Epistle of Athanasius,
Archbishop of Alexandria,
concerning the Councils held at Ariminum in Italy and
at Seleucia in Isauria

Chapter 1. History of the Councils

§. 1.

{73} 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 Prefects [Note A] 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 [Note B] or have 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 practice of misrepresenting what is going on.

2. At Nicæa then, which had been fixed upon, the Council did not meet, but a second edict [Note C] was issued, convening the {74} 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 [Note D], and one Germinius [Note E] from Pannonia; and from Syria, Acacius, Eudoxius [Note F], and Patrophilus of Scythopolis [Note G]. 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 sowing [Note 1] of their heresy, influenced some persons of consequence, and the Emperor Constantius among them, being a heretic [Note 2], on some pretence about the Faith, to call a Council; under the idea that they should be {75} able to put into the shade the Nicene Council, and prevail upon all to turn round, and to establish irreligion every where instead of the Truth.

§. 2.

3. Now here I marvel first, and think that I shall carry every thinking man whatever with me, that, whereas a Catholic Council had been fixed, and all were looking forward to it, it was all of a sudden divided in two, so that one part met here, and the other there. However, this would seem providential, 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 into confusion, and those who at the time bore the profession of clerks, 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 merriment [Note H], that Christians, as if waking out of sleep at this time of day, should be making out how they were to believe concerning Christ; while their professed clerks, though claiming deference from their flocks, as teachers, were infidels 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 against themselves, as our Lord says by His saints, Woe unto them, through whom My Name is blasphemed among the Gentiles [Is. lii. 5.]; and by His own mouth in the Gospels, 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 {76} depth of the sea [Rom. ii. 24. Mat. xviii. 6.], than, as Luke adds, that he should offend one of these little ones.

§. 3.

4. What defect in religious teaching was there for religious truth in the Catholic Church [Note I], that they should be searching after faith now, and should prefix this year's Consulate to their profession of it? Yet 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 year [Note K]; thereby to shew all thinking men, that their faith dates, not from of old, but now, from the reign of Constantius [Note L]; for whatever they write has a view to their own heresy. Moreover, though {77} pretending to write about the Lord, they nominate another sovereign for themselves, Constantius, who has bestowed on them this reign of irreligion [Note M]; and they who deny that the Son is everlasting, have called him Eternal Emperor; such foes of Christ are they in behalf of irreligion.

5. 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 sacred writers do indeed specify their times (for instance, Esaias and Osee lived in the days of Ozias, Joatham, Achaz, and Ezekias; Jeremias, in the days of Josias; Ezekiel and Daniel prophesied unto 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 had 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, which did but belong to their own preaching. And this preaching chiefly related to the Saviour's coming, and secondarily to 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 {77} 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 date; that, as the sacred writers 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 own;" [Note N] (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.

6. The boldness then of their design shews how little they understand the subject; while the novelty of their phrase befits their 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 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 young, 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 Montanus [Note 3], so do these with "Constantius, Sovereign," instead of Christ. If, however, as they would have it, the faith dates from the present Consulate, what must 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 writing [Note O]? So ignorant they are on {79} the subject; with no knowledge but that of making excuses, and those unbecoming and unplausible, and carrying with them their own refutation.

§. 5.

7. 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 Jews [Note P]; on the other hand, the Arian heresy had risen up against the Catholic Church, and found supporters in the Eusebians, who were both zealous for the heresy, and conducted the attack upon religious people. This gave occasion for an Ecumenical [Note 4] Council, that the feast might be everywhere celebrated on one day, and that the heresy which was springing up might be anathematised. It took place then; and the Syrians submitted, and the Fathers pronounced the Arian heresy to be the forerunner of Antichrist [Note Q], and drew {80} up a suitable formula against it. And yet in this, many as they are, they ventured on nothing like the proceedings [Note R] of these three or four men [Note S]. Without prefixing Consulate, month, and day, they wrote concerning the 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 the faith lay, in order to shew that their own sentiments were not novel, but Apostolical; and that what they wrote down, was no discovery of theirs, but is the same as was taught by the Apostles [Note 5]. {81}

§. 6.

8. But the Councils which they have set in motion, what colourable pretext have they [Note 6]? 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 anathematise the heresies antecedent to this Council of theirs, among which is the Arian, as the Nicene Fathers did, that it may be made appear that they too have some cogent reason for saying what is novel [Note 7]. 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 ground [Note T], 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 godless [Note 8], 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 Scripture [Note 9].

§. 7.

9. Having therefore no show of 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 {82} our predecessors, and transgress the traditions of the Fathers, therefore we have thought good that a Council should meet [Note U]; but again, whereas we fear lest, should it meet at one place, our pains will be all thrown away, therefore we have thought good that it be divided into two; that so when we put forth our articles to these separate portions, we may overreach with more effect, with the threat of Constantius the patron of this irreligion, and may abrogate the acts of Nicæa, under pretence of their simplicity." 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 unchristian [Note 10]; but, if any present happened to accuse the heresies, they always took up the defence of the Arian, which the Nicene Council had anathematised; 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:—So that it follows to relate every thing as it occurred.

§. 8.

10. 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 them Germinius, Auxentius, Valens, Ursacius, Demophilus, and Caius [Note X]. And, while the {83} whole assembly was discussing the matter from the Divine Scriptures, these men produced a paper, and, reading the Consulate, they demanded that the whole Council should acquiesce in it, and that no questions should be put to the heretics beyond it, nor inquire made into their meaning, but that it should be sufficient; —and it ran as follows [Note Y]:

11. The Catholic Faith was published in the presence of our Sovereign the most religious and gloriously victorious Emperor, Constantius, Augustus, the eternal and majestic, in the Consulate of the most illustrious Flavians, Eusebius, and Hypatius, in Sirmium on the 11th of the Calends of June [Note 11] [Note Z].

