ST. ATHANASIUS: APOLOGIA CONTRA ARIANOS, PART I
APOLOGIA CONTRA ARIANOS
"This Apology," says Montfaucon, "is the most authentic source of the
history of the Church in the first half of the fourth century. Athanasius is far
superior to any other historians of the period, both from his bearing for the
most part a personal testimony to the facts he relates, and from his great
accuracy and use of actual documents. On the other hand, Rufinus, Socrates, Sozomen,
Theodoret, must not be used without extreme caution, unless they adduce
documents, which is seldom the case." The 'Apology' is a personal defence by Athanasius
against the charges laid against him by the Eusebian party, and does not
directly concern matters of doctrine. After the Council of Nicaea, the Eusebian
policy had been to oust the principal opponents from their sees on personal
grounds, so as to pave the way for the abrogation of the Nicene formula. The attack
upon Athanasius began in 331, but without success. It was renewed at Caesarea and
Tyre in 334--335, and resulted in the exile of Athanasius to Treveri, 336. His
return in 337 was followed by a Synod at Antioch which 'deposed' him (close of
338), and by his expulsion in favour of Gregory (339). Then follow the
intervention of Julius (339--340), and the Council of Sardica (343), which resulted in
the eventual return of Athanasius in the autumn of 346. (The details are given
more fully in the Prolegomena, ch. ii. 4--6). After this latter date, and
before the relapse of Valens and Ursacius which followed upon the death of
Constans, Athanasius drew up a collection of documents in proof of his innocence,
connecting them together by an explanatory narrative. (I) The charges against him
related to events alleged to have occurred before the year 332 (extortion of
money, subvention of the rebel Philumenus, the chalice of Ischyras, murder and
mutilation of the bishop Arsenius): the principal evidence as to their falsehood
was comprised in the proceedings of the Councils of Tyre and Jerusalem, and of
the commission of enquiry sent by the assembled bishops to the Mareotis. (2) The
judicial investigations which proved the innocence of Athanasius took place
first at Rome under Julius, secondly at Sardica under Hosius; and were followed
by the recognition of his innocence on the part of the Emperor Constantius, of
bishops in various parts of the world, and lastly of some of his chief accusers.
The method of defence now adopted by Athanasius was firstly to show how
complete that recognition had been: this he does by a series of documents from
the eve of his departure to Rome down to the recantation of Ursacius and Valens
soon after his return to Alexandria: these documents cover eight years
(339--347) previous to the composition of the Apology ( I--58). Having shewn the
completeness of his acquittal, he next gives the evidence upon which it was based.
Accordingly the second part ( 59--90) of the Apology deals with facts and
documents earlier than those comprised in the first. Hence the inversion of
chronological sequence (praeposterus ordo, Montf.) as between the two parts.
Referring the reader to the Prolegomena for a connected view of the
history of which this Apology is the primary source, it will suffice for our present
purpose to enumerate the documents quoted, with the briefest possible statement
of their contents and bearing upon the general purpose of the work. It should
be noted that while in the first part the documents follow one another in
strict chronological order, those of the second part fall into groups within which
the matters are arranged as best suits the argument, and not in order of time.
In the following list the probable or approximate date of each document is given.
A. DOCUMENTS IN THE FIRST PART
(general subject, the vindication of Athanasius before the bishops of the
Christian world).
(i.) Documents prior to the council of sardica ( 1--35)
1. 3--19 (end of 338 or beginning of 339). Circular of Egyptian bishops
reciting the election of Athanasius, the plots and charges against him, the
history of the Mareotic Commission, the testimony available in his defence, and
requesting all bishops to join in vindicating him.
2. 20--35 (340 A.D.). Letter of Juluis to the Eusebian bishops (at the
request of a Roman Council) remonstrating with their discourteous reply to a
former letter, reciting the history of the intrigues against Athanasius, pressing
them with their disrespect to the Synod of NicAEa, with their evasion of the
invitation to the Council at Rome, vindicating Athanasius (on the ground of
documentary proof of his innocence, and on that of the irregularity of the
proceedings against him) and Marcellus (upon his own statement of belief), lastly,
insisting on the propriety of a reference of the questions at issue to the whole
Church, and upon the precedent giving the Roman Church a decisive voice in
questions affecting that of Alexandria.
(ii.) Council of Sardica ( 36--50).
3. 36--40 (A.D. 343) Letter of the Council to the Church of Alexandria,
reciting the intrigues against Athanasius, and the confirmation by the council
of his acquittal by Julius, encouraging the Alexandrine Church to patience, and
announcing that they have requested the Emperors to give effect to their
decisions.
4. 41--43 (same date). Letter of the Council to the bishops of Egypt and
Libya : identical with No. 3, except that it omits the reference to certain
presbyters of Alexandria, and mentions several Arian leaders by name.
5. 44--50 (same date). Circular letter of the Council, reciting the
occasion of its assembling, the behaviour of the Eastern bishops, the violence
inflicted by them upon orthodox bishops, the breakdown of the charges brought by
them against Athanasius, and the purgation of Marcellus and Asclepas, who are
pronounced innocent, while the Arian leaders are deposed and anathematised.
The signatures follow of over 280 bishops, most of whom signed afterwards
while the letter was in circulation.
(iii.) Documents forming a sequel to the Council of Sardica (51--58).
6--8. 51. Letters of Constantius to Athanasius before and after death of
Gregory. 6 (A.D. 345). Expressing sympathy with his sufferings, and inviting
him to court; he has written to Constans to ask him to allow Athanasius to
return. 7 (same year, later). Urging the same invitation. 8 (346, winter, or early
spring). A similar summons, but more pressing.
9. 52 (same year). Letter of Julius to the Church of Alexandria,
eulogising Athanasius, complimenting them for their constancy, and congratulating them
upon his return.
10. 54 (same year). Circular letter of Constantius to the Church at
large, announcing the restoration of Athanasius and the cassation of all decrees
against him, with indemnity to all in his communion.
11. 55 (same date). Letter of Constantius to the Church of Alexandria.
Announcement of the restoration of Athanasius, with exhortation to peace, and
warning against disturbances.
12. 56 (same date). To the Prefect of Egypt and other officials.
Revocation of decrees against those in communion with Athanasius, and restoration of
their immunities.
13. 57 (same year, autumn). Letter of the bishops of Palestine to the
Egyptian Church congratulating them on the restoration of Athanasius.
14. 58 (A. D. 347). Letter of Valens and Ursacius to Julius unreservedly
withdrawing their allegations against Athanasius, anathematizing Arius and his
heresy, and at the same time promising to take the consequences of their
offence if required by Julius to do so.
15. ib. (same year). Letter of the same to Athanasius, with a greeting and
assurance that they are in communion with him and with the Church.
B. DOCUMENTS IN THE SECOND PART.
(i.) Letters of constantine previous to the council of tyre (59---63).
16. 59 (A.D. 331). A fragment, urging Athanasius with threats to admit to
communion all (Arians) who wish it.
17. 61 (same year). Letter to the people of Alexandria, remonstrating
with them for their dissensions and stigmatising the calumnies against Athanasius
(about the affair of Philumenus).
(ii.) 18. 64 (332). Confession of Ischyras, that he had been compelled by the
violence of certain Meletians to fabricate false charges against Athanasius.
(iii.) The affair of Arsenius ( 65--70).
19. 67 (probably 332). Intercepted letter of the presbyter Pinnes to John
Arcaph, warning him of the discovery of the plot, and begging him to drop the
matter. 68 (same year). Letter to Constantine to Athanasius, expressing
indignation at the charges concerning Arsenius and Ischyras, and bidding him publish
this letter in vindication of himself 66 (same year). Letter of Alexander,
Bishop of Thessalonica, praising Serapion, the son of an old friend, and
congratulating Athanasius on the exposure of the plot about Arsenius. 69 (same year).
