Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| History of the Councils. PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP
Councils of
Ariminum and Seleucia.
————————————
Part I. History of the Councils.
Reason why two Councils were called.
Inconsistency and folly of calling any; and of the style of the Arian
formularies; occasion of the Nicene Council; proceedings at Ariminum;
Letter of the Council to Constantius; its decree. Proceedings at
Seleucia; reflections on the conduct of the Arians.
1. Perhaps news has
reached even yourselves concerning the Council, which is at this time
the subject of general conversation; for letters both from the Emperor
and the Prefects3450
3450 [On
the Prefects, see Gibbon, ch. xvii., and Gwatkin, pp.
272–281.] | were circulated far
and wide for its convocation. However, you take that interest in the
events which have occurred, that I have determined upon giving you an
account of what I have seen myself, and accurately ascertained, which
may save you from the suspense attendant on the reports of others; and
this the more, because there are parties who are in the habit of
misrepresenting what has happened. At Nicæa then, which had been
fixed upon, the Council has not met, but a second edict was issued,
convening the Western Bishops at Ariminum in Italy, and the Eastern at
Seleucia the Rugged, as it is called, in Isauria. The professed reason
of such a meeting was to treat of the faith touching our Lord Jesus
Christ; and those who alleged it, were Ursacius, Valens, and one
Germinius3451
3451 [Cf.
Hist. Ar. 74, D.C.B. ii. 661.] At a later date he approached
very nearly to Catholicism. | from Pannonia; and from Syria,
Acacius, Eudoxius, and Patrophilus3452
3452 [See
Prolegg. ch. ii. §3 (1), and, on the Arian leaders at this
time, §8 (2).] | of
Scythopolis. These men who had always been of the Arian party, and
‘understood neither how they believe or whereof they
affirm,’ and were silently deceiving first one and then another,
and scattering the second sowing3453 of their
heresy, influenced some who seemed to be somewhat, and the Emperor
Constantius among them, being a heretic3454 ,
on some pretence about the Faith, to call a Council; under the idea
that they should be able to put into the shade the Nicene Council, and
prevail upon all to turn round, and to establish irreligion everywhere
instead of the Truth.
2. Now here I marvel first, and think that I
shall carry every sensible man whatever with me, that, whereas a
General Council had been fixed, and all were looking forward to it, it
was all of a sudden divided into two, so that one part met here, and
the other there. However, this was surely the doing of Providence, in
order in the respective Councils to exhibit the faith without guile or
corruption of the one party, and to expose the dishonesty and duplicity
of the other. Next, this too was on the mind of myself and my true
brethren here, and made us anxious, the impropriety of this great
gathering which we saw in progress; for what pressed so much, that the
whole world was to be put in confusion, and those who at the time bore
the profession of clergy, should run about far and near, seeking how
best to learn to believe in our Lord Jesus Christ? Certainly if they
were believers already, they would not have been seeking, as though
they were not. And to the catechumens, this was no small scandal; but
to the heathen, it was something more than common, and even furnished
broad merriment3455
3455 Cf.
Ammianus, Hist. xxi. 16. Eusebius. Vit. Const. ii.
61. | , that Christians,
as if waking out of sleep at this time of day, should be enquiring how
they were to believe concerning Christ; while their professed clergy,
though claiming deference from their flocks, as teachers, were
unbelievers on their own shewing, in that they were seeking what they
had not. And the party of Ursacius, who were at the bottom of all this,
did not understand what wrath they were storing up (Rom. ii. 5) against themselves, as our Lord says by
His saints, ‘Woe unto them, through whom My Name is blasphemed
among the Gentiles’ (Is.
lii. 5; Rom. ii. 24); and by
His own mouth in the Gospels (Matt. xviii. 6), ‘Whoso shall offend one of these
little ones, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck and
that he were drowned in the depth of the sea, than,’ as Luke
adds, ‘that he should offend one of these little ones’
(Luke xvii. 2).