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 substance, 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 [Note 12], according to the Scriptures; whose generation 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 had the economy of things there, whom the gate-keepers of hell saw and shuddered; and He rose from the dead the third day, and conversed with the disciples, and fulfilled 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 the 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. {84}

But whereas the term "substance," 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, and that it be never in any case used of God again, because the divine Scriptures no where use it of Father and Son. But we say that the Son is like the Father in all things, as all the Holy Scriptures say and teach [Note A].

§. 9.

12. When this had been read, the dishonesty of its framers was soon apparent. For on the Bishops proposing that the Arian heresy should be anathematised together with the other heresies [Note B], and all assenting, Ursacius and Valens and their friends 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 miserable 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 clerks, but are starting with school; but if you meet us here with the same views, with which we have come hither, let there be a general unanimity, and let us anathematise 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 Church." [Note C] However, even then, in {85} 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, Caius, and Demophilus, they pronounced them to be heretics, deposed them as not really Christians [Note 13], but Arians, and wrote against them in Latin what has been translated in its substance [Note 14] into Greek, thus:—

§. 10.

13. Copy of an Epistle from the Council to Constantius, Augustus [Note D]:—

We believe it has been ordered by God's command, upon the mandate [Note E] of your religiousness, that we, the Bishops of the Western Provinces, came from all parts to Ariminum, for the manifestation of the Faith to all Catholic Churches and the detection of the heretics. For upon a general discussion, in which we all took part who are right-minded, it was resolved to adhere to that faith which, enduring from antiquity we have ever received from Prophets, Gospels, and Apostles, from God Himself, and our Lord Jesus Christ, the upholder of your dominion, and the author of your welfare. For we deemed it to be a sin, to mutilate any work of the saints, and in particular of those who in the case of the Nicene formulary, held {86} session together with Constantine of glorious memory, the father of your religiousness. Which formulary was put abroad and gained entrance into the minds of the people, and being at that time drawn up against Arianism, is found to be such, that heresies are overthrown by it; from which, if aught were subtracted, an opening is made to the poison of the heretics.

Accordingly Ursacius and Valens formerly came into suspicion of the said Arian heresy, and were suspended from Communion, and asked pardon according to their letters [Note 15], and obtained it then at the Council of Milan, in the presence of the legates of the Roman Church. And since Constantine was at the Nicene Council, when the formulary in question was drawn up with great deliberation, and after being baptised with the profession of it, departed to God's rest, we think it a crime to mutilate aught in it, and in any thing to detract from so many Saints, and Confessors, and Successors of Martyrs who drew it up; considering that they in turn preserved all doctrine of the Catholics who were before them, according to the Scriptures, and that they remained unto these times in which thy religiousness has received the charge of ruling the world from God the Father through our God and Lord Jesus Christ. For them, they were attempting to pull up what had been reasonably laid down. For, whereas the letters of your religiousness commanded to treat of the faith, there was proposed to us by the aforenamed troublers of the Churches, Germinius being associated with Auxentius [Note F] and Caius, something novel for our consideration, which contained many particulars of perverse doctrine. Accordingly, when they found that what they proposed publicly in the Council was unacceptable, they considered that they must draw up another statement. Indeed it is certain that they have often changed these formularies in a short time. And lest the Churches should have a recurrence of these disturbances, it seemed good to keep the ancient and reasonable institutions. For the information therefore of your clemency, we have instructed our legates to acquaint you of the judgment of the Council by our letter, to whom we have given this sole direction, not to execute the legation otherwise than for the stability and permanence of the ancient decrees; that your wisdom might also know, that peace would not be accomplished by the removal of those decrees, as the aforesaid Valens and Ursacius, Germinius and Caius, engaged. On the contrary, troubles have in consequence been excited in all regions and the Roman Church.

On this account we ask your clemency to regard and hear all our legates with favourable ears and a serene countenance, and {87} not to suffer aught to be abrogated to the dishonour of the ancients; so that all things may continue which we have received from our forefathers, who, as we trust, were prudent men, and acted not without the Holy Spirit of God; because by these novelties not only are faithful nations troubled, but the infidels also are deterred from believing. We pray also that you would give orders that so many Bishops, who are detained at Ariminum, among whom are numbers who are broken with age and poverty, may return to their own country, lest the members of their Churches suffer, as being deprived of their Bishops. This, however, we ask with earnestness, that nothing be innovated, nothing withdrawn; but that all remain incorrupt which has continued through the times of the Father of your sacred piety and in your own religious days; and that your holy prudence will not permit us to be harassed, and torn from our sees; but that the Bishops may in quiet give themselves always to the prayers, which they do always offer for your own welfare and for your reign, and for peace, which may the Divinity bestow on you, according to your merits, profound and perpetual! But our legates will bring the subscriptions and names of the Bishops or Legates, as another letter informs your holy and religious prudence.

§. 11.

14. Decree of the Council [Note G]

As far as it was fitting, dearest brethren, the Catholic Council has had patience, and has so often displayed the Church's forbearance towards Ursacius and Valens, Germinius, Caius, and Auxentius; who by so often changing what they had believed, have troubled all the Churches, and still are endeavouring to introduce their heretical spirit into Christian minds. For they wish to annul the formulary passed at Nicæa, which was framed against the Arian and other heresies. They have presented to us besides a creed drawn up by themselves, which we could not lawfully receive. Even before this have they been pronounced heretics by us, and it has been confirmed by a long period, whom we have not admitted to our communion, but condemned them in their presence by our voices. Now then, what seems good to you, again declare, that it may be ratified by the subscription of each.