Later of Arsenius to Athanasius, offering submission and requesting communion with
the Church.
23. 70 (same year). Letter of Constantine to John Arcaph accepting his
reconciliation to Athanasius, and summoning him to court.
(iv.) Proceedings at Tyre in 335 ( 71--83).
24. 77. Address to the Council by the Egyptian Bishop, complaining of the
presence of partizan an judges, of the rejection of their evidence, and of the
proposed constitution of the Mareotic Commission.
25. 71. (Written A.D. 327, but put in as evidence at Tyre by Athanasius
in the matter of Ischyras, after the exposure of the plot concerning Arsenius).
List of Meletian Bishops and Clergy presented to Alexander of Alexandria
shortly before his death, and not containing the name of Ischyras.
26. 78. Protest addressed by the Egptian Bishops to Count Dionysius,
repeating the above complaints (in No. 24), and requesting him to stop the
irregularities.
27. &80. Alexander of Thessalonica to Dionysius, warning him of the
conspiracy against Athanasius, and of the character of the Mission to the Mareotis.
28. 81. Letter of Dionysius to the Council, strongly remonstrating
against their proceedings.
29. 79. Letter of the Egyptian Bishops to Dionysius appealing to the
Emperor.
30--32. Protests made by Egyptian Clergy against the proceedings of the
Mareotic Commission.
30. 73. Clergy of Alexandria to the Commissioners, protesting against the
exclusion of all independent persons from the proceedings.
31. 74, 75. Clergy of the Mareotis to the Council, giving an account of
the facts concerning Ischyras, and of the ex-parte character of the proceedings
of the Commission.
32. 76. The same to the Prefect and other officials of Egypt (dated Sep.
8, 335), denying upon oath the tale of Ischyras, and requesting them to forward
their statement to the Emperor.
(v.) Documents subsequent to the council of tyre ( 84--88).
33. 86 (335). Constantine to the Bishops assembled at Tyre, summoning
them to give an account of their proceedings. 34. 84. The Council of Jerusalem to
the Church of Alexandria, announcing that Arius has been received to communion.
35. 87 (June 17, 337). Constantine II. to the Church of Alexandria (upon
the death of Constantine, whose purpose he claims to be carrying out),
announcing the restoration of Athanasius.
36. 85 (perhaps in 337, but possibly as early as 335). Order by Flavius
Hemerius for the erection of a church for Ischyras.
The two concluding sections (89, 90) of the Apology are a postscript added
during the troubles under Constantius (about 358, see Introd. to Hist. Ar.).
He points to the sufferings which many bishops, including Hosius and Liberius,
had endured rather than surrender his cause, as fresh evidence of their belief
in his innocence. He refuses to see any detraction from the force of this
argument in the fall of the two bishops mentioned.
The importance to the historian of this collection of documents need not
be dwelt upon. If the charges in dispute seem trivial and even grotesque, they
none the less illustrate the temper of the parties concerned, and the character
of the controversy during the very important twenty years which end with the
death of Constans and the reign of Constantius over the undivided Empire.
DEFENCE AGAINST THE ARIANS
INTRODUCTION.
1. I supposed that, after so many proofs of my innocence had been given,
my enemies would have shrunk from further enquiry, and would now have condemned
themselves for their false accusations of others. But as they are not yet
abashed, though they have been so clearly convicted, but, as insensible to shame,
persist in their slanderous reports against me, professing to think that the
whole matter ought to be tried over again (not that they may have judgment passed
on them, for that they avoid, but in order to harass me, and to disturb the
minds of the simple); I therefore thought it necessary to make my defence unto you,
that you may listen to their murmurings no longer, but may denounce their
wickedness and base calumnies. And it is only to you, who are men of sincere minds,
that I offer a defence: as for the contentious, I appeal confidently to the
decisive proofs Which I have against them. For my cause needs no further
judgment; for judgment has already been given, and not once or twice only, but many
times. First of all, it was tried in my own country in an assembly of nearly one
hundred of its Bishops[10]; a second time at Rome, when, in consequence of
letters from Eusebius, both they and we were summoned, and more than fifty Bishops
met[11]; and a third time in the great Council assembled at Sardica by order of
the most religious Emperors Constantius and Constans, when my enemies were
degraded as false accusers, and the sentence that was passed in my favour received
the suffrages of more than three hundred Bishops, out of the provinces of
Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis, Palestine, Arabia, Isauria, Cyprus, Pamphylia, Lycia,
Galatia, Dacia, Moesia, Thrace, Dardania, Macedonia, Epirus, Thessaly, Achaia,
Crete, Dalmatia, Siscia, Pannonia, Noricum, Italy, Picenum, Tuscany, Campania,
Calabria, Apulia, Bruttia, Sicily, the whole of Africa, Sardinia, Spain, Gaul,
and Britain.
Added to these was the testimony[1] of Ursacius and Valens, who had
formerly calumniated me, but afterwards changed their minds, and not only gave their
assent to the sentence that was passed in my favour, but also confessed that
they themselves and the rest of my enemies were false accusers; for men who make
such a change and such a recantation of course reflect upon Eusebius and his
fellows, for with them they had contrived the plot against me. Now after a matter
has been examined and decided on such clear evidence by so many eminent
Bishops, every one will confess that further discussion is unnecessary; else, if an
investigation be instituted at this time, it may be again discussed and again
investigated, and there will be no end to such trifling.
2. Now the decision of so many Bishops was sufficient to confound those
who would still fain pretend some charge against me. But when my enemies also
bear testimony in my favour and against themselves, declaring that the proceedings
against me were a conspiracy, who is there that would not be ashamed to doubt
any longer? The law requires that in the mouth of two or three witnesses[2]
judgments shall be settled, and we have here this great multitude of witnesses in
my favour, with the addition of the proofs afforded by my enemies; so much so
that those who still continue opposed to me no longer attach any importance to
their own arbitrary[3] judgment, but now have recourse to violence, and in the
place of fair reasoning seek to injure[4] those by whom they were exposed. For
this is the chief cause of vexation to them, that the measures they carried on
in secret, contrived by themselves in a corner, have been brought to light and
disclosed by Valens and Ursacius; for they are well aware that their recantation
while it clears those whom they have injured, condemns themselves.
Indeed this led to their degradation in the Council of Sardica, as
mentioned before; and with good reason; for, as the Pharisees of old, when they
undertook the defence of Paul[5], fully exposed the conspiracy which they and the
Jews bad formed against him; and as the blessed David was proved to be persecuted
unjustly when the persecutor confessed, 'I have sinned, my son David[6];' so it
was with these men; being overcome by the truth they made a request, and
delivered it in writing to Julius, Bishop of Rome. They wrote also to me requesting
to be on terms of peace with me, though they have spread such reports
concerning me; and probably even now they are covered with shame, on seeing that those
whom they sought to destroy by the grace of the Lord are still alive.
Consistently also with this conduct they anathematized Arius and his heresy; for knowing
that Eusebius and his fellows had conspired against me in behalf of their own
misbelief, and of nothing else, as soon as they had determined to confess their
calumnies against me, they immediately renounced also that antichristian heresy
for the sake of which they had falsely asserted them.
The following are the letters written in my favour by the Bishops in the
several Councils and first the letter of the Egyptian Bishops.
Encyclical Letter of the Council of Egypt.
The holy Council assembled at Alexandria out of Egypt, the Thebais, Libya,
and Pentapolis, to the Bishops of the Catholic Church everywhere, brethren
beloved and greatly longed for in the Lord, greeting.
