Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| About the Four Brothers, called “The Long,” who were Ascetics, and of whom Theophilus was an Enemy; about Isidore and the Events which came about through these Four. PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP
Chapter XII.—About the
Four Brothers, called “The Long,” who were Ascetics, and of
whom Theophilus was an Enemy; about Isidore and the Events which came
about through these Four.
The controversy would most
likely have been terminated, had it not been renewed by Theophilus
himself, from inimical feelings against Ammonius, Dioscorus, Eusebius,
and Euthymius, who were called “the long.”1601
1601Soc. vi. 7, 9; Pallad, Dialog. 6. Soz. has
different order and some new opinions.
|
They were brothers; and, as we have before stated, became conspicuous
among the philosophers at Scetis. They were at one period beloved by
Theophilus above all the other monks of Egypt; he sought their society,
and frequently dwelt with them. He even conferred on Dioscorus the
bishopric of Hermopolis. He was confirmed in his hatred of them, on
account of his enmity to Isidore, whom he had endeavored to ordain in
Constantinople after Nectarius. Some say, that a woman, belonging to
the Manichean heresy, had been converted to the faith of the Catholic
Church; Theophilus rebuked the arch-presbyter (towards whom he had
other reasons for entertaining resentful feeling), because he had
admitted her to participate in the sacred mysteries before she had
adjured her former heresy. Peter, for this was the name of the
arch-presbyter, maintained that he had received the woman into
communion according to the laws of the Church, and with the consent of
Theophilus; and referred to Isidore, as a witness to the truth of what
he had deposed. Isidore happened to be then at Rome on an embassy; but,
on his return, he testified that the assertions of Peter were true.
Theophilus resented this avowal as a calumny, and ejected both him and
Peter from the Church. Such is the account given by some persons of the
transaction. I have, however, heard it alleged, by a man of undoubted
veracity, who was very intimate with the monks above mentioned, that
the enmity of Theophilus towards Isidore originated from two causes.
One of these causes was identical with that specified by Peter the
presbyter, namely, that he had refused to attest the existence of a
testament in which the inheritance was entailed on the sister of
Theophilus; the other cause alleged by this individual was, that
Isidore refused to give up certain moneys that had been confided to him
for the relief of the poor, and which Theophilus wished to appropriate
to the erection of churches; saying that it is better to restore the
bodies of the suffering, which are more rightly to be considered the
temples of God, and for which end the money had been furnished, than to
build walls. But from whatever cause the enmity of Theophilus might
have originated, Isidore, immediately after his excommunication, joined
his former companions, the monks at Scetis. Ammonius, with a few
others, then repaired to Theophilus, and entreated him to restore
Isidore to communion. Theophilus readily promised to do as they
requested; but as time passed away, and nothing more was effected for
them, and it became evident that Theophilus was pretending, they again
repaired to him, renewed their entreaties, and pressed him to be
faithful to his engagement. Instead of complying, Theophilus thrust one
of the monks into prison, for the purpose of intimidating the others.
But he erred in this. Ammonius and all the monks with him then went to the prison, into which they were
readily admitted by the jailer, who imagined that they had come to
bring provisions to the prisoner; but having once obtained admission,
they refused to leave the prison. When Theophilus heard of their
voluntary confinement, he sent to desire them to come to him. They
replied, that he ought first to take them out of prison himself, for it
was not just, after having been subjected to public indignity, that
they should be privately released from confinement. At length, however,
they yielded and went to him. Theophilus apologized for what had
occurred, and dismissed them as if he had no further intention of
molesting them; but by himself, he champed and was vexed, and
determined to do them ill. He was in doubt, however, as to how he could
ill-treat them, as they had no possessions, and despised everything but
philosophy, until it occurred to him, to disturb the peace of their
retirement. From his former intercourse with them he had gathered that
they blamed those who believe that God has a human form, and that they
adhered to the opinions of Origen; he brought them into collision with
the multitude of monks who maintained the other view. A terrible
contention prevailed among the monks, for they did not think it worth
while to persuade one another by flaming arguments for themselves in an
orderly way, but settled down into insults. They gave the name of
Origenists to those who maintained the incorporeality of the Deity,
while those who held the opposite opinion were called
Anthropomorphists.
E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|