All the Bishops answered, It seems good that the aforenamed heretics should be condemned, that the Church may remain in that unshaken faith, which is truly Catholic, and in perpetual peace.

15. Matters at Ariminum then had this speedy issue; for {88} there was no disagreement there, but all of them with one accord both put into writing what they decided upon, and deposed the Arians [Note H]. §. 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 [Note I], and the day of the month according to the Egyptians the 16th, 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 Leontius, and Theodotus, and Evagrius, and Theodulus, and George who has been driven from the whole world [Note K], adopt an unprincipled course. Fearing the proofs which their accusers had to show against them, they coalesced with the rest of the Arian party [Note L], (who were mercenaries in the cause of irreligion as if for this purpose, and {89} were ordained by Secundus, who had been deposed by the great Council,) the Libyan Stephen, and Seras, and Pollux, who were under accusation upon various charges, next Pancratius, and one Ptolemy a Meletian [Note M]. And they made a pretence of entering upon the question of faith, but it was clear [Note N] they were doing so from fear of their accusers; and they took the part of the heresy, till at length they were left by themselves. For, whereas the supporters of the Acacians lay under suspicion and were very few, but the others were the majority; therefore the Acacians, 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 "Consubstantial," so obscure and 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 indignant [Note O], and deposed Acacius, Patrophilus, Uranius, Eudoxius, and George the contractor [Note 16], and others from Asia, Leontius and Theodosius, Evagrius and Theodoret, and excommunicated Asterius, Eusebius, Augerus, 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 {90} of the offences imputed to them. And after despatching the sentence pronounced against them to the diocese of each, they proceeded to Constantius, that most irreligious [Note P] Augustus, to report to him their proceedings, as they had been ordered. And this was the termination of the Council in Seleucia.

§. 13.

16. 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 enacting [Note 17]. And who but must condemn the fickleness of the party of Eudoxius and Acacius, who sacrifice [Note 18] the honour due to their own {91} fathers to partisanship and patronage of the Ario-maniacs [Note Q]? for what confidence can be placed in their own 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 letter [Note 19] signified to his flock, that that was true faith, which the Council had declared? for, if he explained himself in that letter in his {92} own way [Note R], 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 faces 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 heresy [Note 20]? 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 relics 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 cast a slur on their own ignoble birth, and say, "We are sprung not of religions men but of heretics." For such language, as I said before, is consistent in those who barter [Note 21] 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], and the threat lying in the Law against such.

Top | Contents | Works | Home

Footnotes

A. There were at this time four prætorian præfects, who divided between them this administration of the Empire. They had been lately made merely civil officers, Constantine having suppressed the celebrated troops which they used to command. At Ariminum, one of them, Taurus, was present, and was the instrument of the Emperor in overawing the Council.
Return to text

B. From these words Tillemont and Gibbon infer that Athanasius was present at least at Seleucia, but, as Montfaucon observes, such a supposition is not required by the words, and is in itself improbable.
Return to text

C. The Council was originally to have been held at Nicæa, but the party of Basil did not like a second meeting in the same place, and Nicomedia was substituted. The greater number of Bishops had set out, when an earthquake threw the city into ruins. Nicæa was then substituted again at Basil's wish, Soz. iv. 16. but it was considered too near the seat of the earthquake to be safe. Then the Eusebian or Acacian influence prevailed, and the Council was divided into two; but at first Ancyra, Basil's see, was to have been one of them, (where a celebrated Council of Semi-arians actually was held at the time,) Hil. de Syn. 8. but this was changed for Seleucia. A delegacy of Bishops from each Province was summoned to Nicomedia; but to Nicæa, all Bishops whatever, whose health admitted of the journey, according to Sozomen; but Hilary says, only one or two from each province of Gaul were summoned to Ariminum; he himself was at Seleucia, under compulsion of the local magistrate, being in exile there for the faith, Sulp. Sev. ii. 57.
Return to text

D. Ursacius, Bishop of Singidon, and Valens, Bishop of Mursa, are generally mentioned together. They were pupils of Arius; and as such are called young by Athan. ad Ep. Æg. 7. by Hilary ad Const. i. 5. (imperitis et improbis duobus adolescentibus,) and by the Council of Sardica, ap. Hilar. Fragm. ii. 12. They first appear at the Council of Tyre, A.D. 335. The Council of Sardica deposed them; in 349, they publicly retracted their charges against Athanasius, who has preserved their letters. Apol. contr. Arian. 58. [Hist. tracts pp. 86, 87 O.T.] Valens was the more prominent of the two; he was a favourite Bishop of Constantius, was an extreme Arian in his opinions, and the chief agent at Ariminum in effecting the lapse of the Latin Fathers.
Return to text

E. Germinius was made Bishop of Sirmium by the Eusebians in 351, instead of Photinus whom they deposed for a kind of Sabellianism. However, he was obliged in 358 to sign the Semi-arian formula of Ancyra; yet he was an active Eusebian again at Ariminum. At a later date he approached very nearly to Catholicism.
Return to text

F. Acacius has been mentioned, p. 7. note P. Eudoxius is said to have been a pupil of Lucian, Arius's Master, though the dates scarcely admit it. Eustathius, Catholic Bishop of Antioch, whom the Eusebians subsequently deposed, refused to admit him into orders . Afterwards he was made Bishop of Germanicia in Syria, by his party. He was is present at the Council of Antioch in 341, spoken of infra, § 22. and carried into the West in 345, the fifth Confession, called the Long, [makrostichos]. infr. § 26. He afterwards passed in succession to the sees of Antioch (vid. supr. p. 1. note A.), and Constantinople, and baptized the Emperor Valens into the Arian profession.
Return to text