3. What defect of teaching was there for
religious truth in the Catholic Church3456
3456 Cf.
Orat. ii. §34. And Hilary de Syn. 91; ad
Const. ii. 7. | ,
that they should enquire concerning faith now, and should prefix this
year’s Consulate to their profession of faith? For Ursacius and
Valens and Germinius and their friends have done what never took place,
never was heard of among Christians. After putting into writing what it
pleased them to believe, they prefix to it the Consulate, and the month
and the day of the current year3457
3457 Cf.
Hil. ad Const. ii. 4, 5. | ; thereby to
shew all sensible men, that their faith dates, not from of old, but
now, from the reign of Constantius3458
3458 Cf.
Tertull. de Præscr. 37; Hil. de Trin. vi. 21;
Vincent. Lir. Commonit. 24; Jerom. in Lucif. 27; August.
de Bapt. contr. Don. iii. 3. | ; for whatever
they write has a view to their own heresy. Moreover, though pretending
to write about the Lord, they nominate another master for themselves,
Constantius, who has bestowed on them this reign of irreligion3459
3459 [Cf.
Hist. Ar. §§52, 66, 76, 44, and Prolegg. ch. ii.
§3 (2), c. 2, and §6 (1).] | ; and they who deny that the Son is
everlasting, have called him Eternal Emperor; such foes of Christ are
they in addition to irreligion. But perhaps the dates in the holy
Prophets form their excuse for the Consulate; so bold a pretence,
however, will serve but to publish more fully their ignorance of the
subject. For the prophecies of the saints do indeed specify their times
(for instance, Isaiah and Hosea lived in the days of Uzziah, Jotham,
Ahaz, and Hezekiah; Jeremiah in the days of Josiah; Ezekiel and Daniel
prophesied under Cyrus and Darius; and others in other times); yet they
were not laying the foundations of divine religion; it was before them,
and was always, for before the foundation of the world God prepared it
for us in Christ. Nor were they signifying the respective dates of
their own faith; for they had been believers before these dates. But
the dates did but belong to their own preaching. And this preaching
spoke beforehand of the Saviour’s coming, but directly of what
was to happen to Israel and the nations; and the dates denoted not the
commencement of faith, as I said before, but of the prophets
themselves, that is, when it was they thus prophesied. But our modern
sages, not in historical narration, nor in prediction of the future,
but, after writing, ‘The Catholic Faith was published,’
immediately add the Consulate and the month and the day, that, as the
saints specified the dates of their histories, and of their own
ministries, so these may mark the date of their own faith. And would
that they had written, touching ‘their own3460
3460 ‘He who speaketh of his own, ἐκ
τῶν ἰδίων, speaketh a lie.’ Athan. contr. Apoll. i.
fin…The Simonists, Dositheans, &c.…each privately
(ἰδίως) and separately
has brought in a private opinion.’ Hegesippus, ap Euseb.
Hist. iv. 22. Sophronius at Seleucia cried out, ‘If to
publish day after day our own private (ἰδίαν) will, be a
profession of faith, accuracy of truth will fail us.’ Socr. ii.
40. | ’ (for it does date from today); and
had not made their essay as touching ‘the Catholic,’ for
they did not write, ‘Thus we believe,’ but ‘the
Catholic Faith was published.’
4. The boldness then of their design shews how
little they understand the subject; while the novelty of their phrase
matches the Arian heresy. For thus they shew, when it was they began
their own faith, and that from that same time present they would have
it proclaimed. And as according to the Evangelist Luke, there
‘was made a decree’ (Luke ii. 1) concerning the taxing, and this decree
before was not, but began from those days in which it was made by its
framer, they also in like manner, by writing, ‘The Faith is now
published,’ shewed that the sentiments of their heresy are novel,
and were not before. But if they add ‘of the Catholic
Faith,’ they fall before they know it into the extravagance of
the Phrygians, and say with them, ‘To us first was
revealed,’ and ‘from us dates the Faith of
Christians.’ And as those inscribe it with the names of Maximilla
and Montanus3461
3461 Vid.
supr. Orat. iii. §47. | , so do these with ‘Constantius,
Master,’ instead of Christ. If, however, as they would have it,
the faith dates from the present Consulate, what will the Fathers do,
and the blessed Martyrs? nay, what will they themselves do with their
own catechumens, who departed to rest before this Consulate? how will
they wake them up, that so they may obliterate their former lessons,
and may sow in turn the seeming discoveries which they have now put
into writing3462
3462 Cf.
Tertull. Præscr. 29; Vincent, Comm. 24; Greg. Naz.
ad Cledon Ep. 102, p. 97. | ? So ignorant they are on the subject;
with no knowledge but that of making excuses, and those unbecoming and
unplausible, and carrying with them their own refutation.