3. Dearly beloved brethren, we might have put forth a defence of our
brother Athanasius as respects the conspiracy of Eusebius and his fellows against
him, and complained of his sufferings at their hands, and have exposed all their
false charges, either at the beginning of their conspiracy or upon his arrival
at Alexandria. But circumstances did not permit it then, as you also know; and
lately, after the return of the Bishop Athanasius, we thought that they would
be confounded and covered with shame at their manifest injustice: in consequence
we prevailed with ourselves to remain silent. Since, however, after all his
severe sufferings, after his retirement into Gaul, after his sojourn in a foreign
and far distant country in the place of his own, after his narrow escape from
death through their calumnies, but thanks to the clemency of the
Emperor,--distress which would have satisfied even the most cruel enemy,--they are still
insensible to shame, are again acting insolently against the Church and Athanasius;
and from indignation at his deliverance venture on still more atrocious
schemes against him, and are ready with an accusation, fearless of the words in holy
Scripture[7], 'A false witness shall not be unpunished;' and, 'The mouth that
belieth slayeth the soul;' we therefore are unable longer to hold our peace,
being amazed at their wickedness and at the insatiable love of contention
displayed in their intrigues.
For see, they cease not to disturb the ear of royalty with fresh reports
against us; they cease not to write letters of deadly import, for the
destruction of the Bishop who is the enemy of their impiety. For again have they written
to the Emperors against him; again they wish to conspire against him, charging
him with a butchery which has never taken place; again they wish to shed his
blood, accusing him of a murder that never was committed (for at that former time
would they have murdered him by their calumnies, had we not had a kind
Emperor); again they are urgent, to say the least, that he should be sent into
banishment, while they pretend to lament the miseries of those alleged to have been
exiled by him. They lament before us things that have never been done, and, not
satisfied with what has been done to him, desire to add thereto other and more
cruel treatment. So mild are they and merciful, and of so just a disposition; or
rather (for the truth shall be spoken) so wicked are they and malicious;
obtaining respect through fear and by threats, rather than by their piety and
justice, as becomes Bishops. They have dared in their letters to the Emperors to pour
forth language such as no contentious person would employ even among those
that are without; they have charged him with a number of murders and butcheries,
and that not before a Governor, or any other superior officer, but before the
three Augusti; nor shrink they from any journey however long, provided only all
greater courts may be filled with their accusations. For indeed, dearly beloved,
their business consists in accusations, and that of the most solemn character,
forasmuch as the tribunals to which they make their appeal are the most solemn
of any upon earth. And what other end do they propose by these investigations,
except to move the Emperor to capital punishment?
4. Their own conduct therefore, and not that of Athanasius, is the fittest
subject for lamentation and mourning, and one would more properly lament them,
for such actions ought to be bewailed, since it is written, 'Weep ye not for
the dead, neither bemoan him: but weep sore for him that goeth away, for he
shall return no more[8].' For their whole letter contemplates nothing but death;
and their endeavour is to kill, whenever they may be permitted, or if not, to
drive into exile. And this they were permitted to do by the most religious father
of the Emperors, who gratified their fury by the banishment of Athanasius[9],
instead of his death. Now that this is not the conduct even of ordinary
Christians, scarcely even of heathens, much less of Bishops, who profess to teach
others righteousness, we suppose that your Christian consciences must at once
perceive. How can they forbid others to accuse their brethren, who themselves become
their accusers, and that to the Emperors? How can they teach compassion for the
misfortunes of others, who cannot rest satisfied even with our banishment? For
there was confessedly a general sentence of banishment against us Bishops, and
we all looked upon ourselves as banished men: and now again we consider
ourselves as restored with Athanasius to our native places, and instead of our former
lamentations and mourning over him, as having the greatest encouragement and
grace,-which may the Lord continue to us, nor suffer Eusebius and his fellows to
destroy?
Even if their charges against him were true, here is a certain charge
against them, that against the precept of Christianity, and after his banishment
and trials, they have assaulted him again, and accuse him of murder, and
butchery, and other crimes, which they sound in the royal ears against the Bishops. But
how manifold is their wickedness, and what manner of men think you them, when
every word they speak is false, every charge they bring a calumny, and there is
no truth whatever either in their mouths or their writings! Let us then at
length enter upon these matters, and meet their last charges. This will prove,
that in their former representations in the Council[1] and at the trial their
conduct was dishonourable, or rather their words untrue, besides exposing them for
what they have now advanced.
5. We are indeed ashamed to make any defence against such charges. But
since our reckless accusers lay hold of any charge, and allege that murders and
butchcries were committed after the return of Athanasius, we beseech you to bear
with our answer though it be somewhat long; for circumstances constrain as. No
murder has been committed either by Athanasius or on his account, since our
accusers, as we said before, compel us to enter upon this humiliating defence.
Slaughter and imprisonment are foreign to our Church. No one did Athanasius commit
into the hands of the executioner; and the prison, so far as he was concerned,
was never disturbed. Our sanctuaries are now, as they have always been, pure,
and honoured only with the Blood of Christ and His pious worship. Neither
Presbyter nor Deacon was destroyed by Athanasius; he perpetrated no murder, he
caused the banishment of no one. Would that they had never caused the like to him,
nor given him actual experience of it ! No one here has been banished on his
account; no one at all except Athanasius himself, the Bishop of Alexandria, whom
they banished, and whom, now that he is restored, they again seek to entangle in
the same or even a more cruel plot than before, setting their tongues to speak
all manner of false and deadly words against him.
For, behold, they now attribute to him the acts of the magistrates; and
although they plainly confess in their letter that the Prefect of Egypt passed
sentence upon certain persons, they now are not ashamed to impute this sentence
to Athanasius; and that, though he had not at the time entered Alexandria, but
was yet on his return from his place of exile. Indeed he was then in Syria;
since we must needs adduce in defence his length of way from home, that a man may
not be responsible for the actions of a Governor or Prefect of Egypt. But
supposing Athanasius had been in Alexandria, what were the proceedings of the Prefect
to Athanasius? However, he was not even in the country; and what the Prefect
of Egypt did was not done on ecclesiastical grounds, but for reasons which you
will learn from the records, which, after we understood what they had written,
we made diligent enquiry for, and have transmitted to you. Since then they now
raise a cry against certain things which were never done either by him or for
him, as though they had certainly taken place, and testify against such evils as
though they were assured of their existence; let them inform us from what
Council they obtained their knowledge of them, from what proofs, and from what
judicial investigation? But if they have no such evidence to bring forward, and
nothing but their own mere assertion, we leave it to you to consider as regards
their former charges also, how the things took place, and why they so speak of
them. In truth, it is nothing but calumny, and a plot of our enemies, and a temper
of ungovernable mood, and an impiety in behalf of the Arian madmen which is
frantic against true godliness, and desires to root out the orthodox, so that
henceforth the advocates of impiety may preach without fear whatever doctrines
they please. The history of the matter is as follows:--
6. When Arius, from whom the heresy of the Arian madmen has its name, was
cast out of the Church for his impiety by Bishop Alexander, of blessed memory,
Eusebius and his fellows, who are the disciples and partners of his impiety,
considering themselves also to have been ejected, wrote frequently to Bishop
Alexander, beseeching him not to leave the heretic Arius out of the Church[2]. But
when Alexander in his piety towards Christ refused to admit that impious man,
they directed their resentment against Athanasius, who was then a Deacon,
because in their busy enquiries they had heard that he was much in the familiarity of
Bishop Alexander, and much honoured by him. And their hatred of him was
greatly increased after they had experience of his piety towards Christ, in the
Council assembled at Nicaea[3], wherein he spoke boldly against the impiety of the
Arian madmen. But when God raised him to the Episcopate, their long-cherished
malice burst forth into a flame, and fearing his orthodoxy and resistance of
their impiety, they (and especially Eusebius[4], who was smitten with a
consciousness of his own evil doings), engaged in all manner of treacherous designs
against him. They prejudiced the Emperor against him; they frequently threatened him
with Councils; and at last assembled at Tyre; and to this day they cease not
to write against him, and are so implacable that they even find fault with his
appointment to the Episcopate[5], taking every means of shewing their enmity
and hatred towards him, and spreading false reports for the sole purpose of
thereby vilifying his character.