G. Patrophilus was one of the original Arian party, and took share in all their principal acts, but there is nothing very distinctive in his history. Sozomen assigns to these six Bishops the scheme of dividing the Council into two. Hist. iv. 16. and Valens undertook to manage the Latins, Acacius the Greeks.
Return to text

H. The heathen Ammianus speaks of "the troops of Bishops hurrying to and fro at the public expense," and "the Synods, in their efforts to bring over the whole religion to their side, being the ruin of the posting establishments." Hist. xxi. 16. "The spectacle proceeded to that pitch of indecency," says Eusebius, "that at length in the very midst of the theatres of the unbelievers, the solemn matters of divine teaching were subjected to the basest mockery." in vit. Const. ii. 61. Heathen philosophers attended the Nicene Council, "from an interest to learn what the Christian doctrine was." Soz. i. 18.
Return to text

I. "Who is there, who when he heard, upon his first catechisings, that God had a Son, and had made all things in His proper Word, did not so understand it in that sense which we now intend? who, when the vile Arian heresy began , but at once, on hearing its teachers, was startled, as if they taught strange things?" Orat. ii. § 34 [infra p. 328]. And Hilary with the same sense, "I call the God of heaven and earth to witness, that, before I had heard either term, I always felt concerning the two words that by 'one in substance' ought to be understood 'like in substance,' that is, that nothing can be like Him in nature, but That which is of the same nature. Regenerated long since, and for a while a Bishop, yet I never heard the Nicene Creed till I was in exile, but Gospels and Apostles intimated to me the meaning of 'one in substance' and 'like in substance.'" de Syn. 91. vid. also ad Const. ii. 7.
Return to text

K. "Faith is made a thing of dates rather than Gospels, while it is written down by years, and is not measured by the confession of baptism." ad Const. ii. 4. "We determine yearly and monthly creeds concerning God, we repent of our determinations; we defend those who repent, we anathematize those whom we have defended; we condemn our own doings in those of others, or others in us, and gnawing each other, we are well nigh devoured one of another." ibid. 5.
Return to text

L. "Who are you? whence and when came ye? what do ye on my property being none of mine? by what right, O Marcion, cuttest thou my wood? By what license, O Valentinus, turnest thou my springs? by what power, O Apelles, movest thou my landmarks? Mine is possession ... I possess of old, I have prior possession ... I am heir of the Apostles." Tertull. de Præscr. 37. Tardily for me hath this time of day put forth these, in my judgment, most impious doctors. Full late hath that faith of mine, which Thou hast instructed, encountered these Masters. Before these names were heard of, I thus believed in Thee, I thus was new born by Thee, and thenceforth I thus am Thine." Hil. de Trin. vi. 21. "What heresy hath ever burst forth, but under the name of some certain men, in some certain place. and at some certain time? Who ever set up any heresy, who first divided not himself from the consent of the universality and antiquity of the Catholic Church?" Vincent Lir. Commonit. 24. "I will tell thee my mind briefly and plainly, that thou shouldest remain in that Church which, being founded by the Apostles, endures even to this day. When thou hearest that those who are called Christ's, are named, not after Jesus Christ, but after some one, say Marcionites, Valentinians, &c. know then it is not Christ's Church, but the synagogue of Antichrist. For by the very fact that they are formed afterwards, they shew that they are those who the Apostle foretold should come." Jerom. in Lucif. 27. "If the Church was not ... whence hath Donatus appeared? from what soil hath he sprung? out of what sea hath he emerged? from what heaven hath he fallen?" August. de Bapt. contr. Don. iii. 3.
Return to text

M. Athan. says, that after Eusebius had taken up the patronage of the heresy, he made no progress till he had gained the Court. Hist. Arian. 66. shewing that it was an act of external power by which Arianism grew, not an inward movement in the Church, which indeed loudly protested against the Emperor's proceeding. "If Bishops are to judge," he says says shortly before, "what has the Emperor to with this matter? if the Emperor is to threaten, what need of men styled Bishops? where in the world was such a thing heard of? where had the Church's judgment its force from the Emperor, or his sentence was at all recognised? many Councils have been before this, many judgments of the Church, but neither the Fathers ever argued with the Emperor about them, nor the Emperor meddled with the concerns of the Church. Paul the Apostle had friends of Cæsar's household, and in his Epistle he saluted the Philippians in their name, but he took them not to him as partners in his judgments. But now a new spectacle, and this the discovery of the Arian heresy," &c. § 52. [Hist. tracts p. 266 O.T.] Again, "In what then is he behind Antichrist? what more will he do when he comes? or rather, on his coming will he not find the way by [Constantius] prepared for him unto his deceiving without effort? for he to is to claim the judgments for the court instead of the Churches, and of these he is to become head." § 76. [ib. p. 287.] And so Hosius to Constantius, "Cease, I charge thee, and remember that thou art a mortal man. Fear the day of judgment; keep thyself clear against it. Interfere not with things ecclesiastical, nor be the man to charge us in a matter of the kind; rather learn them thyself from us. God has put into thy hand the kingdom; to us He hath intrusted the things of the Church; and as he who is traitorous to thy rule speaks against God who has thus ordained, so fear thou, lest drawing to thyself the things of the Church, thou fallest beneath a great accusation." Apud Athan. ibid. 44 [ib. p. 258]. vid. infr. p. 90, note P.
Return to text

N. "He who speaketh of his own, [ek ton idion], speaketh a lie." Athan. contr. Apoll. i. fin."They used to call the Church a virgin," says Hegesippus, "for it was not yet defined by profane doctrines … the Simonists, Dosithians &c. each privately ([idios]) and separately has brought in a private opinion." ap. Euseb. Hist. iv. 22. Sophronius at Seleucia cried out, "If to publish day after day our private ([idian]) will, be a profession of faith, accuracy of truth will fail us." Socr. ii. 40.
Return to text

