fug. 26. (Cf. § 49, de Syn. 17.

Prolegg. ch. ii. § 3 (2) c, 2.]

DEFENCE AGAINST THE ARIANS.

TOS res How can they have the boldness to call that a Council, at which a Count presided, which an executioner attended, and where an usher +4 instead of the Deacons of the Church introduced us into Court; and where the Count only spoke, and all present held their peace, or rather obeyed his directions 5? The removal of those Bishops who seemed to deserve it, was prevented at his desire; and when he gave the order we were dragged about by soldiers ;— or rather Eusebius and his fellows gave the order, and he was subservient to their will. our fellow-minister Athanasius, but still the Count threatened him with violence, and was very zealous against him, the Bishop® fled from this violence and went up to the most religious Emperor, where he protested against the Count and their conspiracy against him, and requested either that a lawful Council of Bishops might be assembled, or that the Emperor would himself receive his defence concerning the charges they brought against him.

Upon this the Emperor wrote in anger, summoning them before him, and declaring that he would hear the cause himself, and for that purpose he also ordered a Council to be held.

Whereupon Eusebius and his fellows went up and falsely charged Athanasius, not with the same offences which they had published against him at Tyre, but with an intention of detaining the vessels laden with corn, as though Athanasius had been the man to pretend that he could stop the exports of corn from Alexandria to Constantinople *.

In short, dearly beloved, what kind of Council was that, the object of which was banishment and murder at the pleasure of the Emperor?

And of what nature were their charges p—for here is matter of still greater astonishment.

There was one Arsenius whorn they declared to have been murdered; and they also complained that a chalice belonging to the sacred mysteries had been broken.

Now Arsenius is alive, and prays to be admitted to our communion.

He waits for no other testimony to prove that he is still living, but himself confesses it, writing in his own person to our brother Athanasius, whom they positively asserted to be his murderer.

The impious wretches were not ashamed to accuse him of having murdered a man who was at a great distance from him, being separated by so great a distance, whether by sea or land, and whose abode at that time no one knew.

Nay, they even had the boldness to remove him out of sight, and place him in concealment, though he had suffered no injury; and, if it had been possible, they would have transported him to another world, nay, or have taken him from life in earnest, so that either by a true or false statement of his murder they might in good earnest destroy Athanasius.

But thanks to divine Providence for this also, which permitted them not to succeed in their injustice, but presented Arsenius ° alive to the eyes of all men, who has clearly proved their conspiracy and calumnies.

He does not withdraw from us as murderers, nor hate us as having injured him (for indeed he has suffered no evil at all); but he desires to hold communion with us; he wishes to be numbered among us, and has written to this effect.

Certain of our friends were present at the palace with Athanasius, and heard the threats of the Emperor upon receiving this report.

And when Athanasius cried out upon the calumny, and positively declared that it was not true, (for how, he argued, should he a poor man, and in a private station, be able to do such a thing?) Eusebius did not hesitate publicly to repeat the charge, and swore that Athanasius was a rich man, and powerful, and able to do anything; in order that it might thence be supposed that he had used this. language. Such was the accusation these venerable

Bishops proffered against him.

But the grace of God proved superior to their wickedness, for it moved the pious Emperor to mercy, who instead of death passed upon him the sentence of banishment. Thus their calumnies, and nothing else, were the cause of this.

For the Emperor, in the. letter which he previously wrote, complained of their conspiracy, censured their machinations, and condemned the Meletians as unscrupulous and deserving of execration ; in short, expressed himself in the severest terms concerning them.

For he was greatly moved when he heard the story of the dead alive; he was moved at hearing of 9. Nevertheless they laid their plot against Athanasius, accusing him of having murdered a person who was still alive ; and those same men are the authors of his banishment?7.

For it was not the father of the Emperors, but their calumnies, that sent him into exile.

Consider whether this is not the truth.

When nothing was discovered to the prejudice of 8 The circumstances of this appeal, which are related by Athan. below, § 86, are thus summed up by Gibbon; "' Before the final sentence could be pronounced at Tyre, the intrepid primate threw himself into a bark which was ready to hoist sail for the imperial city.

The request of a formal audience might have been opposed or eluded; but Athanasius concealed his arrival, watched the moment of Constantine's return from an adjacent villa, and boldly encountered his angry sovereign as he passed on horseback through the principal street of Constantinople.

So strange an apparition excited his surprise and indignation ; and the guards were ordered to remove the importunate suitor ;. but his resentment was subdued by involuntary respect ; and the haughty spirit of the Emperor was awed by the courage and eloquence of a Bishop, who implored his justice and awakened his conscience." Decl. and Fail, xxi. Athan,

8 Hist. Ari. 11, and below §§ 36, 71.

4 Conventarius.

7 By Constantine into Gaul, A.D. 336.

6 §6 wasasmallmanin person.