However, the very misrepresentations which they now are making do but
convict their former statements of being falsehoods, and a mere conspiracy against
him. For they say, that 'after the death of Bishop Alexander, a certain few
having mentioned the name of Athanasius, six or seven Bishops elected him
clandestinely in a secret place:' and this is what they wrote to the Emperors, having
no scruple about asserting the greatest falsehoods. Now that the whole multitude
and all the people of the Catholic Church assembled together as with one mind
and body, and cried, shouted, that Athanasius should be Bishop of their Church,
made this the subject of their public prayers to Christ, and conjured us to
grant it for many days and nights, neither departing themselves from the Church,
nor suffering us to do so; of all this we are witnesses, and so is the whole
city, and the province too. Not a word did they speak against him, as these
persons represented, but gave him the most excellent titles they could devise,
calling him good, pious, Christian, an ascetic[5], a genuine Bishop. And that he was
elected by a majority of our body in the sight and with the acclamations of
all the people, we who elected him also testify, who are surely more credible
witnesses than those who were not present, and now spread these false accounts.
But yet Eusebius finds fault with the appointment of Athanasius,--he who
perhaps never received any appointment to his office at all; or if he did, has
himself rendered it invalid[6]. For he had first the See of Berytus, but leaving
that he came to Nicomedia. He left the one contrary to the law, and contrary
to the law invaded the other; having deserted his own without affection, and
holding possession of another's without reason; he lost his love for the first in
his lust for another, without even keeping to that which he obtained at the
prompting of his lust. For, behold, withdrawing himself from the second, again he
takes possession of another's[6a], casting an evil eye all around him upon the
cities of other men, and thinking that godliness[7] consists in wealth and in
the greatness of cities, and making light of the heritage of God to which he had
been appointed; not knowing that 'where' even 'two or three are gathered in
the name of the' Lord, 'there' is the Lord 'in the midst of them;' not
considering the words of the Apostle, 'I will not boast in another man's labours;' not
perceiving the charge which he has given, 'Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not
to be loosed.' For if this expression applies to a wife, how much more does it
apply to a Church, and to the same Episcopate; to which whosoever is bound ought
not to seek another, lest he prove an adulterer according to holy Scripture.
7. But though conscious of these his own misdoings, he has boldly
undertaken to arraign the appointment of Athanasius, to which honourable testimony has
been borne by all, and he ventures to reproach him with his deposition, though
he has been deposed himself, and has a standing proof of his deposition in the
appointment of another in his room. How could either he or Theognius[8] depose
another, after they had been deposed themselves, which is sufficiently proved
by the appointment of others in their room? For you know very well that there
were appointed instead of them Amphion to Nicomedia and Chrestus to Nicaea, in
consequence of their own impiety and connection with the Arian madmen, who were
rejected by the Ecumenic Council But while they desire to set aside that true
Council, they endeavour to give that name to their own unlawful combination[9];
while they are unwilling that the decrees of the Council should be enforced,
they desire to enforce their own decisions; and they use the name of a Council,
while they refuse to submit themselves to one so great as this. Thus they care
not for Councils, but only pretend to do so in order that they may root out the
orthodox, and annul the decrees of the true and great Council against the
Arians, in support of whom, both now and heretofore, they have ventured to assert
these falsehoods against the Bishop Athanasius. For their former statements
resembled those they now falsely make, viz., that disorderly meetings were held at
his entrance[10], with lamentation and mourning, the people indignantly refusing
to receive him. Now such was not the case, but, quite the contrary, joy and
cheerfulness prevailed, and the people ran together, hastening to obtain the
desired sight of him. The churches were full of rejoicings, and thanksgivings were
offered up to the Lord everywhere; and all the Ministers and Clergy beheld him
with such feelings, that their souls were possessed with delight, and they
esteemed that the happiest day of their lives. Why need we mention the inexpressible
joy that prevailed among us Bishops, for we have already said that we counted
ourselves to have been partakers in his sufferings?
8. Now this being confessedly the truth of the matter, although it is very
differently represented by them, what weight can be attached to that Council
or trial of which they make their boast? Since they presume thus to interfere in
a case which they did not witness, which they have not examined, and for which
they did not meet, and to write as though they were assured of the truth of
their statements, how can they claim credit respecting these matters for the
consideration of which they say that they did meet together? Will it not rather be
believed that they have acted both in the one case and in the other out of
enmity to us? For what kind of a Council of Bishops was then held? Was it an
assembly which aimed at the truth? Was not almost every one among them our enemy[1]?
Did not the attack of Eusebius and his fellows upon us proceed from their zeal
for the Arian madness? Did they not urge on the others of their party? Have we
not always written against them as professing the doctrines of Arius? Was not
Eusebius of Caesarea in Palestine accused by our confessors of sacrificing to
idols[2]? Was not George proved to have been deposed by the blessed Alexander[3]?
Were not they charged with various offences, some with this, some with that?
How then could such men entertain the purpose of holding a meeting against
us? How can they have the boldness to call that a Council, at which a Count
presided, which an executioner attended, and where an usher[4] instead of the
Deacons of the Church introduced us into Court; and where the Count only spoke,
and all present held their peace, or rather obeyed his directions [5]? The
removal of those Bishops who seemed to deserve it was prevented at his desire; and
when he gave the order we were dragged about by soldiers;--or rather Eusebius and
his fellows gave the order, and he was subservient to their will. In short,
dearly beloved, what kind of Council was that, the object of which was banishment
and murder at the pleasure of the Emperor? And of what nature were their
charges?--for here is matter of still greater astonishment. There was one Arsenius
whom they declared to have been murdered; and they also complained that a
chalice belonging to the sacred mysteries had been broken.
Now Arsenius is alive, and prays to be admitted to our communion. He waits
for no other testimony to prove that he is still living, but himself confesses
it, writing in his own person to our brother Athanasius, whom they positively
asserted to be his murderer. The impious wretches were not ashamed to accuse
him of having murdered a man who was at a great distance from him, being
separated by so great a distance, whether by sea or land, and whose abode at that time
no one knew. Nay, they even had the boldness to remove him out of sight, and
place him in concealment, though he had suffered no injury; and, if it had been
possible, they would have transported him to another world, nay, or have taken
him from life in earnest, so that either by a true or false statement of his
murder they might in good earnest destroy Athanasius. But thanks to divine
Providence for this also which permitted them not to succeed in their injustice, but
presented Arsenius[6] alive to the eyes of all men, who has clearly proved their
conspiracy and calumnies. He does not withdraw from us as murderers, nor hate
us as having injured him (for indeed he has suffered no evil at all); but he
desires to hold communion with us; he wishes to be numbered t among us, and has
written to this effect.
9. Nevertheless they laid their plot against Athanasius, accusing him of
having murdered a person who was still alive; and those same men are the
authors of his banishment[7]. For it was not the father of the Emperors, but their
calumnies, that sent him into exile. Consider whether this is not the truth.
When nothing was discovered to the prejudice of our fellow-minister Athanasius,
but still the Count threatened him with violence, and was very zealous against
him, the Bishop[8] fled from this violence and went up[9] to the most religious
Emperor, where he protested against the Count and their conspiracy against him,
and requested either that a lawful Council of Bishops might be assembled, or
that the Emperor would himself receive his defence concerning the charges they
brought against him. Upon this the Emperor wrote in anger, summoning them before
him, and declaring that he would hear the cause himself, and for that purpose
he also ordered a Council to be held. Whereupon Eusebius and his fellows went
up and falsely charged Athanasius, not with the same offences which they had
published against him at Tyre, but with an intention of detaining the vessels
laden with corn, as though Athanasius had been the man to pretend that he could
stop the exports of corn from Alexandria to Constantinople[10].