O. "However the error was, certainly error reigned so long as heresies were not. Truth needed a rescue, and looked out for Marcionites and Valentinians. Meanwhile, gospelling was nought, faith was nought, nought was the baptism of so many thousand thousand, so many works of faith performed, so many virtues, so many gifts displayed, so many priesthoods, so many ministries exercised, nay, so many martyrdoms crowned." Tertull. Præser. 29. "'Profane novelties,' which if we receive, of necessity the faith of our blessed ancestors, either all or a great part of it must be overthrown; the faithful people of all ages and times, all holy saints, all the chaste, all the continent, all the virgins, all the Clergy, the Deacons, the Priests, so many thousands of confessors, so great armies of martyrs, so many famous populous cities and commonwealths, so many islands, provinces, kings, tribes, kingdoms, nations, to conclude, almost now the whole world, incorporated by the Catholic Faith to Christ their head, must needs be said, so many hundred years, to have been ignorant, to have erred, to have blasphemed, to have believed they knew not what." Vinc. Comm. 24. "O the extravagance! the wisdom, hidden after Christ's coming, they announce to us today, which is a thing to draw tears. For if the faith began thirty years since, while near four hundred are past since Christ was manifested, nought hath been our gospel that long while, and nought our faith, and fruitlessly have martyrs been martyred, and fruitlessly have such and so great rulers ruled the people." Greg. Naz. ad Cledon. Ep. 102. p. 97.
Return to text

P. This seems to have been an innovation in these countries of about fifty years old, or from about the year 276. It is remarkable, that the Quartodeciman custom had come to an end in Proconsular Asia, where it had existed from S. John's time, before it began in Syria. Tillemont refers the change to Anatolius of Laodicea; the writer of this note has attempted in a former work to prove Paul of Samosata the author of it.
Return to text

Q. [prodromos], præcursor, is almost a received word for the predicted apostacy or apostate (vid. note on S. Cyril's Cat. xv. 9. also infr. note P.), but the distinction was not always carefully drawn between the apostate and the Antichrist. Constantius is called Antichrist by Athan. Hist. Arian. 67. his acts are the [prooimion kai paraskeue] of Antichrist. Hist. Arian. 70 fin. 71. and 80. Constantius is the image, [eikon], of Antichrist. 74. and 80. and shows the likeness, [homoioma], of the malignity of Antichrist. 75. [prodromos] 77. "Let Christ be expected, for Antichrist is in possession." Hilar. contr. Const. init. Constantius, Antichrist. ibid. 5. Speaking of Auxentius, the Arian Bishop of Milan, he says, "Of one thing I warn you, beware of Antichrist; it is ill that a love of walls has seized you, it is ill that your veneration for God's Church lies in houses and edifices; it is ill that under this plea ye insinuate the name of pence. Is there any doubt that Antichrist is to sit in these? Mountains and woods and lakes and prisons and pits are to be more safe; for in these did prophets, sojourning or sunk, still by God's spirit prophesy." contr. Aux. 12. Lucifer calls Constantius præcursor Antichristi. p. 89. possessed with the spirit of Antichrist, p. 219. friend of Antichrist. p. 259. Again, S. Jerome, writing against Jovinian, says that he who so says that there are no differences of rewards is Antichrist, ii. 21. S. Leo, alluding to 1 John iv. 10. calls Nestorius and Eutyches, Antihristi præcursores, Ep. 75. p. 1022. Again, Antichrist, whoever opposes what the Church has once settled, with an allusion to opposition to the see of S. Peter. Ep. 156. c. 2. Anastasius speaks of the ten horns of Monophysitism, Hodeg. 6. also 8. and 24. and calls Severus, Monophysite Bp. of Antioch, Antichrist, for usurping the judicial powers of Christ and His Church. ibid. p. 92.
Return to text

R. "They know not to be reverent even to their leaders. And this is why commonly schisms exist not among heretics; because while they are, they are not visible. Schism is their very unity. I am a liar if they do not dissent from their own rules, while every man among them equally alters at his private judgment (suo arbitrio) what he has received, just as he who gave to them composed it at his private judgment. The progress of the thing is true to its nature and its origin. What was a right to Valentinus, was a right to Valentinians, what to Marcion was to the Marcionites, to innovate on the faith at their private judgment. As soon as any heresy is thoroughly examined, it is found in many points dissenting from its parent. Those parents for the most part have no Churches; they roam about without Mother, without see, bereaved of the faith, without a county, without a home." Tertull. Præscr. 42. At Seleucia Acacius said, "If the Nicene faith has been altered once and many time 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 Semi-arian 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? for those who met at Nicæa, and unanimously confessed the Consubstantial, might more properly receive the name, &c. But if the Bishops at Antioch set at nought their own fathers, those who come after are blindly following parricides; and how did they receive a valid ordination from them, whose faith they set at nought as reprobate? But if those had not the Holy Ghost, which cometh through laying on of hands, neither did these receive the priesthood; for did they receive from those who have not wherewith to give?
Return to text

S. [oligoi tines], says Pope Julius, ap. Athan. Apol. 34 [Hist. tracts p. 55 O.T.]. [egrapsan tines peri pisteos] says Athan. ad Ep. Æg. 5. [ib. p. 130 O.T.]
Return to text