9 i.e. to Constantinople.

10 § 87,

APOLOGIA CONTRA ARIANOS.

erp teries before the uninitiated, lest the heathen in their ignorance deride them, and the Catechumens being over-curious be offended.

However, what was the cup, and where and before whom was it broken?

It is the Meletians who make the accusation, who are not worthy of the least credit, for they have been schismatics and enemies of the Church, not of a recent date, but from the times of the blessed Peter, Bishop and Martyr+.

They formed a conspiracy against Peter himself; they calumniated his successor Achillas ; they accused Alexander even before the Emperor ; and being thus well versed in these arts, they have now transferred their enmity to Athanasius, acting altogether in accordance with their former wickedness.

For as they slandered those that have been before him, so now they have slandered him.

But their calumnies and false accusations have never prevailed against him until now, that they have got Eusebius and his fellows for their assistants and patrons, on account of the impiety which these have adopted from the Arian madmen, which has led them to conspire against many

Bishops, and among the rest Athanasius. murder in the case of one alive, and not deprived of life.

We have sent you the letter.

10. But these marvellous men, Eusebius and his fellows, to make a show of refuting the truth of the case, and the statements contained in this letter, put forward the name of a Council, and ground its proceedings upon the authority of the Emperor.

Hence the attendance of a Count at their meeting, and the soldiers as guards of the Bishops, and royal letters compelling the attendance of any persons whom they required.

But observe here the strange character of their machinations, and the inconsistency of their bold measures, so that by some means or other they may take Athanasius away from us.

For if as Bishops they claimed for themselves alone the judgment of the case, what need was there for the attendance of a Count and soldiers? or how was it that they assembled under the sanction of royal letters ?

Or if they required the Emperor's countenance and wished to derive their authority from him, why were they then annulling his judgment? and when he declared in the letter which he wrote, that the Meletians were -calumniators, unscrupulous, and that Athanasius was most innocent, and made much stir about the pretended murder of the living, how was it that they determined that the Meletians had spoken the truth, and that Athanasius was guilty of the offence; and were not ashamed to make the living dead, living both after the Emperor's judgment, and at the time when they met together, and who even until this day is amongst us? So much concerning the case of Arsenius.

Now the place where they say the cup was broken, was not a Church; there was no Presbyter in occupation of the place; and the day on which they say that Macarius did the deed, was not the Lord's day.

Since then there was no church there; since there was no one to perform the sacred office; and since the day did not require the use of it'; what was this cup belonging to the mysteries, and when, or where was it broken?

There are many cups, it is plain, both in private houses, and in the public market; and if a person breaks one of them, he is not guilty of impiety.

But the cup which belongs to the mysteries, and which if it be broken intentionally, makes the perpetrator of the deed an impious person, is found only among those who lawfully preside.

This is the only description that can be given of this kind of cup; there is none other; this you legally give to the people to drink ; this you have received according to the canon of the Church®; this belongs only to those who preside over the Catholic Church, for to you only it appertains to administer the Blood of Christ, and to none besides.

But as he who breaks the cup belonging to the mysteries is an impious person, much more impious is he who treats the 11. And as for the cup belonging to the mysteries, what was it, or where was it broken by Macarius ? for this is the report which they spread up and down.

But as for Athanasius, even his accusers would not have ventured to blame him, had they not been suborned by them.

However, they attribute the origin of the offence to him; although it ought not to be imputed even to Macarius who is clear of it.

And they are not ashamed to parade the sacred mysteries before Catechumens, and worse than that, even before heathens:: whereas, they ought to attend to what is written, 'It is good to keep close the secret of a king?;' and as the Lord has charged us,

Give not that which is holy. unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine 3,'

We ought not then to parade the holy myscific ians. iets Se See area els ola : 1 This period, when Christianity was acknowledged by the state ut not embraced by the population, is just the time when we hear most of this Reserve as a Principle.

While Christians were but @ Sect, persecution enforced a discipline, and when they were commensurate with the nation, faith made it unnecessary,

We are now returned to the state of the fourth century, 4[Cf. § 59, and Ap. 4g. 22, Prolegg. ch. ii. § 2 zuzZ.] coe seems se Enel hat the Holy Communion was only celebrated on Sundays in the Egyptian Churches.

[Cf. §§ 6 76.) 6 Vid. Can. Af. 65.

8863, 74 2 Tob, xii. 7, 3 Matt. vii. 6.

DEFENCE AGAINST THE ARIANS.

Blood of Christ with contumely: and he does so who 'does this 7' contrary to the rule of the Church.