Certain of our friends were present at the palace with Athanasius, and
heard the threats of the Emperor upon receiving this report And when Athanasius
cried out upon the calumny, and positively declared that it was not true, (for
how, he argued, should he a poor man, and in a private station, be able to do
such a thing?) Eusebius did not hesitate publicly to repeat the charge, and swore
that Athanasius was a rich man, and powerful, and able to do anything; in order
that it might thence be supposed that he had used this language. Such was the
accusation these venerable Bishops proffered against him. But the grace of God
proved superior to their wickedness, for it moved the pious Emperor to mercy,
who instead of death passed upon him the sentence of banishment. Thus their
calumnies, and nothing else, were the cause of this. For the Emperor, in the letter
which he previously wrote, complained of their conspiracy, censured their
machinations, and condemned the Meletians as unscrupulous and deserving of
execration; in short, expressed himself in the severest terms concerning them. For he
was greatly moved when he heard the story of the dead alive; he was moved at
hearing of murder in the case of one alive, and not deprived of life. We have sent
you the letter.
10. But these marvellous men, Eusebius and his fellows, to make a show of
refuting the truth of the case, and the statements contained in this letter,
put forward the name of a Council, and ground its proceedings upon the authority
of the Emperor. Hence the attendance of a Count at their meeting, and the
soldiers as guards of the Bishops, and royal letters compelling the attendance of
any persons whom they required. But observe here the strange character of their
machinations, and the inconsistency of their bold measures, so that by some
means or other they may take Athanasius away from us. For if as Bishops they
claimed for themselves alone the judgment of the case, what need was there for the
attendance of a Count and soldiers? or how was it that they assembled under the
sanction of royal letters? Or if they required the Emperor's countenance and
wished to derive their authority from him why were they then annulling his
judgment? and when he declared in the letter which he wrote, that the Meletians were
calumniators, unscrupulous, and that Athanasius was most innocent, and made
much stir about the pretended murder of the living, how was it that they
determined that the Meletians had spoken the truth, and that Athanasius was guilty of
the offence; and were not ashamed to make the living dead, living both after the
Emperor's judgment, and at the time when they met together, and who even until
this; day is amongst us? So much concerning the case of Arsenius.
11. And as for the cup belonging to the mysteries, what was it, or where
was it broken by Macarius? for this is the report which they spread up and down.
But as for Athanasius, even his accusers would not have ventured to blame him,
had they not been suborned by them. However, they attribute the origin of the
offence to him; although it ought not to be imputed even to Macarius who is
clear of it. And they are not ashamed to parade the sacred mysteries before
Catechumens, and worse than that, even before heathens[1]: whereas, they ought to
attend to what is written, 'It is good to keep close the secret of a king[2];'
and as the Lord has charged us, 'Give not that which is holy unto the dogs,
neither cast ye your pearls before swine[3].' We ought not then to parade the holy
mysteries before the uninitiated, lest the heathen in their ignorance deride
them, and the Catechumens being over-curious be offended. However, what was the
cup, and where and before whom was it broken? It is the Meletians who make the
accusation, who are not worthy of the least credit, for they have been
schismatics and enemies of the Church, not of a recent date, but from the times of the
blessed Peter, Bishop and Martyr[4]. They formed a conspiracy against Peter
himself; they calumniated his successor Achillas; they accused Alexander even before
the Emperor; and being thus well versed in these arts, they have now
transferred their enmity to Athanasius, acting altogether in accordance with their
former wickedness. For as they slandered those that have been before him, so now
they have slandered him. But their calumnies and false accusations have never
prevailed against him until now, that they have got Eusebius and his fellows for
their assistants and patrons, on account of the impiety which these have adopted
from the Arian madmen, which has led them to conspire against many Bishops, and
among the rest Athanasius.
Now the place where they say the cup was broken, was not a Church; there
was no Presbyter in occupation of the place; and the day on which they say that
Macarius did the deed, was not the Lord's day. Since then there was no church
there; since there was no one to perform the sacred office; and since the day
did not require the use of its; what was this cup belonging to the mysteries, and
when, or where was it broken? There are many cups, it is plain, both in
private houses, and in the public market; and if a person breaks one of them, he is
not guilty of impiety. But the cup which belongs to the mysteries, and which if
it be broken intentionally, makes the perpetrator of the deed an impious
person, is found only among those who lawfully preside. This is the only description
that can be given of this kind of cup; there is none other; this you legally
give to the people to drink; this you have received according to the canon of the
Church[6]; this belongs only to those who preside over the Catholic Church.
for to you only it appertains to administer the Blood of Christ, and to none
besides. But as he who breaks the cup belonging to the mysteries is an impious
person, much more impious is he who treats the Blood of Christ with contumely: and
he does so who ' does this[7] ' contrary to the rule of the Church. (We say
this, not as if a cup even of the schismatics was broken by Macarius, for there
was no cup there at all; how should there be? where there was neither Lord's
house nor any the belonging to the Church, nay, it was not the time of the
celebration of the mysteries). Now such a person is the notorious Ischyras, who was
never appointed to his office by the Church, and when Alexander admitted the
Presbyters that had been ordained by Meletius, he was not even numbered amongst
them; and therefore did not receive ordination even from that quarter.
12. By what means then did Ischyras become a Presbyter? who was it that
ordained him? was it Colluthus? for this is the only supposition that remains.
But it is well known and no one has any doubt about the matter that Colluthus
died a Presbyter, and that every ordination of his was invalid, and that all that
were ordained by him during the schism were reduced to the condition of laymen,
and in that rank appear in the congregation. How then can it be believed that
a private person, occupying a private house had in his possession a sacred
chalice? But the truth is, they gave the name of Presbyter at the time to a private
person, and gratified him with this title to support him in his iniquitous
conduct towards us; and now as the reward of his accusations they procure for him
the erection of a Church[8]. So that this man had then no Church; but as the
reward of his malice and subserviency to them in accusing us, he receives now
what he had not before; nay, perhaps they have even remunerated his services with
the Episcopate, for so he goes about reporting, and accordingly behaves towards
us with great insolence. Thus are such rewards as these now bestowed by
Bishops upon accusers and calumniators though indeed it is reasonable, in the case of
an accomplice, that as they have made him a partner in their proceedings, so
they should also make him their associate in their own Episcopate. But this is
not all; give ear yet further to their proceedings at that time.
13. Being unable to prevail against the truth, though they bad thus set
themselves in array against it, and Ischyras having proved nothing at Tyre, but
being shewn to be a calumniator, and the calumny ruining their plot, they defer
proceedings for flesh evidence, and profess that they are going to send to the
Mareotis certain of their party to enquire diligently into the matter.
Accordingly they dispatched secretly, with the assistance of the civil power, persons
to whom we openly objected on many accounts, as being of the party of Arius, and
therefore our enemies; namely, Diognius[9], Maris, Theodorus, Macedonius, and
two others, young both in years and mind[9], Ursacius and Valens from Pannonia;
who, after they had undertaken this long journey for the purpose of sitting in
judgment upon their enemy, set out again from Tyre for Alexandria. They did
not shrink from becoming witnesses themselves, although they were the judges, but
openly adopted every means of furthering their design, and undertook any
labour or journey whatsoever in order to bring to a successful issue the conspiracy
which was in progress. They left the Bishop Athanasius detained in a foreign
country while they themselves entered their enemy's city, as if to have their
revel both against his Church and against his people. And what was more outrageous
still, they took with them the accuser Ischyras, but would not permit
Macarius, the accused person, to accompany them, but left him in custody at Tyre. For
'Macarius the Presbyter of Alexandria' was made answerable for the charge far
and near.