T. vid. de Decr. init. and § 4. and p. 2. note C. We shall have abundant instances of the Arian changes as this Treatise proceeds. "It happens to thee," says S. Hilary to Constantius, as to unskilful builders, always to be dissatisfied with what thou hast done; thou art ever destroying what thou art ever building." contr. Constant. 23. "O miserable state! with what seas of cares, with what storms, are they tossed! for now at one time, as the wind driveth them, they are carried away headlong in error; at another time, coming again to themselves, they are beaten back like contrary waves; sometimes with rash presumption, they allow such things as seem uncertain, at another time of pusillanimity they are in fear even about those things which are certain; doubtful which way to take, which way to return, what to desire, what to avoid, what to hold, what to let go, &c." Vincent. Comm. 20. "He writes," says Athan. of Constantius, "and while he writes repents, and while he repents is exasperated; and then he grieves again, and not knowing how to act, he shews how bereft the soul is of understanding." Hist. Arian. 70. [Hist. tracts p. 282 O.T.] vid. also ad Ep. Æg. 6.
Return to text

U. "The Emperor [Theodosius] had a conversation with Nectarius, Bishop [of Constantinople], in what way to make Christendom concordant, and to unite the Church. This made Nectarius anxious; but Sisinnius, a man of ready speech and of practical experience, and thoroughly versed in the interpretation of the sacred writings and in the doctrines of philosophy, having a conviction that disputations would but aggravate the party spirit of the heresies instead of reconciling schisms, advises him to avoid dialectic engagements, and to appeal to the statements of the ancients, and to put the question to the heresiarchs from the Emperor, whether they made any sort of account of the doctors who belonged to the Church before the division, or came to issue with them as aliens from Christianity; for if they made their authority null, therefore let them venture to anathematize them. But if they did venture, then they would be driven out by the people." Socr. v. 10.
Return to text

X. There were two Arian Bishops of Milan of the name of Auxentius, but little is known of them besides. S. Hilary wrote against the elder; the other came into collision with S. Ambrose. Demophilus, Bishop of Berea, was one of those who carried the long Confession into the West, though not mentioned by Athan. below. He was afterwards claimed by Aetius, as agreeing with him. Of Caius, an Illyrian Bishop, nothing is known except that he sided throughout with the Arian party.
Return to text

Y. The Creed which follows had been prepared at Sirmium shortly before, and is the third, or, as some think, the fourth, drawn up at Sirmium. It was the composition of Mark of Arethusa, yet it was written in Latin; and though Mark was a Semi-arian, it distinctly abandons the word substance. But this point of history is involved in much obscurity. As it stands it is a patchwork of two views. It will be observed, that it is the Creed on which Athanasius has been animadverting above.
Return to text

Z. May 22, 359, Whitsun-Eve.
Return to text

A. This clause shews the presence and influence of time Acacian party; but the confession is raised towards the end by the introduction of the phrase, "like in all timings," [kata panta homoion], which was added by Constantius himself, Epiph. Hær. 73. 22. and which in the minds of the more orthodox included "substance," vid. S. Cyril, Catech. iv. 7. xi. 18. a sense, however, which is contradictory to what goes before. It is impossible to go into this subject without being involved in historical difficulties, which there would be no room for discussing.
Return to text

B. The Eusebian party began after the Nicene Council by attacking Athanasius; then they held Councils to explain the faith; then they attacked the received terms of theology, and thereby the Nicene Creed, professing to adhere to Scripture. At Seleucia, as described infra, they openly attacked the Creed. But they did not dare avow the Arian heresy; the first step then on the part of the Catholics was to demand of them a condemnation of it. The Anomœans perplexed the Eusebians by letting out the secret of their real Arianism.
Return to text

C. It need scarcely be said, that the great object of the Arians was to obtain a consideration of the doctrine settled at Nicæa by a new Council. This Athan. all through his works strenuously resists. In the Letter which follows, the Council observes, that the Emperor had commanded "to treat of the faith," under which ambiguous phrase the Arians attempted to "propose," as they say, "something novel for their consideration." And so at Sardica the Council writes to Pope Julius, that the Emperors Constantius and Constans had proposed three subjects for its consideration; first, "that all points in discussion should be debated afresh (de integro), and above all concerning the holy faith and the integrity of the truth which [the Arians] had violated." Hil. Fragm. ii. 11. Enemies of the Arians seem to have wished this as well as themselves; and the Council got into difficulty in consequence. Hosius the president and Protogenes Bishop of the place wrote to the Pope to explain, "from fear," says Sozomen, "lest some might think that there was any innovation upon the Nicene decrees." iii. 12. From his way of stating the matter, Sozomen seems to have himself believed that the Council did publish a creed. And, as has been alluded to in a former note, p. 70. a remarkable confession, and attributed to the Council does exist. Accordingly Athanasius, Eusebius of Vercellæ, and the Council of Alexandria, A.D. 362, protest against the idea. "It is true that certain persons wished to add to the Nicene Council as if there was something wanting, but the Holy Council was displeased," &c. Tom. ad Antioch. However, Vigilius of Thapsus repeats the report. contr. Eutych. v. init.
Return to text

D. The same version of the Letter which follows is found in Socr. ii. 39. Soz. iv. 10. Theod. Hist. ii. 19. Niceph. i. 40. On comparison with the Latin original, which is preserved by Hilary, Fragm. viii. it appears to be so very freely executed, that it has been thought better here to translate it from the text of Hillary.
Return to text

E. Ex præcepto. Præceptum becomes a technical word afterwards for a royal deed, charter, or edict; and it has somewhat of that meaning even here.
Return to text

F. Auxentius, omitted in Hilary's copy, is inserted here, and in the Decree which follows, from the Greek, since Athanasius has thus given his sanction to the fact of his being condemned at Ariminum. Yet Auxentius appeals to Ariminum triumphantly. Hil. contr. Aux. fin. Socrates, Hist. ii. 37. says, that Demophilus also was deposed, but he was an Eastern Bishop, if he be Demophilus of Beria. vid. Coustant. on Hill. Fragm. vii. p. 1342. Yet he is mentioned also by Athanasius as present, supra, § 9. A few words are wanting in the Latin in the commencement of one of the sentences which follow.
Return to text