5. As to the Nicene Council, it was not a common
meeting, but convened upon a pressing necessity, and for a reasonable
object. The Syrians, Cilicians, and Mesopotamians, were out of order in
celebrating the Feast, and kept Easter with the Jews3463
3463 Cf.
D.C.A. i. 588 sqq. | ; on the other hand, the Arian heresy had
risen up against the Catholic Church, and found supporters in Eusebius
and his fellows, who were both zealous for the heresy, and conducted the attack upon
religious people. This gave occasion for an Ecumenical Council, that
the feast might be everywhere celebrated on one day, and that the
heresy which was springing up might be anathematized. It took place
then; and the Syrians submitted, and the Fathers pronounced the Arian
heresy to be the forerunner of Antichrist3464
3464 πρόδρομος, præcursor, is almost a received word for the
predicted apostasy or apostate (vid. note on S. Cyril’s
Cat. xv. 9), but the distinction was not always carefully drawn
between the apostate and the Antichrist. [Cf. both terms applied to
Constantius, Hist. Ar. passim, and by Hilary and
Lucifer.] | ,
and drew up a suitable formula against it. And yet in this, many as
they are, they ventured on nothing like the proceedings3465
3465 At
Seleucia Acacius said, ‘If the Nicene faith has been altered once
and many times since, no reason why we should not dictate another faith
now.’ Eleusius the Semi-Arian answered, ‘This Council is
called, not to learn what it does not know, not to receive a faith
which it does not possess, but walking in the faith of the
fathers’ (meaning the Council of the Dedication. a.d. 341. vid. infr. §22), ‘it swerves
not from it in life or death.’ On this Socrates (Hist. ii.
40) observes, ‘How call you those who met at Antioch Fathers, O
Eleusius, you who deny their Fathers,’ &c. | of these three or four men3466
3466 ὀλίγοι
τινές, says Pope
Julius, supr. p. 118, cf. τινές, p.
225. | . Without pre-fixing Consulate, month, and
day, they wrote concerning Easter, ‘It seemed good as
follows,’ for it did then seem good that there should be a
general compliance; but about the faith they wrote not, ‘It
seemed good,’ but, ‘Thus believes the Catholic
Church;’ and thereupon they confessed how they believed, in order
to shew that their own sentiments were not novel, but Apostolical; and
what they wrote down was no discovery of theirs, but is the same as was
taught by the Apostles.3467
6. But the Councils which they are now setting in
motion, what colourable pretext have they3468 ?
If any new heresy has risen since the Arian, let them tell us the
positions which it has devised, and who are its inventors? and in their
own formula, let them anathematize the heresies antecedent to this
Council of theirs, among which is the Arian, as the Nicene Fathers did,
that it may appear that they too have some cogent reason for saying
what is novel. But if no such event has happened, and they have it not
to shew, but rather they themselves are uttering heresies, as holding
Arius’s irreligion, and are exposed day by day, and day by day
shift their ground3469
3469 Vid.
de Decr. init. and §4. We shall have abundant instances of
the Arian changes as this Treatise proceeds. Cf. Hilary contr.
Constant. 23. Vincent. Comm. 20. | , what need is there
of Councils, when the Nicene is sufficient, as against the Arian
heresy, so against the rest, which it has condemned one and all by
means of the sound faith? For even the notorious Aetius, who was
surnamed godless3470
3470 Vid.
de Decr. 1. note. | , vaunts not of the
discovering of any mania of his own, but under stress of weather has
been wrecked upon Arianism, himself and the persons whom he has
beguiled. Vainly then do they run about with the pretext that they have
demanded Councils for the faith’s sake; for divine Scripture is
sufficient above all things; but if a Council be needed on the point,
there are the proceedings of the Fathers, for the Nicene Bishops did
not neglect this matter, but stated the doctrine so exactly, that
persons reading their words honestly, cannot but be reminded by them of
the religion towards Christ announced in divine Scripture3471
3471 Vid.
de Decr. 32, note. | .