14. They therefore entered Alexandria alone with the accuser, their
partner in lodging, board, and cup; and taking 'with them Philagrius the Prefect of
Egypt they proceeded to the Mareotis, and there carried on the so-called
investigation by themselves, all their own way, with the forementioned person.
Although the Presbyters frequently begged that they might be present, they would not
permit them. The Presbyters both of the city and of the whole country desired to
attend, that they might detect who and whence the persons were who were
suborned by Ischyras. But they forbade the Ministers to be present, while they
carried on the examination concerning church, cup, table, and the holy things, before
the heathen; nay, worse than that, they summoned heathen witnesses during the
enquiry concerning a cup belonging to the mysteries; and those persons who they
affirmed were taken out of the way by Athanasius by summons of the
Receiver-general, and they knew not where in the world they were, these same individuals
they brought forward before themselves and the Prefect only, and avowedly used
their testimony, whom they affirmed without shame to have been secreted by the
Bishop Athanasius.
But here too their only object is to effect his death, and so they again
pretend that persons are dead who are still alive, following the same method
they adopted in the case of Arsenius. For the men are living, and are to be seen
in their own country; but to you who are at a great distance from the spot they
make a great stir about the matter as though they had disappeared, in order
that, as the evidence is so far removed from you, they may falsely accuse our
brother-minister, as though he used violence and the civil power; whereas they
themselves have in all respects acted by means of that power and the countenance of
others. For their proceedings in the Mareotis were parallel to those at Tyre;
and as there a Count attended with military assistance, and would permit
nothing either to be said or done contrary to their pleasure, so here also the
Prefect of Egypt was present with a band of men, frightening all the members of the
Church, and permitting no one to give true testimony. And what was the strangest
thing of all, the persons who came, whether as judges or witnesses, or, what
was more likely, in order to serve their own purposes and those of Eusebius,
lived in the same place with the accuser, even in his house, and there seemed to
carry on the investigation as they pleased.
15. We suppose you are not ignorant what outrages they committed at
Alexandria; for they are reported everywhere. Naked swords[10] were at work against
the holy virgins and brethren scourges were at work against their persons,
esteemed honourable in the sight of God, so that their feet were lamed by the
stripes, whose souls are whole and sound in purity and all good works[1]. The trades
were excited against them; and the heathen multitude was set to strip them
naked, to beat them, wantonly to insult them, and to threaten them with their
altars and sacrifices. And one coarse fellow, as though license had now been given
them by the Prefect in order to gratify the Bishops, took hold of a virgin by
the hand, and dragged her towards an altar that happened to be near, imitating
the practice of compelling to offer sacrifice in time of persecution. When this
was done, the virgins took to flight, and a shout of laughter was raised by the
heathen against the Church; the Bishops being in the place, and occupying the
very house where this was going on; and from which, in order to obtain favour
with them, the virgins were assaulted with naked swords, and were exposed to all
kinds of danger, and insult, and wanton violence. And this treatment they
received on a fast-day[2], and at the hands of persons who themselves were feasting
with the Bishops indoors.
16. Foreseeing these things, and reflecting that the entrance of enemies
into a place is no ordinary calamity, we protested against this commission. And
Alexander[3], Bishop of Thessalonica, considering the same, wrote to the people
residing there, discovering the conspiracy, and testifying of the plot. They
indeed reckon him to be one of themselves, and account him a partner in their
designs; but they only prove thereby the violence they have exercised towards
him. For even the profligate Ischyras himself was only induced by fear and
violence to proceed in the matter, and was obliged by force to undertake the
accusation. As a proof of this, he wrote himself to our brother Athanasius[4],
confessing that nothing of the kind that was alleged had taken place there, but that he
was suborned to make a false statement. This declaration be made, though he was
never admitted by Athanasius as a Presbyter, nor received such a title of
grace from him, nor was entrusted by way of recompense with the erection of a
Church, nor expected the bribe of a Bishopric; all of which he obtained from them in
return for under, taking the accusation. Moreover, his whole family held
communion with us[5], which they would not have done had they been injured in the
slightest degree.
17. Now to prove that these things are facts and not mere assertions, we
have the testimony[6] of all the Presbyters of the Mareotis[7], who always
accompany the Bishop in his visitations, and who also wrote at the time against
Ischyras. But neither those of them who came to Tyre were allowed to declare the
truth[8], nor could those who remained in the Mareotis obtain permission to
refute the calumnies of Ischyras[9]. The copies also of the letters of Alexander,
and of the Presbyters, and of Ischyras will prove the same thing. We have sent
also the letter of the father of the Emperors, in which he expresses his
indignation that the murder of Arsenius was charged upon any one while the man was
still alive; as also his astonishment at the variable and inconsistent character of
their accusations with respect to the cup i since at one time they accused the
Presbyter Macarius, at another the Bishop Athanasius, of having broken it with
his hands. He declares also on the one hand that the Meletians are
calumniators, and on the other that Athanasius is perfectly innocent.
And are not the Meletians calumniators, and above all John[10], who after
coming into the Church, and communicating with us, after condemning himself,
and no longer taking any part in the proceedings respecting the cup, when he saw
Eusebius and his fellows zealously supporting the Arian madmen, though they had
not the daring to co-operate with them openly, but were attempting to employ
others as their masks, undertook a character, as an actor in the heathen
theatres[1]? The subject of the drama was a contest of Arians; the real design of the
piece being their success, but John and his partizans being put on the stage
and playing the parts, in order that under colour of these, the supporters of the
Arians in the garb of judges might drive away the enemies of their impiety,
firmly establish their impious doctrines, and bring the Arians into the Church.
And those who wish to drive out true religion strive all they can to prevail by
irreligion; they who have chosen the part of that impiety which wars against
Christ, endeavour to destroy the enemies thereof, as though they were impious
persons; and they impute to us the breaking of the cup, for the purpose of making
it appear that Athanasins, equally with themselves, is guilty of impiety
towards Christ.
For what means this mention of a cup belonging to the mysteries by them?
Whence comes this religious regard for the cup among those who support impiety
towards Christ? Whence comes it that Christ's cup is known to them who know not
Christ? How can they who profess to honour that cup, dishonour the God of the
cup? or how can they who lament over the cup, seek to murder the Bishop who
celebrates the mysteries therewith? for they would have murdered him, had it been
in their power. And how can they who lament the loss of the throne that was
Episcopally covered[2], seek to destroy the Bishop that sat upon it, to the end
that both the throne may be without its Bishop, and that the people may be
deprived of godly doctrine? It was not then the cup, nor the murder, nor any of those
portentous deeds they talk about, that induced them to act thus; but the
forementioned heresy of the Arians, for the sake of which they conspired against
Athanasius other Bishops, and still continue to wage war against the Church.
Who are they that have really been the cause of murders and banishments?
Is it not these? Who are they that, availing themselves of external support,
conspire against the Bishops? Are not Eusebius and his fellows the men, and not
Athanasius, as they say in their letters? Both he and others have suffered at
their hands. Even at the time of which we speak, four Presbyters s of
Alexandria, though they had not even proceeded to Tyre, were banished by their means.
Who then are they whose conduct calls for tears and lamentations? Is it not they,
who after they have been guilty of one course of persecution, do not scruple
to add to it a second, but have recourse to all manner of falsehood, in order
that they may destroy a Bishop who will not give way to their impious heresy?
Hence arises the enmity of Eusebius and his fellows; hence their proceedings at
Tyre; hence their pretended trials; hence also now the letters which they have
written even without any trial, expressing the utmost confidence in their
statements; hence their columnies before the father of the Emperors, and before the
most religious Emperors themselves.