G. This Decree is also here translated from the original 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, à multis sanctis Scripturis insinuatam mentibus nostris, obtinere debere sui firmitatem." Fragm. vii. 3.
Return to text

H. Athanasius seems to have known no more of the proceedings at Ariminum, which perhaps were then in progress, when he wrote this Treatise; their termination, as is well known, was very unhappy, "Ingemuit totus orbis," says S. Jerome, "et Arianum se esse miratus est," ad Lucif. 19. A deputation of ten persons was sent from the Council to Constantius, to which Valens opposed one of his own. Constantius pretended the barbarian war, and delayed an answer till the beginning of October, the Council having opened in July. The postscript to this Treatise contained the news of this artifice and of the Council's distress in consequence, which Athanasius had just heard. He also seems to have inserted into his work, § 30 and 31, upon the receipt of the news of the mission of Valens to Constantinople, a mission which ended in the submission of the Catholic delegacy. Upon this returning to Ariminum with the delegates and the Arian Creed they had signed (vid. infr. § 30.), Valens, partly by menaces and partly by sophistry, succeeded in procuring the subscriptions of the Council also to the same formula.
Return to text

I. Gorpiæus was the first month of the Syro-Macedonic year among the Greeks, dating according to the era of the Seleucidæ. The Roman date of the meeting of the Council was the 27th of September. The original transactions at Ariminum had at this time been finished as much as two months, and its deputies were waiting for Constantius in Constantinople.
Return to text

K. There is little to observe of these Acacian Bishops in addition to what has been said of several of them, except that George is the Cappadocian, the notorious intruder into the see of S. Athanasius. The charges which lay against them were of various kinds. Socrates says that the Acacian party consisted in all of 34; others increase it by a few more.
Return to text

L. The Eusebian or Court party are here called Acacian, and were Anomœans and Semi-Arians alternately, or more properly as they may be called Homœan or Scriptural; for Arians, Semi-Arians, and Anomœans, all used theological terms as well as the Catholics. The Semi-Arians numbered about 100, the remaining dozen might be the Egyptian Bishops who were zealous supporters of the Catholic cause. However, there were besides a few Anomœans or Arians, as Athan. calls them, with whom the Acacians now coalesced.
Return to text

M. The Meletian schismatics of Egypt had formed an alliance with the Arians from the first. Athan. imputes the alliance to ambition and avarice in the Meletians, and to zeal for their heresy in theArians. Ad Ep. Æg. 22. vid. also Hist. Arian. 78. [Hist. tracts pp. 151, 289, 291 O.T.] After Sardica the Semi-arians attempted a coalition with the Donatists of Africa. Aug. contr. Cresc. iii. 38.
Return to text

N. Acacius had written to the Semi-arian Macedonius of Constantinople in favour of the [kata panta homoion], and of the Son's being [tes autes ousias], 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. 10.
Return to text

O. They also confirmed the Semi-Arian Confession of the Dedication, 341. of which infr. § 22. Basil of Ancyra, the leading Semi-arian, was not present; and he and Mark of Arethusa were both parties to the Acacian third Sirmium Confession, which had been proposed at Ariminum. George of Laodicea, however, who was with him at the Council of Ancyra in the foregoing year, acted as the leader of the Semi-arians. After this the Acacians drew up another Confession, which Athan. has preserved, infra, § 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. There is nothing to remark as regards the names of Arian Bishops here introduced into the text.
Return to text

P. Up to the year 356, Athanasius had treated Constantius as a member of the Church; but at that date the Eusebian or Court party abandoned the Semi-arians for the Anomœans, George of Cappadocia was sent as Bishop to Alexandria, Athanasius was driven into the desert, S. Hilary and other Western Bishops were sent into banishment, Hosius was persecuted into signing an Arian confession, and Pope Liberius into communicating with the Arians. Upon this Athanasius changed his tone and considered that he had to deal with an Antichrist. We have seen above, note G, the language both of himself and others in consequence. In his Apol. contr. Arian. init. (A.D. 350.) ad Ep. Æg. 5. (356.) and his Apol. ad Constant. passim. (356.) he calls the Emperor most pious, religious, &c. At the end of the last mentioned work, § 27. the news comes to him while in exile of the persecution of the Western Bishop and the measures against himself. He still in the peroration calls Constantius, "blessed and divinely favoured Augustus," and urges on him that he is a Christian, [philochristos], Emperor." In the works which follow, Apol. de fuga, § 26 (357.) he calls him an heretic; and Hist. Arian. § 45, &c. (358.) speaking of the treatment of Hosius, &c. he calls him "Ahab," "Belshazzar," "Saul," "Antichrist." The passage at the end of the Apol. contr. Arian. [Hist. tracts, p. 123 O.T.] in which he speaks of the "much violence and tyrannical power of Constantius," is an addition of Athan.'s at a later date, vid. Montfaucon's note on § 88. fin. This is worth mentioning, as it shews the unfairness of the following passage from Gibbon, ch. xxi. note 116. "As Athanasius dispersed secret invectives against Constantius, see the Epistle to the monks," [i.e. Hist. Arian. ad Monach. A.D. 358.] "at the same time that he assured him of his profound respect, we might distrust the professions of the Archbishop. tom. i. p. 677." [i.e. apparently Apol. ad Const. A.D. 356.] Again in a later part of the chapter, "In his public Apologies, which he addressed to the Emperor himself, he sometimes affected the praise of moderation; whilst at the same time in secret and vehement invectives he exposed Constantius as a weak and wicked prince, the executioner of his family, the tyrant of the republic, and the Antichrist of the Church." He offers no proof of this assertion. It may be added that S. Greg. Naz. praises Constantius, but it is in contrast to Julian. Orat. iv. 3. v. 6. And S. Ambrose, but it is for his enmity to paganism. Ep. i. 18. n. 32.
Return to text