(We say this, not as if a cup even of the schismatics was broken by Macarius, for there was no cup there at all; how should there be? where there was neither Lord's house nor any one belonging into the matter.

Accordingly they dispatched secretly, with the assistance of the civil power, persons to whom we openly objected on many accounts, as being of the party of Arius, and therefore our enemies; namely, Diognius9, Maris, Theodorus, Macedonius, and _ two others, young both in years and mind9, Ursacius and Valens from Pannonia; who, after they had undertaken this long journey for the purpose of sitting in judgment upon their enemy, set out again from Tyre for Alexandria.

They did not shrink from becoming witnesses themselves, although they were the judges, but openly adopted every means of furthering their design, and undertook any labour or journey whatsoever in order to bring to a successful issue the conspiracy which was in progress.

'They left the Bishop Athanasius detained in a foreign country while they themselves entered their enemy's city, as if to have their revel both against his Church and against his people.

And what was more outrageous still, they took with them the accuser Ischyras, but would not permit Macarius, the accused person, to accompany them, but left him in custody at Tyre.

For ' Macarius the Presbyter of Alexandria' was made answerable for the charge far and near. to the Church, nay, it was not the time of the celebration of the mysteries).

Now such a person is the notorious Ischyras, who was never appointed to his office by the Church, and when Alexander admitted the Presbyters that had been ordained by Meletius, he was not even numbered amongst them ; and therefore did not receive ordination even from that quarter.

12.

By what means then did Ischyras become a Presbyter? who was it that ordained him? was it Colluthus? for this is the only supposition that remains. But it is well known, and no one has any doubt about the matter, that Colluthus died a Presbyter, and that every ordination of his was invalid, and that all that were ordained by him during the schism were reduced to the condition of laymen, and in that rank appear in the congregation.

How then can it be believed that a private person, occupying a private house, had in his possession a sacred chalice? But the truth is, they gave the name of Presbyter at the time to a private person, and gratified him with this title to support him in his iniquitous conduct towards us; and now as the reward of his accusations they procure for him the erection of a Church®.

So that this man had then no Church ; but as the reward of his malice and subserviency to them in accusing us, he receives now what he had not before ; nay, perhaps they have even remunerated his services with the Episcopate, for so he goes about reporting, and accordingly behaves towards us with great insolence.

Thus are such rewards as these now bestowed by Bishops upon accusers and calumniators ; though indeed it is reasonable, in the case of an accomplice, that as they have made him a partner in their proceedings, so they should also make him their associate in their own

Episcopate.

But this is not all; give ear yet further to their proceedings at that time.

14. They therefore entered Alexandria alone with the accuser, their partner in lodging, board, and cup; and taking with them Philagrius the Prefect of Egypt they proceeded to the Mareotis, and there carried on the socalled investigation by thémselves, all their own way, with the forementioned person.

Although the Presbyters frequently begged that they might be present, they would not permit them.

The Presbyters both of the city and of the whole country desired to attend, that they might detect who and whence the persons were who were suborned by Ischyras.

But they forbade the Ministers to be present, while they carried on the examination concerning church, cup, table, and the holy things, before the heathen; nay, worse than that, they summoned heathen witnesses during the enquiry concerning a cup belonging to the mysteries; and those persons who they affirmed were taken out of the way by Athanasius by summons of the Receiver-general, and they knew not where in the world they were, these same individuals they brought forward before themselves and the Prefect 13. Being unable to prevail against the truth, though they had thus set themselves in array against it, and Ischyras having proved nothing at Tyre, but being shewn to be a calumniator, and the calumny ruining their plot, they defer proceedings for fresh evidence, and profess that they are going to send to the Mareotis certain of their party to enquire diligently owen ew ed a nee Sa ee only, and avowedly used their testimony, whom they affirmed without shame to have been secreted by the Bishop Athanasius.

9 Vid. also Z%. 4g. 7. Euseb. Vit. C. iv. 43. Hilar. ad Const. i. 5. Fragm. ii. 12 _ ['Diognius' is another form of *'

Theognius or Theognis.

See Prolegg. ch. ii. § 5.1

7 1 Cor. xi. 25.

8 Cf. § 85.

APOLOGIA CONTRA ARIANOS.

a eas ol ecg ap on a fast-day?, and at the hands of persons who themselves were feasting with the Bishops indoors.

But here too their only object is to effect his death, and so they again pretend that persons are dead who are still alive, following the same method they adopted in the case of Arsenius.

For the men are living, and are to be seen in their own country; but to you who are at a great distance from the spot they make a great stir about the matter as though they had disappeared, in order that, as the evidence is so far removed from you, they may falsely accuse our brother-minister, as though he used violence and the civil power ; whereas they themselves have in all respects acted by means of that power and the countenance of others.