18. For it is necessary that you should know what is now reported to the
prejudice of our fellow-minister Athanasius, in order that you may thereby be
led to condemn their wickedness, and may perceive that they desire nothing else
but to murder him. A quantity of corn was given by the father of the Emperors
for the support of certain widows, partly of Libya, and partly certain out of
Egypt. They have all received it up to this time, Athanasius getting nothing
therefrom, but the trouble of assisting them. But now, although the recipients
themselves make no complaint, but acknowledge that they have received it, Athanasius
has been accused of selling all the corn, and appropriating the profits to his
own use: and the Emperor wrote to this effect about it, charging him with the
offence in consequence of the calumnies which had been raised against him. Now
who are they which have raised these calumnies? Is it not those who after they
have been guilty of one course of persecution, scruple not to set on foot
another? Who are the authors of those letters which are said to have come from the
Emperor? Are not the Arians, who are so zealous against Athanasius, and scruple
not to speak and write anything against him? No one would pass over persons who
have acted as they have done, in order to entertain suspicion of others. Nay,
the proof of their calumny appears to be most evident for they are anxious
under cover of it, to take away the corn from the Church, and to give it to the
Arians. And this circumstance more than any other, brings the matter home to the
authors of this design and their principals, who scrupled neither to set on foot
a charge of murder against Athanasius, as a base means of prejudicing the
Emperor against him, nor yet to take away from the Clergy of the Church the
subsistence of the poor, in order that in fact they might make gain for the heretics.
19. We have sent also the testimony of our fellow-ministers in Libya,
Pentapolis, and Egypt, from which likewise you may learn the false accusations
which have been brought against Athanasius. And these things they do, in order
that, the professors of true godliness being henceforth induced by fear to remain
quiet, the heresy of the impious Arians may be brought in in its stead. But
thanks be to your piety, dearly beloved, that you have frequently anathematized the
Arians in your letters, and have never given them admittance into the Church.
The exposure of Eusebius and his fellows is also easy and ready at hand. For
behold, after their former letters concerning the Arians, of which also we have
sent you copies, they now openly stir up the Arian madmen against the Church,
though the whole Catholic Church has anathematized them; they have appointed a
Bishop[1] over them; they distract the Churches with threats and alarms, that
they may gain assistants in their impiety in every part. Moreover, they send
Deacons to the Arian madmen, who openly join their assemblies; they write letters to
them, and receive answers from them, thus making schisms in the Church, and
holding communion with them; and they send to every part, commending their
heresy, and repudiating the Church, as you will perceive from the letters they have
addressed to the Bishop of Rome[2] and perhaps to yourselves also. You perceive
therefore, dearly beloved, that these things are not undeserving of vengeance:
they are indeed dreadful and alien from the doctrine of Christ.
Wherefore we have assembled together, and have written to you, to request
of your Christian wisdom to receive this our declaration and sympathize with
our brother Athanasius, and to shew your indignation against Eusebius and his
fellows who have essayed such things, in order that such malice and wickedness
may no longer prevail against the Church. We call upon you to be the avengers
of such injustice, reminding you of the injunction of the Apostle, 'Put away
from among yourselves that wicked person[3].' Wicked indeed is their conduct, and
unworthy of your communion. Wherefore give no further heed to them, though
they should again write to you against the Bishop Athanasius (for all that
proceeds from them is false); not even though they subscribe their letter with
names[4] of Egyptian Bishops. For it is evident that it will not be we who write, but
the Meletians[5], who have ever been schismatics, and who even unto this day
make disturbances and raise factions in the Churches. For they ordain improper
persons, and all but heathens; and they are guilty of such actions as we are
ashamed to set down in writing, but which you may learn from those whom we have
sent unto you, who will also deliver to you our letter.
20. Thus wrote the Bishops of Egypt to all Bishops, and to Julius, Bishop
of Rome.
CHAPTER II.
Letter of Julius to the Eusebians at Antioch.
Eusebius and his fellows wrote also to Julius, and thinking to frighten
me, requested him to call a council, and to be himself the judge, if he so
pleased[6]. When therefore I went up to Rome, Julius wrote to Eusebius and his
fellows as was suitable, and sent moreover two of his own Presbyters[7], Elpidius and
Philoxenus[8]. But they, when they heard of me, were thrown into confusion, as
not expecting my going up thither; and they declined the proposed Council,
alleging unsatisfactory reasons for so doing, but in truth they were afraid lest
the things should be proved against them which Valens and Ursacius afterwards
confessed[9]. However, more than fifty Bishops assembled, in the place where the
Presbyter Vito held his congregation; and they acknowledged my defence, and
gave me the confirmation[1] both of their communion and their love. On the other
hand, they expressed great indignation against Eusebius and his fellows, and
requested that Julius would write to the following effect to those of their number
who had written to him. Which accordingly he did, and sent it by the hand of
Count Gabianus.
The Letter of Julius.
Julius to his dearly beloved brethren[2], Danius, Flacillus, Narcissus,
Eusebius, Maris, Macedonius, Theodorus, and their friends, who have written to me
from Antioch, sends health in the Lord.
21. I have read your letter[3] which was brought to me by my Presbyters
Elpidius and Philoxenus, and I am surprised to find that, whereas I wrote to you
in charity and with conscious sincerity, you have replied to me in an
unbecoming and contentious temper; for the pride and arrogance of the writers is plainly
exhibited in that letter. Yet such feelings are inconsistent with the
Christian faith; for what was written in a charitable spirit ought likewise to be
answered in a spirit of charity and not of contention. And was it not a token of
charity to send Presbyters to sympathize with them that are in suffering, and to
desire those who had written to me to come thither, that the questions at issue
might obtain a speedy settlement, and all things be duly ordered, so that our
brethren might no longer be exposed to suffering, and that you might escape
further calumny? But something seems to shew that your temper is such, as to force
us to conclude that even in the terms in which you appeared to pay honour to
us, you have expressed yourselves under the disguise of irony. The Presbyters
also whom we sent to you, and who ought to have returned rejoicing, did on the
contrary return sorrowful on account of the proceedings they had witnessed among
you. And I, when I had read your letter, after much consideration, kept it to
myself, thinking that after all some of you would come, and there would be no
need to bring it forward, lest if it should be openly exhibited, it should grieve
many of our brethren here. But when no one arrived, and it became necessary
that the letter should be produced, I declare to you, they were all astonished,
and were hardly able to believe that such a letter had been written by you at
all; for it is expressed in terms of contention rather than of charity.
Now if the author of it wrote with an ambition of exhibiting his power of
language, such a practice surely is more suitable for other subjects: in
ecclesiastical matters, it is not a display of eloquence that is needed, but the
observance of Apostolic Canons, and an earnest care not to offend one of the little
ones of the Church. For it were better for a man, according to the word of the
Church, that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned
in the sea, than that he should offend even one of the little ones[4]. But if
such a letter was written, because certain persons have been aggrieved on
account of their meanness of spirit towards one another (for I will not impute it to
all); it were better not to entertain any such feeling of offence at all, at
least not to let the sun go down upon their vexation; and certainly not to give
it room to exhibit itself in writing.
22. Yet what has been done that is a just cause of vexation? or in what
respect was my letter to you such? Was it, that I invited you to be present at a
council? You ought rather to have received the proposal with joy. Those who
have confidence in their proceedings, or as they choose to term them, in their
decisions, are not wont to be angry, if such decision is inquired into by others;
they rather shew all boldness, seeing that if they have given a just decision,
it can never prove to be the reverse. The Bishops who assembled in the great
Council of Nicaea agreed, not without the will of God, that the decisions of one
council should be examined in another[5], to the end that the judges, having
before their eyes that other trial which was to follow, might be led to
investigate matters with the utmost caution, and that the parties concerned in their
sentence might have assurance that the judgment they received was just, and not
dictated by the enmity of their former judges. Now if you are unwilling that such
a practice should be adopted in your own case, though it is of ancient
standing, and has been noticed and recommended by the great Council, your refusal is
not becoming; for it is unreasonable that a custom which had once obtained in
the Church, and been established by councils, should be set aside by a few
individuals.