7. Having therefore no reason on their side, but
being in difficulty whichever way they turn, in spite of their
pretences, they have nothing left but to say; ‘Forasmuch as we
contradict our predecessors, and transgress the traditions of the
Fathers, therefore we have thought good that a Council should meet3472
3472 Cf.
the opinion of Nectarius and Sisinnius. Socr. v. 10. | ; but again, whereas we fear lest, should it
meet at one place, our pains will be thrown away, therefore we have
thought good that it be divided into two; that so when we put forth our
documents to these separate portions, we may overreach with more
effect, with the threat of Constantius the patron of this irreligion,
and may supersede the acts of Nicæa, under pretence of the
simplicity of our own documents.’ If they have not put this into
words, yet this is the meaning of their deeds and their disturbances.
Certainly, many and frequent as have been their speeches and writings
in various Councils, never yet have they made mention of the Arian
heresy as objectionable; but, if any present happened to accuse the
heresies, they always took up the defence of the Arian, which the
Nicene Council had anathematized; nay, rather, they cordially welcomed
the professors of Arianism. This then is in itself a strong argument,
that the aim of the present Councils was not truth, but the annulling
of the acts of Nicæa; but the proceedings of them and their
friends in the Councils themselves, make it equally clear that this was
the case:—For now we must relate everything as it occurred.
8. When all were in expectation that they were to
assemble in one place, whom the Emperor’s letters convoked, and
to form one Council, they were divided into two; and, while some betook
themselves to Seleucia called the Rugged, the others met at Ariminum,
to the number of those four hundred bishops and more, among whom were
Germinius, Auxentius, Valens, Ursacius, Demophilus, and Gaius3473
3473 [On
Demophilus and Gaius see D.C.B. i. 812, 387 (20); on Auxentius, ad
Afr. note 9.] | . And, while the whole assembly was
discussing the matter from the Divine Scriptures, these men produced3474
3474 [See
Prolegg. ch. ii. §8 (2), and Introd. to this Tract.] | a paper, and, reading out the Consulate,
they demanded that it should be preferred to every Council, and that no
questions should be put to the heretics beyond it, nor inquiry made
into their meaning, but that it should be sufficient by
itself;—and what they had written ran as follows:—
The Catholic Faith3475
3475 8th
Confession, or 3rd Sirmian, of 359, vid. §29,
infr. |
was published in the presence of our Master the most religious and
gloriously victorious Emperor, Constantius, Augustus, the eternal and
august, in the Consulate of the most illustrious Flavii, Eusebius and
Hypatius, in Sirmium on the 11th of the Calends of June3476
3476 May
22, 359, Whitsun-Eve. | .
We believe in one Only and True God, the Father
Almighty, Creator and Framer of all things:
And in one Only-begotten Son of God, who, before
all ages, and before all origin, and before all conceivable time, and
before all comprehensible essence, was begotten impassibly from God:
through whom the ages were disposed and all things were made; and Him
begotten as the Only-begotten, Only from the Only Father, God from God,
like to the Father who begat Him, according to the Scriptures; whose
origin no one knoweth save the Father alone who begat Him. We know that
He, the Only-begotten Son of God, at the Father’s bidding came
from the heavens for the abolishment of sin, and was born of the Virgin
Mary, and conversed with the disciples, and fulfilled the Economy
according to the Father’s will, and was crucified, and died and
descended into the parts beneath the earth, and regulated the things
there, Whom the gate-keepers of hell saw (Job xxxviii. 17, LXX.) and shuddered; and He rose from
the dead the third day, and conversed with the disciples, and fulfilled
all the Economy, and when the forty days were full, ascended into the
heavens, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father, and is coming in
the last day of the resurrection in the glory of the Father, to render
to every one according to his works.
And in the Holy Ghost, whom the Only-begotten of
God Himself, Jesus Christ, had promised to send to the race of men, the
Paraclete, as it is written, ‘I go to My Father, and I will ask
the Father, and He shall send unto you another Paraclete, even the
Spirit of Truth. He shall take of Mine and shall teach and bring to
your remembrance all things’ (Job. xiv. 16, 17, 26; xvi. 14).
But whereas the term ‘essence,’ has
been adopted by the Fathers in simplicity, and gives offence as being
misconceived by the people, and is not contained in the Scriptures, it
has seemed good to remove it, that it be never in any case used of God
again, because the divine Scriptures nowhere use it of Father and Son.
But we say that the Son is like the Father in all things, as also the
Holy Scriptures say and teach3477
3477 On
the last clause, see Prolegg. ubi supra. | .