Q. "The dumb ass forbade the madness of the prophet," [paraphonian]. On the word [Areiomanitai], 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. and thenceforth used by the general Church, e.g. Eustathius of Antioch, ap. Theod. Hist. i. 7. Constant. ap. Concil. t. i. p. 456. b. Hilar. de Trin. vi. Julius ap. Athan. Apol. 23. Council of Egypt, ibid. 6. Phæbadius, contr. Arian. circ. fin. Epiph. Hær. 69. 19. ([homaniodes Areios].) Greg. Naz. Orat. ii. 37. [ten Areiou kalos onomastheisan manian], and so [ho tes manias eponumos]. Orat. 43. 30. vid. also Orat. 20. 5. and so Proclus, [ten Areiou manian]. ad Armen. p. 618 fin. And Athan. e.g. [manian diabolou]. ad Serap. i. 1. also ad Serap. i. 17 fin. 19 init. 20 d. 24 e. 29 e. ii. 1 fin. iv. 5 init. 6 fin. 15 fin. 16 fin. In some of these the denial of the divinity of the Holy Ghost is the madness. In like manner Hilary speaks continually of their "furor." de Trin. e.g. i. 17. Several meanings are implied in this title; the real reason for it was the fanatical fury with which it spread and maintained itself; e.g. [ho manikos erastes tou christou], enthusiastic. Chrysost. in Esai. vi. 1. Hom. iv. 3. p. 124. Thus Athan. contrasts the Arian hatred of the truth, with the mere worldliness of the Meletians, supr. p. 89. note M. Hence they are [asebeis, christomachoi], and governed by [kakonoia] and [kakophrosune]. Again Socrates speaks of it as a flame which ravaged, [epenemeto], provinces and cities. i. 6. And Alexander cries out, [o anosiou tuphou kai ametrou manias]. Theod. Hist. i. 3. p. 741. vid. also pp. 735, 6, 747. And we read much of their eager spirit of proselytism. Theod. ibid. The original word mania best expresses it in English. Their cruelty came into this idea of their "mania;" hence Athan. in one place calls the Arian women, in the tumult under George of Cappadocia, Mænades. "They running up and down like Bacchanals and furies, [mainades kai erinnues], thought it a misfortune not to find opportunity for injury, and passed that day in grief in which they could do no harm." Hist. Arian. 59. [Hist. tracts p. 272 O.T.] Also "profana Arianorum novitas velut quædam Bellona aut Furia." Vincent. Common. 6. Eustathius speaks of [oi paradoxoi tes areiou thumeles mesochoroi]. ap. Phot. 225. p. 759. And hence the strange paronomasia of Constantine, [Ares, aerie], with an allusion to Hom. II. v. 31. A second reason, or rather sense, of the appellation was what is noted, supr. p. 2, note E. that, denying the Word, they have forfeited the gift of reason, e.g. [ton Areiomaniton ten alogian]. de Sent. Dion. init. vid. ibid. 24 fin. Orat. ii. § 32. c. iii. § 63. throughout. Hence in like manner Athan. speaks of the heathen as mad who did not acknowledge God and His Word. contr. Gent. fin. also 23 fin. Hence he speaks of [eidolomania]. contr. Gent. 10. and 21 fin. Again, Incarn. 47. he speaks of the mania of oracles, which belongs rather to the former sense of the word. Other heresies had the word mania applied to them, e.g. that of Valentinus. Athan. Orat. ii. § 70 [infra p. 382]. [kan mainetai]. Epiphanius speaks of the [emmanes didaskalia] of the Noetians. Hær. 57. 2. Nazianzen contrasts the sickness, [nodos], of Sabellius with the madness of Arius, Orat. 20. 5 but Athan. says, [mainetai men Areios, mainetai de Sabellios], Orat. iv. 25 [infra p. 543]: But this note might be prolonged indefinitely.
Return to text

R. [hos ethelesen], vid. also de Decr. § 3. [hos ethelesan]. ad Ep. Æg. 5.
Return to text

Top | Contents | Works | Home

Margin Notes

1. supr. p. 5, note K.
Return to text

2. infr. p. 90, note P.
Return to text

3. vid. infr. Orat. iii. § 47.
Return to text

4. supr. p. 49, note O.
Return to text

5. infr. p. 84, note C.
Return to text

6. ad Ep. Æg. 10.
Return to text

7. vid. infr. notes B and C.
Return to text

8. vid. p. 3, note F.
Return to text

9. vid. p. 57, note L; p. 60, note C.
Return to text

10. infr. note B.
Return to text

11. viii. Confession, or 3rd Sirmian, of 359. vid. § 29. infr.
Return to text

12. [homoion].
Return to text

13. supr. p. 27, note H.
Return to text

14. [kata dunamin].
Return to text

15. supr. p. 74, note D.
Return to text

16. pork contractor to the troops, [hypodekten], Hist. Arian. 75. vid. Naz. Orat. 21. 16.
Return to text

17. supr. p. 80, note R.
Return to text

18. [propinousi]. infr. § 16. fin.
Return to text

19. vid. supr. de Decr. § 3.
Return to text

20. p. 80, note R; p. 82, note U.
Return to text

21. [propinousi], de Decr. § 4.
Return to text

22. ad Ep. Æg. 6. [Hist. tracts, p. 132 O.T.]
Return to text

23. supr. p. 49, note O.
Return to text

Top | Contents | Works | Home

Newman Reader — Works of John Henry Newman
Copyright © 2007 by The National Institute for Newman Studies. All rights reserved.