Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Proceedings of the Council of Ariminum. PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP
Chapter
XVII.—Proceedings of the Council of Ariminum.
The emperor1325
1325Athan. de Synodis, 8–11; Soc. ii. 37;
Ruf. i. 21; Philost. H. E. iv. 10; Theodoret, H. E. ii.
18.
|
was persuaded that it would not be desirable for the public, on account
of the expense, nor advantageous to the bishops, on account of the
length of the journey, to convene them all to the same place for the
purpose of holding a council. He therefore writes to the bishops who
were then at Ariminum, as well as to those who were then at Seleucia,
and directed them to enter upon an investigation of contested points
concerning the faith, and then to turn their attention to the
complaints of Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, and of other bishops who had
remonstrated against the injustice of the decrees of deposition and
banishment which had been issued against them, and to examine the
legality of various sentences which had been enacted against other
bishops. There were, in fact, several accusations pending against
different bishops. George was accused by the Egyptians of rapine and
violence. Finally, the emperor commanded that ten deputies should be
sent to him from each council, to inform him of their respective
proceedings.
In accordance with this edict, the bishops assembled at
the appointed cities. The Synod at Ariminum first commenced
proceedings;1326
it consisted of about four hundred members. Those who regarded
Athanasius with the greatest enmity, were of opinion that there was
nothing further to be decreed against him. When they had entered upon
the investigation of doctrinal questions, Valens and Ursacius,
supported by Germenius, Auxentius, Caius, and Demophilus, advanced into
the middle of the assembly, and demanded that all the formularies of
the faith which had been previously compiled should be suppressed, and
that the formulary which they had but a short time previously set forth
in the Latin language at Sirmium should be alone retained. In this
formulary it was taught, according to Scripture, that the Son is like
unto the Father; but no mention was made of the substance of God. They
declared that this formulary had been approved by the emperor, and that
it was incumbent upon the council to adopt it, instead of consulting
too scrupulously the individual opinions of every member of the
council, so that disputes and divisions might not spring up, were the
terms to be delivered up to debate and accurate proof. They added that
it would better enable those who were more ignorant of the art of
discourse to have a right conception of God, than were they to
introduce novelties in terms, so akin to disputatious jugglery. By
these representations, they designed to denounce the use of the term
“consubstantial,” because they said it was not found in the
Holy Scriptures, and was obscure to the multitude; and, instead of this
term, they wished to substitute the expression that “the Son is
like unto the Father in all things,” which is borne out by the
Holy Scriptures. After they had read their formulary containing the
above representations, many of the bishops told them that no new
formulary of the faith ought to be set forth, that those which had been
previously compiled were quite sufficient for all purposes, and that
they were met together for the express purpose of preventing all
innovations. These bishops then urged those who had compiled and read
the formulary to declare publicly their condemnation of the Arian
doctrine, as the cause of all the troubles which had agitated the
churches of every region. Ursacius and Valens, Germenius and Auxentius,
Demophilus and Caius, having protested against this protestation, the
council commanded that the expositions of the other heresies should be
read, and likewise that set forth at Nicæa; so that those
formularies which favored divers heresies might be condemned, and those
which were in accordance with the Nicene doctrines might be approved;
in order that there might be no further ground for dispute, and no
future necessity for councils, but that an efficient decision might be
formed.1327
1327This speech is quoted directly in Soc. ii. 37.
|
They remarked that it was absurd to compose so many formularies, as if
they had but just commenced to become acquainted with the faith, and as
if they wished to slight the
ancient traditions of the Church, by which the churches had been
governed by themselves, and by their predecessors, many of whom had
witnessed a good confession, and had received the crown of martyrdom.
Such were the arguments adduced by these bishops, to prove that no
innovations ought to be attempted. As Valens and Ursacius and their
partisans refused to be convinced by these arguments, but persisted in
advocating the adoption of their own formulary, they were deposed, and
it was decided that their formulary should be rejected. It was remarked
that the declaration at the commencement of this formulary, of its
having been compiled at Sirmium, in the presence of Constantius,
“the eternal Augustus,” and during the consulate of
Eusebius and Hypatius, was an absurdity. Athanasius made the same
remark, in a letter addressed to one of his friends,1328
1328Athan. de Synodis, 3; quoted by Soc. ii.
37.
|
and said that it was ridiculous to term Constantius the eternal
emperor, and yet to shrink from acknowledging the Son of God to be
eternal; he also ridiculed the date affixed to the formulary, as though
condemnation were meant to be thrown on the faith of former ages, as
well as on those who had, before that period, been initiated into the
faith.
After these events had transpired at Ariminum, Valens
and Ursacius, together with their adherents, irritated at their
deposition, repaired with all haste to the emperor. E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|