For their proceedings in the Mareotis were parallel to those at Tyre; and as there a Count attended with military

16. Foreseeing these things, and reflecting that the entrance of enemies into a place is no ordinary calamity, we protested against this commission. And Alexander3, Bishop of 'Thesgalonica, considering the same, wrote to the people residing there, discovering the conspiracy, and testifying of the plot.

They indeed reckon him to be one of themselves, and account him a partner in their designs; but they only prove thereby the violence they have exercised towards him. For even the profligate

Ischyras himself was only induced by fear and violence to proceed in the matter, and was obliged by force to undertake the accusation.

As a proof of this, he wrote himself to our brother Athanasius', confessing that nothing of the kind that was alleged had taken place there, but that he was suborned to make a false statement.

This declaration he made, though he was never admitted by Athanasius as a Presbyter, nor received such a title of grace from him, nor was entrusted by way of recompense with the erection of a Church, nor expected the bribe of a Bishopric; all of which he obtained from them in return for undertaking the accusation.

Moreover, his whole family held communion with us5, which they would not have done had they been injured in the slightest degree. assistance, and would permit nothing either to be said or done contrary to their pleasure, so here also the Prefect of Egypt was present with a band of men, frightening all the members of the Church, and permitting no one to give true testimony.

And what was the strangest thing of all, the persons who came, whether as judges or witnesses, or, what was more likely, in order to serve their own purposes and those of Eusebius, lived in the same place with the accuser, even in his house, and there seemed to carry on the investigation as they pleased.

15. We suppose you are not ignorant what outrages they committed at Alexandria ; for they are reported everywhere. Naked swords'° were

17. Now to prove that these things are facts and not mere assertions, we have the testimony ° of all the Presbyters of the Mareotis7, who always accompany the Bishop in his visitations, and who also wrote at the time against Ischyras.

But neither those of them who came to Tyre were allowed to declare the truth ®, nor could those who remained in the Mareotis obtain permission to refute the calumnies of Ischyras 9. The copies also of the letters of Alexander, and of the Presbyters, and of Ischyras will prove the same thing.

We have sent also the letter of the father of the Emperors, in which he expresses his indignation that the murder of Arsenius was charged upon any one while the man was still alive; as also his astonishment at the variable and inat work against the holy virgins and brethren ; scourges were at work against their persons, esteemed honourable in the sight of God, so that their feet were lamed by the stripes, whose souls are whole and sound in purity and all good works*, The trades were excited against them ; and the heathen multitude was set to strip them naked, to beat them, wantonly to insult them, and to threaten them with their altars and sacrifices.

And one coarse fellow, as though license had now been given them by the Prefect in order to gratify the Bishops, took hold of a virgin by the hand, and dragged her towards an altar that happened to be near, imitating the practice of compelling to offer sacrifice in time of persecution.

When this was done, the virgins took to flight, and a shout of laughter was raised by the heathen against the Church ; the Bishops being in the place, and occupying the very house where this was going on; and from which, in order to obtain favour with them, the virgins were assaulted with naked swords, and were exposed to all kinds of danger, and insult, and wanton violence.

And this treatment they received Sta es Aig 200 ee Pee a ee 2 [Not in Lent, for the commission were at Alexandria in September, see the date of the protest, 7z/ra, § 76.]

3 This Alexander had been one of the Nicene Fathers, in 325, and had the office of peeing their decrees in Macedonia, Greece,

&c, He was at the Council of Jerusalem ten years after, at which the Church of the Holy Sepulchre was consecrated, and afterwards

Arius admitted to communion.

His influence with the Court party seems to have been great, judging from Count Dionysius's tone in speaking of him.

_Infr. §§ 66, 80, 81.

4 Infr. § 64.

5 Vid. infr. § 63 fin. § 85 fin.

6 Infr. § 74» 7 The district, called Mareotis from a neighbouring lake, .

. la in the territory and diocese of Alexandria, to the south-west. tt consisted of various large villages, with handsome Churches, and resident Priests, and of hamlets which had none; of the latter was '' Irene of Secontarurus," (infr. § 85.) where Isch: ived, 8 Infr. § 79.

9 872 fin. bh nt il ate % Cf. Encycl. 3, Apol. Const. 33.

* Hist. Arian. 12.

DEFENCE AGAINST THE ARIANS.

ae eee et consistent character of their accusations with respect to the cup; since at one time they accused the Presbyter Macarius, at another the Bishop Athanasius, of having broken it with his hands.

He declares also on the one hand that the Meletians are calumniators, and on the other that Athanasius is perfectly innocent. tioned heresy of the Arians, for the sake of which they conspired against Athanasius and other Bishops, and still continue to wage war against the Church.

Who are they that have really been the cause of murders and banishments?