9. When this had been read, the dishonesty of its
framers was soon apparent. For on the Bishops proposing that the Arian
heresy should be anathematized together with the other heresies too,
and all assenting, Ursacius and Valens and those with them refused;
till in the event the Fathers condemned them, on the ground that their
confession had been written, not in sincerity, but for the annulling of
the acts of Nicæa, and the introduction instead of their unhappy
heresy. Marvelling then at the deceitfulness of their language and
their unprincipled intentions, the Bishops said: ‘Not as if in
need of faith have we come hither; for we have within us faith, and
that in soundness: but that we may put to shame those who gainsay the
truth and attempt novelties. If then ye have drawn up this formula, as
if now beginning to believe, ye are not so much as clergy, but are
starting with school; but if you meet us with the same views with which
we have come hither, let there be a general unanimity, and let us
anathematize the heresies, and preserve the teaching of the Fathers.
Thus pleas for Councils will not longer circulate about, the Bishops at
Nicæa having anticipated them once for all, and done all that was
needful for the Catholic Church3478
3478 [Cf.
Tom. ad. Ant. 5, Soz. iii. 12.] | .’
However, even then, in spite of this general agreement of the Bishops,
still the above-mentioned refused. So at length the whole Council,
condemning them as ignorant and deceitful men, or rather as heretics,
gave their suffrages in behalf of the Nicene Council, and gave judgment
all of them that it was enough; but as to the forenamed Ursacius and
Valens, Germinius, Auxentius, Gaius, and Demophilus, they pronounced
them to be heretics, deposed them as not really Christians, but Arians,
and wrote against them in Latin what has been translated in its
substance into Greek, thus:—
10. Copy of an Epistle from the Council to
Constantius Augustus3479
3479 Cf.
Socr. ii. 39; Soz. iv. 10; Theod. H. E. ii. 19; Niceph. i. 40.
The Latin original is preserved by Hilary, Fragm. viii., but the
Greek is followed here, as stated supr. Introd. | .
We believe that what was formerly decreed was
brought about both by God’s command and by order of your piety.
For we the bishops, from all the Western cities, assembled together at
Ariminum, both that the Faith of the Catholic Church might be made
known, and that gainsayers might be detected. For, as we have found
after long deliberation, it appeared desirable to adhere to and
maintain to the end, that faith which, enduring from antiquity, we have
received as preached by the prophets, the Gospels, and the Apostles
through our Lord Jesus Christ, Who is Keeper of your Kingdom and Patron
of your power. For it appeared wrong and unlawful to make any change in
what was rightly and justly defined, and what was resolved upon in
common at Nicæa along with the Emperor your father, the most
glorious Constantine,—the doctrine and spirit of which
[definition] went abroad and was proclaimed in the hearing and
understanding of all men. For it alone was the conqueror and destroyer
of the heresy of Arius, by which not that only but the other heresies3480
3480 The
Hilarian Latin is much briefer here. | also were destroyed, to which of a truth it
is perilous to add, and full of danger to minish aught from it, since
if either be done, our enemies will be able with impunity to do
whatever they will. Accordingly Ursacius and Valens, since they had
been from of old abettors and
sympathisers of the Arian dogma, were properly declared separate from
our communion, to be admitted to which they asked to be allowed a place
of repentance and pardon for the transgressions of which they were
conscious, as the documents drawn up by them testify. By which means
forgiveness and pardon on all charges has been obtained. Now the time
of these transactions was when the council was assembled at Milan3481 , the presbyters of the Roman Church being
also present. But knowing at the same time that Constantine of worthy
memory had with all accuracy and deliberation published the Faith then
drawn up; when he had been baptized by the hands of men, and had
departed to the place which was his due, [we think it] unseemly to make
a subsequent innovation and to despise so many saints, confessors,
martyrs, who compiled and drew up this decree; who moreover have
continued to hold in all matters according to the ancient law of the
Church; whose faith God has imparted even to the times of your reign
through our Master Jesus Christ, through whom also it is yours to reign
and rule over the world in our day3482
3482 The
whole passage is either much expanded by Athan., or much condensed by
Hilary. | . Once more
then the pitiful men of wretched mind with lawless daring have
announced themselves as the heralds of an impious opinion, and are
attempting to upset every summary of truth. For when according to your
command the synod met, those men laid bare the design of their own
deceitfulness. For they attempted in a certain unscrupulous and
disorderly manner to propose to us an innovation, having found as
accomplices in this plot Germinius, Auxentius3483
3483 Auxentius, omitted in Hilary’s copy. A few words are wanting
in the Latin in the commencement of one of the sentences which follow.
