Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Eunomius and his Teacher Aëtius, their Affairs and Doctrines. They were the first who broached One Immersion for the Baptism.
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
Chapter XXVI.—Eunomius
and his Teacher Aëtius, their Affairs and Doctrines. They were
the first who broached One
Immersion for the Baptism.
About this time, Eunomius,1483
| 1483Philost. many sections, especially from vi. to x. 4;
he says in iii. 21, that he had written an encomium of Eunomius. Soc.
iv. 7, 13, v. 24. The many opinions gathered up by Soz. were probably
contributed by Sabinus. There is more original judgment in this chapter
than in any other. Cf. the great treatises of Basil and Greg. Nyssa
against Eunomius.
|
who had held the church in Cyzicus in place of Eleusius, and who
presided over the Arian heresy, devised another heresy besides this,
which some have called by his name, but which is sometimes denominated
the Anomian heresy. Some assert that Eunomius was the first who
ventured to maintain that divine baptism ought to be performed by one
immersion, and to corrupt, in this manner, the apostolical tradition
which has been carefully handed down to the present day. He invented,
it is said, a mode of discipline contrary to that of the Church, and
disguised the innovation under gravity and greater severity. He was an
artist in words and contentions, and delighted in arguments. The
generality of those who entertain his sentiments have the same
predilections. They do not applaud a good course of life or manner, or
mercy towards the needy, unless exhibited by persons of their own sect,
so much as skill in disputation and the power of triumphing in debates.
Persons possessed of these accomplishments are accounted pious above
all others among them. Others assert, I believe more truthfully, that
Theophronius, a native of Cappadocia, and Eutychius, both zealous
propagators of this heresy, seceded from communion with Eunomius during
the succeeding reign, and innovated about the other doctrines of
Eunomius and about the divine baptism. They asserted that baptism ought
not to be administered in the name of the Trinity, but in the name of
the death of Christ. It appears that Eunomius broached no new opinion
on the subject, but was from the beginning firmly attached to the
sentiments of Arius, and remained so. After his elevation to the
bishopric of Cyzicus, he was accused by his own clergy of introducing
innovations in doctrine. Eudoxius, ruler of the Arian heresy at
Constantinople, summoned him and obliged him to give an account of his
doctrines to the people; finding, however, no fault in him, Eudoxius
exhorted him to return to Cyzicus. Eunomius, however, replied, that he
could not remain with people who regarded him with suspicion; and, it
is said, seized the opportunity for secession, although it seems that,
in taking this step he was really actuated by the resentment he felt at
the refusal which Aëtius, his teacher, had met with, of being
received into communion. Eunomius, it is added, dwelt with Aëtius,
and never deviated from his original sentiments. Such are the
conflicting accounts of various individuals; some narrate the
circumstances in one way, and some in another. But whether it was
Eunomius, or any other person, who first made these innovations upon
the tradition of baptism, it seems to me that such innovators, whoever
they may have been, were alone in danger, according to their own
representation, of quitting this life without having received the
divine baptism; for if, after they had been baptized according to the
mode recommended from the beginning, they found it impossible to
rebaptize themselves, it must be admitted that they introduced a
practice to which they had not themselves submitted, and thus undertook
to administer to others what had never been administered to them by
themselves nor by others. Thus, after having laid down the dogma by
some non-existent principle and private assumption, they proceeded to
bestow upon others what they had not themselves received. The absurdity
of this assumption is manifest from their own confession; for they
admit that the uninitiated have not the power to baptize others. Now,
according to their opinion, he who has not been baptized in conformity
with their tradition is unbaptized as one not properly initiated, and
they confirm this opinion by their practice, inasmuch as they rebaptize
all those who join their sect, although previously initiated according
to the tradition of the Catholic Church. These varying dogmas are the
sources of innumerable troubles to religion; and many are deterred from
embracing Christianity by the diversity of opinion which prevails in
matters of doctrine.
The disputes daily became stronger, and, as in the
beginning of heresies, they grew; for they had leaders who were not
deficient in zeal or power of words; indeed, it appears that the
greater part of the Catholic Church would have been subverted by this
heresy, had it not found opponents in Basil and Gregory, the
Cappadocians. The reign of Theodosius began a little while after; he
banished the founders of heretical sects from the populous parts of the
empire to the more desert regions.
But, lest those who read my history should be ignorant
of the precise nature of the two heresies to which I have more
especially alluded, I think it necessary to state that Aëtius, the
Syrian, was the originator of the heresy usually attributed to
Eunomius; and that, like Arius, he maintained that the Son is
dissimilar from the Father, that He is a created being, and was created
out of what had no previous existence. Those who held these views were
formerly called Aëtians; but afterwards, during the reign of
Constantius, when, as we have stated, some parties maintained that the
Son is consubstantial with the Father, and others that He is like in
substance to the Father, and when
the council of Ariminum had decreed that the Son is only to be
considered like unto the Father, Aëtius was condemned to
banishment, as guilty of impiety and blasphemy against God. For some
time subsequently his heresy seemed to have been suppressed; for
neither any other man of note, nor even Eunomius, ventured openly upon
undertaking its defense. But when Eunomius was raised to the church of
Cyzicus in place of Eleusius, he could no longer quietly restrain
himself, and in open debate he brought forward again the tenets of
Aëtius. Hence, as it often happens that the names of the original
founders of heretical sects pass into oblivion, the followers of
Eunomius were designated by his own name, although he merely renewed
the heresy of Aëtius, and promulgated it with greater boldness
than was done by him who first handed it down. E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