Is it not these?

Who are they that, availing themselves of external support, conspire against the Bishops?

Are not Eusebius and his fellows the men, and not Athanasius, as they say in their letters ? Both he and others have suffered at their hands.

Even at the time of which we speak, four Presbyters3 of Alexandria, though they had not even proceeded to Tyre, were banished by their means.

Who then are they whose conduct calls for tears and lamentations?

Is it not they, who after they have been guilty of one course of persecution, do not scruple to add to it a second, but have recourse to all manner of falsehood, in order that they may destroy a Bishop who will not give way to their impious heresy?

Hence arises the enmity of Eusebius and his fellows ; hence their proceedings at Tyre; hence their pretended trials; hence also now the letters which they have written even without any trial, expressing the utmost confidence in their statements ; hence their calumnies before the father of the Emperors, and before the most religious Emperors themselves.

And are not the Meletians calumniators, and above all John*, who after coming into the Church, and communicating with us, after condemning himself, and no longer taking any part in the proceedings respecting the cup, when he saw Eusebius and his fellows zealously supporting the Arian madmen, though they had not the daring to co-operate with them openly, but were attempting to employ others as their masks, undertook a character, as an actor in the heathen theatres'?

The subject of the drama was a contest of Arians; the real design of the piece being their success, but John and his partizans being put on the stage and playing the parts, in order that under colour of these, the supporters of the Arians in the garb of judges might drive away the enemies of their impiety, firmly establish their impious doctrines, and bring the Arians into the Church.

And those who wish to drive out true religion strive all they can to prevail by irreligion; they who have chosen the part} of that impiety which wars against Christ, endeavour to destroy the enemies thereof, as though they were impious persons; and they impute to us the breaking of the cup, for the purpose of making it appear that Athanasius, equally with themselves, is guilty of impiety towards Christ.

18. For it is necessary that you should know what is now reported to the prejudice of our fellow-minister Athanasius, in order that you may thereby be led to condemn their wickedness, and may perceive that they desire nothing else but to murder him. A quantity of corn was given by the father of the Emperors for the support of certain widows, partly of Libya, and partly certain out of Egypt.

They have all received it up to this time, Athanasius getting nothing therefrom, but the trouble of assisting them.

But now, although the recipients themselves make no complaint, but acknowledge that they have received it, Athanasius has been accused of selling all the corn, and appropriating the profits to his own use: and the Emperor wrote to this effect about it, charging him with the offence in consequence of the calumnies which had been raised against him.

Now who are they which have raised these calumnies?

Is it not those who after they have been guilty of one course of persecution, scruple not to set on foot another?

Who are the authors of those letters which are said to have come from the Emperor?

Are not the Arians, who are so zealous against Athanasius, and scruple not to speak and write anything against him? No one would pass over persons

For what means this mention of a cup belonging to thé mysteries by them? Whence comes this religious regard for the cup among those who support impiety towards Christ?

Whence comes it that Christ's cup is known to them who know not Christ? How can they who profess to honour that cup, dishonour the God of the cup? or how can they who lament over the cup, seek to murder the Bishop who celebrates the mysteries therewith? for they would have murdered him, had it been in their power. And how can they who lament the loss of the throne that was Episcopally covered ?, seek to destroy the Bishop that sat upon it, to the end that both the throne may be without its Bishop, and that the people may be deprived of godly doctrine?

It was not then the cup, nor the murder, nor any of those portentous deeds they talk about, that induced them to act thus; but the foremenze Arcaph. infr. 65 fin., head of the Meletians, t Vid. infr. § 37, 46. and de Syn. 32, note.

2 Cathedrz velate, see Bingh. viii. 6. § 10.

3 Vid. their names infr. § 40.

APOLOGIA CONTRA ARIANOS.

1m Ge) to be the avengers of such injustice, reminding you of the injunction of the Apostle, ' Put away from among yourselves that wicked person 3,'

Wicked indeed is their conduct, and unworthy of your communion. Wherefore give no further heed to them, though they should again write to you against the Bishop Athanasius (for all that proceeds from them is false); not even though they subscribe their letter with names 4 of Egyptian Bishops.

For it is evident that it will not be we who write, but the Meletians 5, who have ever been schismatics, and who even unto this day make disturbances and raise factions in the Churches.

For they ordain improper persons, and all but heathens; and they are guilty. of such actions as we are ashamed to set down in writing, but which you may learn from those whom we have sent unto you, who will also deliver to you our letter. who have acted as they have done, in order to entertain suspicion of others.

Nay, the proof of their calumny appears to be most evident, for they are anxious under cover of it, to take away the corn from the Church, and to give it to the Arians.