[See above, note 3.] | ,
and Gaius, the stirrers up of strife and discord, whose teaching by
itself has gone beyond every pitch of blasphemy. But when they
perceived that we did not share their purpose, nor agree with their
evil mind, they transferred themselves to our council, alleging that it
might be advisable to compile something instead. But a short time was
enough to expose their plans. And lest the Churches should have a
recurrence of these disturbances, and a whirl of discord and confusion
throw everything into disorder, it seemed good to keep undisturbed the
ancient and reasonable institutions, and that the above persons should
be separated from our communion. For the information therefore of your
clemency, we have instructed our legates to acquaint you with the
judgment of the Council by our letter, to whom we have given this
special direction, to establish the truth by resting their case upon
the ancient and just decrees; and they will also assure your piety that
peace would not be accomplished by the removal of those decrees as
Valens and Ursacius alleged. For how is it possible for peace-breakers
to bring peace? on the contrary, by their means strife and confusion
will arise not only in the other cities, but also in the Church of the
Romans. On this account we ask your clemency to regard our legates with
favourable ears and a serene countenance and not to suffer aught to be
abrogated to the dishonour of the dead; but allow us to abide by what
has been defined and laid down by our forefathers, who, we venture to
say, we trust in all things acted with prudence and wisdom and the Holy
Spirit; because by these novelties not only are the faithful made to
disbelieve, but the infidels also are embittered3484
3484 The
Greek here mistranslates ‘credulitatem’ as though it were
‘crudelitatem.’ The original sense is the heathen are kept
back from believing. | . We pray also that you would give orders
that so many Bishops who are detained abroad, among whom are numbers
who are broken with age and poverty, may be enabled to return to their
own country, lest the Churches suffer, as being deprived of their
Bishops. This, however, we ask with earnestness, that nothing be
innovated upon existing creeds, nothing withdrawn; but that all remain
incorrupt which has continued in the times of your Father’s piety
and to the present time; and that you will not permit us to be
harassed, and estranged from our sees; but that the Bishops may in
quiet give themselves always to prayers and worship, which they do
always offer for your own safety and for your reign, and for peace,
which may the Divinity bestow on you for ever. But our legates are
conveying the subscriptions and titles of the Bishops, and will also
inform your piety from the Holy Scriptures themselves.
11. Decree of the Council3485
3485 This
Decree is also preserved in Hilary, who has besides preserved the
‘Catholic Definition’ of the Council, in which it professes
its adherence to the Creed of Nicæa, and, in opposition to the
Sirmian Confession which the Arians had proposed, acknowledges in
particular both the word and the meaning of ‘substance:’
‘substantiæ nomen et rem, a multis sanctis Scripturis
insinuatam mentibus nostris, obtinere debere sui firmitatem.’
Fragm. vii. 3. [The decree is now re-translated from the
Greek.] | .
As far as it was fitting and possible, dearest
brethren, the general Council and the holy Church have had patience,
and have generously displayed the Church’s forbearance towards
Ursacius and Valens, Gaius, Germinius, and Auxentius; who by so often
changing what they had believed, have troubled all the Churches, and
still are endeavouring to foist their heretical spirit upon the faith
of the orthodox. For they wish to annul the formulary passed at
Nicæa, which was framed against the Arian heresy. They have
presented to us besides a creed drawn up by themselves from without,
and utterly alien to the most holy Church; which we could not lawfully
receive. Even before this, and now, have they been pronounced heretics
and gainsayers by us, whom we have not admitted to our communion, but
condemned and deposed them in their presence by our voices. Now then,
what seems good to you, again declare, that each one’s vote may
be ratified by his subscription.
The Bishops answered with one accord, It seems
good that the aforenamed heretics should be condemned, that the
Catholic faith may remain in peace.
Matters at Ariminum then had this speedy issue;
for there was no disagreement there, but all of them with one accord
both put into writing what they decided upon, and deposed the Arians3486
3486 [On
the subsequent events at Ariminum, see Prolegg. ubi
supra.] | .
12. Meanwhile the transactions in Seleucia the
Rugged were as follows: it was in the month called by the Romans
September, by the Egyptians Thoth, and by the Macedonians
Gorpiæus, and the day of the month according to the Egyptians the
16th3487
3487 i.e.