And this circumstance more than any other, brings the matter home to the authors of this design and their principals, who scrupled neither to set on foot a charge of murder against Athanasius, as a base means of prejudicing the Emperor against him, nor yet to take away from the Clergy of the Church the subsistence of the poor, in order that in fact they might make gain for the heretics.

19. We have sent also the testimony of our fellow-ministers in Libya, Pentapolis, and Egypt, from which likewise you may learn the false accusations which have been brought against Athanasius.

And these things they do, in order that, the professors of true godliness being henceforth induced by fear to remain quiet, the heresy of the impious Arians may be brought in in its stead.

But thanks be to your piety, dearly beloved, that you have frequently anathematized the Arians in your letters, and have never given them admittance into the Church.

The exposure of Eusebius and his fellows is also easy and ready at hand.

For behold, after their former letters concerning the Arians, of which also we have sent you copies, they now openly stir up the Arian madmen against the Church, though the whole Catholic Church has anathematized them; they have appointed a Bishop? over them ; they distract the Churches with threats and alarms, that they may gain assistants in their impiety in every part.

Moreover, they send Deacons to the Arian madmen, who openly join their assemblies; they write letters to them, and receive answers from them, thus making schisms in the Church, and holding communion with them; and they send to every part, commending their heresy, and repudiating the 20. Thus wrote the Bishops of Egypt-to all

Bishops, and to Julius, Bishop of Rome.

CHAPTER II.

Letter of Julius to the Eusebians at Antioch.

Eusebius and his fellows wrote also to Julius, and thinking to frighten me, requested him to call a council, and to be himself the judge, if he so pleased®.

When therefore I went up to Rome, Julius wrote to Eusebius and his fellows as was suitable, and sent moreover two of his own Presbyters?, Elpidius and Philoxenus ®.

But they, when they heard of me, were thrown into confusion, as not expecting my going up thither ; and they declined the proposed Coun. cil, alleging unsatisfactory reasons for so doing, but in truth they were afraid lest the things should be proved against them which Valens and Ursacius afterwards confessed9.

However, more than fifty Bishops assembled, in the place where the Presbyter Vito held his congregation ; and they acknowledged my defence, and gave me the confirmation? both of their communion and their love.

On Church, as you will perceive from the letters they have addressed to the Bishop of Rome ?, and perhaps to yourselves also.

You perceive therefore, dearly beloved, that these things are not undeserving of vengeance : they are indeed dreadful and alien from the doctrine of Christ.

3 x Cor. v. 13.

4 The Eusebians availed themselves of the subscriptions of the Meletians, as at Philippopolis, Hilar. Fragyz. 3.

5 Infr. § 73.

6 a.p. 339. vid. H7st, Avian. $ rt.

[Socrates (iii. 5) and Sozomenus (ii. 8, &c.), confuse the Antiochene Synod, which sent the letter referred to, with the Synod of the ' Dedication' held in 341

A.D., after the receipt of the letter of Julius.] Wherefore we have assembled together, and have written to you, to request of your Christian wisdom to receive this our declaration and sympathize with our brother Athanasius, and to shew your indignation against Eusebius and his fellows who have essayed such things, in order that such malice and wickedness may no longer prevail against the Church.

We call upon you 7 Vito and Vincentius, Presbyters, had represented Silvester at Nicea.

Liberius sent Vincentius, Bishop, and Marcellus, Bishop, to Constantius; and again Lucifer, Bishop, and Eusebius,

Bishop.

[The practice was common to all bishops, not peculiar to that of Rome.] S. Basil suggests that Damasus should send legates into the East, Ep. 69. The Council of Sardica, Can. 5, recognised the Pope's power of sending legates into foreign Provinces to hear certain appeals ; 'Sut de La¢eve suo Presbyterum mittat."

[It conJerred the power (r) upon Julius (2) without any right of initiative, in Can. 3; Can. 5 simply regulates the exercise of the power thus conferred. The genuineness of these Canons has been disputed: at Rome they were quoted in the fifth century as ' Nicene.'] vid. a a de Eccl. Disc. Part 1.ii. 117. (D.C. B. iii. 530, D.C.

197, 1658.

8 [Date uncertain ; see Prolegg. ch. ii. § 6 (1) sud fim., and note there. ] 9 Infr. § 58.

© Vid. infr. § 36.

Z Pistus, 2 Vid. infr. § 21.

DEFENCE AGAINST THE ARIANS.

IIt SS a the other hand, they expressed great indignation against Eusebius and his fellows, and requested that Julius would write to the following effect to those of their number who had written to him.

Which accordingly he did, and sent it by the-hand of Count Gabianus. to bring it forward, lest if it should be openly exhibited, it should grieve many of our brethren here.

But when no one arrived, and it became necessary that the letter should be produced, I declare to you, they were all astonished, and were hardly able to believe that such a letter had been written by you at all; for it is expressed in terms of contention rather than of charity.

The Letter of Julius.

Julius to his dearly beloved brethren ?, Danius, Flacillus, Narcissus, Eusebius, Maris,

Macedonius, Theodorus, and their friends, who have written to me from Antioch, sends health in the Lord.

Now if the author of it wrote with an ambition of exhibiting his power of language, such a practice surely is more suitable for other subjects: in ecclesiastical matters, it is not a display of eloquence that is needed, but the observance of Apostolic Canons, and an earnest care not to offend one of the little ones of the Church.

For it were better for a man, according to the word of the Church, that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the sea, than that he should offend even one of the little ones4.

But if such a letter was written, because certain persons have been aggrieved on account of their meanness of spirit towards one another (for I will not impute it to all) ; it were better not to entertain any such feeling of offence at all, at least not to let the sun go down upon their vexation; and certainly not to give it room to exhibit itself in writing.

21.

I have read your letter3 which was brought to me by my Presbyters Elpidius and Philoxenus, and I am surprised to find that, whereas I wrote to you in charity and with conscious sincerity, you have replied to me in an unbecoming and contentious temper ; for the pride and arrogance of the writers is plainly exhibited in that letter.

Yet such feelings are inconsistent with the Christian faith; for what was written in a charitable spirit ought likewise to be answered in a spirit of charity and not of contention.

And was it not a token of charity to send Presbyters to sympathize with them that are in suffering, and to desire those who had written to me to come thither, that the questions at issue might obtain a speedy settlement, and all things be duly ordered, so that our brethren might no longer be exposed to suffering, and that you might escape further calumny?

But something seems to shew that your temper is such, as to force us to conclude that even in the terms in which you appeared to pay honour to us, you have expressed yourselves under the disguise of irony.

The Presbyters also whom we sent to you, and who ought to have returned rejoicing, did on the contrary return sorrowful on account of the proceedings they had witnessed among you.

And I, when I had read your letter, after much consideration, kept it to myself, thinking that after all some of you would come, and there would be no need

22. Yet what has been done that is a just cause of vexation? or in what respect was my letter to you such? Was it, that I invited you to be present at a council?

You ought rather to have received the proposal with joy. Those who have confidence in their proceedings, or as they choose to term them, in their decisions, are not wont to be angry, if such decision is inquired into by others; they rather shew all boldness, seeing that if they have given a just decision, it can never prove to be the reverse.

The Bishops who assembled in the great Council of Nicea agreed, not without the will of God, that the decisions of one council should be examined in another5, to the end that the judges, having before their eyes that other trial which was to follow, might be led to investigate matters with the utmost caution, and that the parties concerned in their sentence might have assurance that the judgment they received was just, and not dictated by the enmity of their

2 By Danius, which had been considered the same name as Dianius, Bishop of Czsarea in Cappadocia, Montfaucon i doc. understands the notorious Arian Bishop of Nicza, called variously

Diognius (supr. § 13.), Theognius (infr. § 28.), Theognis (Philost.

Hist. ii. 7.) Thasdastn, (Theod. 7st. i. 19.), and assigns some ingenious and probable reasons for his supposition.

['Danius' was the Bishop of Czsarea in Cappad., he also signs at Philippopolis.

See D.C.B. under Dianius and Basi.) Flacillus, Arian Bishop of Antioch, as Athan. names him, is called Placillus (in S. Jerome's

Chronicon, p. 785.), Placitus (Soz. iii. 5.), Flacitus (Theod. Aisz, i. 21.). Theodorus was Arian Bishop of Heraclea, whose Comments | on the Psalms are supposed to be those which bear his name in Corderius's Catena.

(He was not a thorough Arian.] 3 Some of the topics contained in the Eusebian Letter are specified in Julius's answer.

It acknowledged, besides, the high dignity of the [church] of Rome, as being a '' School (dpovtiarijpiov) of Apostles and a Metropolis of orthodoxy from the beginning," but added that '"'doctors came to it from the east; and they ought not themselves to hold the second place, for they were superior in virtue, though not in their Church."

And hey said that they would hold communion with Julius if he would agree to their depositions and substitutions in the Eastern Sees.

Soz. iii. 8.

4 Matt. xviii. 6.

5 As this determination does not find a place among the now received Canons of the Council, the passage in the text becomes of great moment in the argument in favour of the twenty

Canons extant in Greek being but a portion of those passed at Nicza. vid.

Alber. Dissert. in Hist. Eccles. vii. Abraham Ecchellensis has argued on the same side (apud Colet. Coxc7i. t. ii. p. 399. Ed. Ven.