Sep. 14, 359 (Egyptian leap-year.) Gorpiæus was the first month of
the Syro-Macedonic year among the Greeks, dating according to the era
of the Seleucidæ. The original transactions at Ariminum had at
this time been finished as much as two months, and its deputies were
waiting for Constantius at Constantinople. | , upon which all the members of the Council
assembled together. And there were present about a hundred and sixty;
and whereas there were many who were accused among them, and their
accusers were crying out against them, Acacius, and Patrophilus, and
Uranius of Tyre, and Eudoxius, who usurped the Church of Antioch, and
Leontius3488
3488 [Of
Tripolis, D.C.B. iii. 688 (3).] | , and Theodotus3489
3489 [‘Theodosius’ infr.] | ,
and Evagrius, and Theodulus, and
George who has been driven from the whole world3490
3490 There
is little to observe of these Acacian Bishops in addition to [the names
and sees in Epiph. Hær. lxxiii. 26] except that George is
the Cappadocian, the notorious intruder into the see of S. Athanasius.
[For his expulsion see Fest. Ind. xxx, and on the composition of
the council, see Gwatkin, note G, p. 190.] | ,
adopt an unprincipled course. Fearing the proofs which their accusers
had to shew against them, they coalesced with the rest of the Arian
party (who were mercenaries in the cause of irreligion for this
purpose, and were ordained by Secundus, who had been deposed by the
great Council), the Libyan Stephen, and Seras, and Polydeuces, who were
under accusation upon various charges, next Pancratius, and one Ptolemy
a Meletian3491
3491 The
Meletian schismatics of Egypt had formed an alliance with the Arians
from the first. Cf. Ep. Æg. 22. vid. also Hist.
Arian. 31, 78. After Sardica the Arians attempted a coalition with
the Donatists of Africa. Aug. contr. Cresc. iii. 38. | . And they made a pretence3492
3492 Acacius had written to the Semi-Arian Macedonius of Constantinople
in favour of the κατὰ πάντα
ὅμοιον, and of
the Son’s being τῆς αὐτῆς
οὐσίας, and
this the Council was aware of. Soz. iv. 22. Acacius made answer that no
one ancient or modern was ever judged by his writings. Socr. ii.
40. | of entering upon the question of faith, but
it was clear they were doing so from fear of their accusers; and they
took the part of the heresy, till at length they were divided among
themselves. For, whereas those with Acacius and his fellows lay under
suspicion and were very few, the others were the majority; therefore
Acacius and his fellows, acting with the boldness of desperation,
altogether denied the Nicene formula, and censured the Council, while
the others, who were the majority, accepted the whole proceedings of
the Council, except that they complained of the word
‘Coessential,’ as obscure and so open to suspicion. When
then time passed, and the accusers pressed, and the accused put in
pleas, and thereby were led on further by their irreligion and
blasphemed the Lord, thereupon the majority of Bishops became
indignant3493
3493 They
also confirmed the Semi-Arian Confession of the Dedication, 341. of
which infr. §22. After this the Acacians drew up another
Confession, which Athan. has preserved, infr. §29. in which
they persist in their rejection of all but Scripture terms. This the
Semi-Arian majority rejected, and proceeded to depose its
authors. | , and deposed Acacius, Patrophilus,
Uranius, Eudoxius, and George the contractor3494
3494 Pork
contractor to the troops, ὑποδέκτην, Hist. Arian. 75. vid. Naz. Orat. 21.
16. | ,
and others from Asia, Leontius, and Theodosius, Evagrius and Theodulus,
and excommunicated Asterius, Eusebius, Augarus, Basilicus, Phœbus,
Fidelius, Eutychius, and Magnus. And this they did on their
non-appearance, when summoned to defend themselves on charges which
numbers preferred against them. And they decreed that so they should
remain, until they made their defence and cleared themselves of the
offences imputed to them. And after despatching the sentence pronounced
against them to the diocese of each, they proceeded to Constantius, the
most irreligious3495
3495 [Cf.
supr. pp. 237, 267.] | Augustus, to report
to him their proceedings, as they had been ordered. And this was the
termination of the Council in Seleucia.
13. Who then but must approve of the
conscientious conduct of the Bishops at Ariminum? who endured such
labour of journey and perils of sea, that by a sacred and canonical
resolution they might depose the Arians, and guard inviolate the
definitions of the Fathers. For each of them deemed that, if they undid
the acts of their predecessors, they were affording a pretext to their
successors to undo what they themselves then were enacting3496 . And who but must condemn the fickleness of
Eudoxius, Acacius, and their fellows, who sacrifice the honour due to
their own fathers to partizanship and patronage of the Ario-maniacs3497
3497 On
the word ᾽Αρειομανῖται, Gibbon observes, ‘The ordinary appellation with
which Athanasius and his followers chose to compliment the Arians, was
that of Ariomanites,’ ch. xxi. note 61. Rather, the name
originally was a state title, injoined by Constantine, vid. Petav.
de Trin. i. 8 fin. Naz. Orat. p. 794. note e. [Petavius
states this, but without proof.] Several meanings are implied in this
title; the real reason for it was the fanatical fury with which it
spread and maintained itself; and hence the strange paronomasia of
Constantine, ᾽Αρὲς
ἄρειε, with an
allusion to Hom. Il. v. 31. A second reason, or rather sense, of
the appellation was that, denying the Word, they have forfeited the
gift of reason, e.g. τῶν
᾽Αρειομανιτῶν
τὴν
ἀλογίαν.
de Sent. Dion. init. 24 fin. Orat. ii. §32, iii.
§63. [The note, which is here much condensed, gives profuse
illustrations of this figure of speech.] | ? for what confidence can be placed in their
acts, if the acts of their fathers be undone? or how call they them
fathers and themselves successors, if they set about impeaching their
judgment? and especially what can Acacius say of his own master,
Eusebius, who not only gave his subscription in the Nicene Council, but
even in a letter3498
3498 Vid.
supr. pp. 152, 74. | signified to his
flock, that that was true faith, which the Council had declared? for,
if he explained himself in that letter in his own way3499
3499 ὡς ἠθέλησεν. vid. also de Decr. §3. ὡς ἠθέλησαν. ad Ep. Æg. 5. | , yet he did not contradict the
Council’s terms, but even charged it upon the Arians, that their
position that the Son was not before His generation, was not even
consistent with His being before Mary. What then will they proceed to
teach the people who are under their teaching? that the Fathers erred?
and how are they themselves to be trusted by those, whom they teach to
disobey their Teachers? and with what eyes too will they look upon the
sepulchres of the Fathers whom they now name heretics? And why do they
defame the Valentinians, Phrygians, and Manichees, yet give the name of
saint to those whom they themselves suspect of making parallel
statements? or how can they any longer be Bishops, if they were
ordained by persons whom they accuse of heresy3500 ?
But if their sentiments were wrong and their writings seduced the world, then let their memory perish
altogether; when, however, you cast out their books, go and cast out
their remains too from the cemeteries, so that one and all may know
that they are seducers, and that you are parricides.
14. The blessed Apostle approves of the
Corinthians because, he says, ‘ye remember me in all things, and
keep the traditions as I delivered them to you’ (1 Cor. xi. 2); but they, as entertaining such views
of their predecessors, will have the daring to say just the reverse to
their flocks: ‘We praise you not for remembering your fathers,
but rather we make much of you, when you hold not their
traditions.’ And let them go on to accuse their own unfortunate
birth, and say, ‘We are sprung not of religious men but of
heretics.’ For such language, as I said before, is consistent in
those who barter their Fathers’ fame and their own salvation for
Arianism, and fear not the words of the divine proverb, ‘There is
a generation that curseth their father’ (Prov. xxx. 11; Ex. xxi. 17), and the threat lying in the Law
against such. They then, from zeal for the heresy, are of this
obstinate temper; you, however, be not troubled at it, nor take their
audacity for truth. For they dissent from each other, and, whereas they
have revolted from their Fathers, are not of one and the same mind, but
float about with various and discordant changes. And, as quarrelling
with the Council of Nicæa, they have held many Councils
themselves, and have published a faith in each of them, and have stood
to none3501 , nay, they will never do otherwise,
for perversely seeking, they will never find that Wisdom which they
hate. I have accordingly subjoined portions both of Arius’s
writings and of whatever else I could collect, of their publications in
different Councils; whereby you will learn to your surprise with what
object they stand out against an Ecumenical Council and their own
Fathers without blushing.E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|