1728), also Baronius, though not so strongly, Ann. 325. nn. 157 &c. and Montfaucon z# oc.

Natalis Alexander, Sac. 4. Dissert. 28 argues against the larger number, and Tillemont, Mem. vi. 674.

[But it is far more likely that Julius is making a free use of Can.

Nic. 5; the Arabic canons are apparently referred to in the above note: no one now defends them. ]

APOLOGIA CONTRA ARIANOS.

case, lest I should appear to press too heavily on certain parties, the last instance that has occurred, and which every one who hears it must shudder at, will be sufficient in proof of the others which I omit. former judges.

Now if you are unwilling that such a practice should be adopted in your own case, though it is of ancient standing, and has been noticed and recommended by the great Council, your refusal is not becoming ; for it is unreasonable that a custom which had once obtained in the Church, and been established by councils, should be set

23. The Arians who were excommunicated for their impiety by Alexander, the late Bishop of Alexandria, of blessed memory, were not only proscribed by the brethren in the several cities, but were also anathematised by the whole body assembled together in the great

Council of Niczea.

For theirs was no ordinary offence, neither had they sinned against man, but against our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, the Son of the living God.

And yet these persons who were proscribed by the whole world, and branded in every Church, are said now to have been admitted to communion again ; which I think even you ought to hear with indignation, Who then are the parties who dishonour a council? Are not they who have set at nought the votes of the Three hundred §, and have preferred impiety to godliness? The heresy of the Arian madmen was condemned and proscribed by the whole body of Bishops everywhere ; but the Bishops Athanasius and Marcellus have many supporters who speak and write in their behalf We have received testimony in favour of Marcellus 7, that he resisted the advocates of the Arian doctrines in the Council of Nicea; and in favour of Athanasius', that at Tyre nothing was brought home to him, and that in the Mareotis, where the Reports against him are said to have been drawn up, he was not present.

Now you know, dearly beloved, that ex parte proceedings are of no weight, but bear a suspicious appearance.

Nevertheless, these things being so, we, in order to be accurate, and neither shewing any prepossession in favour of yourselves, nor of those who wrote in behalf of the other party, invited those who had written to us to come hither ; that, since there were many who wrote in their behalf, all things might be enquired into in a council, and neither the guiltless might be condemned, nor the person on his trial be accounted innocent.

We then are not the parties who dishonour a council, but they who at once and recklessly have received the Arians whom all had condemned, and contrary to the decision of the judges. The greater part of those judges have now departed, and are with Christ; but some of them are still in this life of trial, and aside by a few individuals.

For a further reason they cannot justly take offence in this point. When the persons whom you, Eusebius and his fellows, dispatched with your letters, I mean Macarius the Presbyter, and Martyrius and Hesychius the Deacons, arrived here, and found that they were unable to withstand the arguments of the Presbyters who came from Athanasius, but were confuted and exposed on all sides, they then requested me to call a Council together, and to write to Alexandria to the Bishop Athanasius, and also to Eusebius and his fellows, in order that a just judgment might be given in presence of all parties.

And they undertook in that case to prove all the charges which had been brought against Athanasius.

For Martyrius and Hesychius had been publicly refuted by us, and the Presbyters of the Bishop

Athanasius had withstood them with great confidence: indeed, if one must tell the truth,

Martyrius and his fellows had been utterly overthrown; and this it was that led them to desire that a Council might be held.

Now supposing that they had not desired a Council, but that I had been the person to propose it, in discouragement of those who had written to me, and for the sake of our brethren who complain that they have suffered injustice ; even in that case the proposal would have been reasonable and just, for it is agreeable to ecclesiastical practice, and well pleasing to God.

But when those persons, whom you, Eusebius and his fellows, considered to be trustworthy, when even they wished me to call the brethren together, it was inconsistent in the parties invited to take offence, when they ought rather to have shewn all readiness to be present.

These considerations shew that the display of anger in the offended persons is petulant, and the refusal of those who decline to meet the Council is unbecoming, and has a suspicious appearance.

Does any one find fault, if he sees that done by: another, which he would allow if done by himself?

If, as you write, each council has an irreversible force, and he who has given judgment on a matter is dishonoured, if his sentence is examined by others; consider, dearly beloved, who are they that dishonour councils ? who are setting aside the decisions of. former judges?

Not to inquire at present into every individual 6 The number of the Fathers at the Nicene Council is generally considered to have been 318, the number of Abraham's servants,

Gen. xiv. 14..

Anastasius(Hodeg. 3. fin.) referring to the first three Ecumenical Councils, speaks of the faith of the 318, the 150, and the 200.

[Prolegg. ch. ii. § 3 (1)-] :

7 Cf. § 32, 8 Cf. § 73.

↑ Back to top