For a further reason they cannot justly take offence in this point. When
the persons whom you, Eusebius and his fellows, dispatched with your letters, I
mean Macarius the Presbyter, and Martyrius and Hesychius the Deacons, arrived
here, and found that they were unable to withstand the arguments of the
Presbyters who came from Athanasius, but were confuted and exposed on all sides, they
then requested me to call a Council together, and to write to Alexandria to the
Bishop Athanasius, and also to Eusebius and his fellows, in order that a just
judgment might be given in presence of all parties. And they undertook in that
case to prove all the charges which had been brought against Athanasius. For
Martyrius and Hesychius had been publicly refuted by us, and the Presbyters of the
Bishop Athanasius had withstood them with great confidence: indeed, if one
must tell the truth, Martyrius and his fellows had been utterly overthrown; and
this it was that led them to desire that a Council might be held. Now supposing
that they had not desired a Council, but that I had been the person to propose
it, in discouragement of those who had written to me, and for the sake of our
brethren who complain that they have suffered injustice; even in that case the
proposal would have been reasonable and just, for it is agreeable to
ecclesiastical practice, and well pleasing to God. But when those persons, whom you,
Eusebius and his fellows, considered to be trustworthy, when even they wished me to
call the brethren together, it was inconsistent in the parties invited to take
offence, when they ought rather to have shewn all readiness to be present. These
considerations shew that the display of anger in the offended persons is
petulant, and the refusal of those who decline to meet the Council is unbecoming,
and has a suspicious appearance. Does any one find fault, if he sees that done by
another, which he would allow if done by himself? If, as you write, each
council has an irreversible force, and he who has given judgment on a matter is
dishonoured, if his sentence is examined by others; consider, dearly beloved, who
are they that dishonour councils? who are setting aside the decisions of former
judges? Not to inquire at present into every individual case, lest I should
appear to press too heavily on certain parties, the last instance that has
occurred, and which every one who hears it must shudder at, will be sufficient in
proof of the others which I omit.
23. The Arians who were excommunicated for their impiety by Alexander, the
late Bishop of Alexandria, of blessed memory, were not only proscribed by the
brethren in the several cities, but were also anathematised by the whole body
assembled together in the great Council of Nicaea. For theirs was no ordinary
offence, neither had they sinned against man, but against our Lord Jesus Christ
Himself, the Son of the living God. And yet these persons who were proscribed by
the whole world, and branded in every Church, are said now to have been
admitted to communion again; which I think even you ought to hear with indignation.
Who then are the parties who dishonour a council? Are not they who have set at
nought the votes of the Three hundred[6], and have preferred impiety to
godliness? The heresy of the Arian madmen was condemned and proscribed by the whole
body of Bishops everywhere; but the Bishops Athanasius and Marcellus have many
supporters who speak and write in their behalf. We have received testimony in
favour of Marcellus[7], that he resisted the advocates of the Arian doctrines in
the Council of NicAEa; and in favour of Athanasius[8], that at Tyre nothing was
brought home to him, and that in the Mareotis, where the Reports against him are
said to have been drawn up, he was not present. Now you know, dearly beloved,
that ex parte proceedings are of no weight, but bear a suspicious appearance.
Nevertheless, these things being so, we, in order to be accurate, and neither
shewing any prepossession in favour of yourselves, nor of those who wrote in
behalf of the other party, invited those who had written to us to come hither;
that, since there were many who wrote in their behalf, all things might be enquired
into in a council, and neither the guiltless might be condemned, nor the
person on his trial be accounted innocent. We then are not the parties who dishonour
a council, but they who at once and recklessly have received the Arians whom
all had condemned, and contrary to the decision of the judges. The greater part
of those judges have now departed, and are with Christ; but some of them are
still in this life of trial, and are indignant at learning that certain persons
have set aside their judgment.
24. We have also been informed of the following circumstance by those who
were at Alexandria. A certain Carpones, who had been excommunicated by
Alexander for Arianism, was sent hither by one Gregory with certain others, also
excommunicated for the same heresy. However, I had learnt the matter also from the
Presbyter Macarius, and the Deacons Martyrius and Hesychius. For before the
Presbyters of Athanasius arrived they urged me to send letters to one Pistus at
Alexandria, though at the same time the Bishop Athanasius was there. And when the
Presbyters of the Bishop Athanasius came, they informed me that this Pistus was
an Arian, and that he had been excommunicated[9] by the Bishop Alexander and
the Council of NicAEa, and then ordained[1] by one Secundus, whom also the great
Council excommunicated as an Arian. This statement Martyrius and his fellows
did not gainsay, nor did they deny that Pistus had received his ordination from
Secundus. Now consider, after this who are most justly liable to blame? I, who
could not be prevailed upon to write to the Arian Pistus; or those, who advised
me to do dishonour to the great Council, and to address the irreligious as if
they were religious persons? Moreover, when the Presbyter Macarius, who had been
sent hither by Eusebius with Martyrius and the rest, heard of the opposition
which had been made by the Presbyters of Athanasius, while we were expecting his
appearance with Martyrius and Hesychius, he departed in the night, in spite of
a bodily ailment; which leads us to conjecture that his departure arose from
shame on account of the exposure which had been made concerning Pistus. For it
is impossible that the ordination of the Arian Secundus should be considered
valid in the Catholic Church. This would indeed be dishonour to the Council, and
to the Bishops who composed it, if the decrees they framed, as in the presence
of God, with such extreme earnestness and care, should be set aside as worthless.
25. If, as you write[2], the decrees of all Councils ought to be of force,
according to the precedent in the case of Novatus[3] and Paul of Samosata, all
the more ought not the sentence of the Three hundred to be reversed, certainly
a general Council ought not to be set at nought by a few individuals. For the
Arians are heretics as they, and the like sentence has been passed both against
one and the other. And, after such bold proceedings as these, who are they
that have lighted up the flame of discord? for in your letter you blame us for
having done this. Is it we, who have sympathised with the sufferings of the
brethren, and have acted in all respects according to the Canon ; or they who
contentiously and contrary to the Canon have set aside the sentence of the Three
hundred, and dishonoured the Council in every way? For not only have the Arians been
received into communion, but Bishops also have made a practice of removing
from one place to another[4]. Now if you really believe that all Bishops have the
same and equal authority[5], and you do not, as you assert, account of them
according to the magnitude of their cities; he that is entrusted with a small city
ought to abide in the place committed to him, and not from disdain of his
trust to remove to one that has never been put under him; despising that which God
has given him, and making much of the vain applause of men. You ought then,
dearly beloved, to have come and not declined, that the matter may be brought to a
conclusion; for this is what reason demands.
But perhaps you were prevented by the time fixed upon for the Council, for
you complain in your letter that the interval before the day we appointed[6]
was too short. But this, beloved, is a mere excuse. Had the day forestalled any
when on the journey, the interval allowed would then have been proved to be too
short. But when persons do not wish to come, and detain even my Presbyters up
to the month of January[7], it is the mere excuse of those who have no
confidence in their cause; otherwise, as I said before, they would have come, not
regarding the length of the journey, not considering the shortness of the time, but
trusting to the justice and reasonableness of their cause. But perhaps they did
not come on account of the aspect of the times[8], for again you declare in
your letter, that we ought to have considered the present circumstances of the
East, and not to have urged you to come. Now if as you say you did not come
because the times were such, you ought to have considered such times beforehand, and
not to have become the authors of schism, and of mourning and lamentation in
the Churches. But as the matter stands, men, who have been the cause of these
things, shew that it is not the times that are to blame, but the determination of
those who will not meet a Council.
26. But I wonder also how you could ever have written that part of your
letter, in which you say, that I alone wrote, and not to all of you, but to
Eusebius and his fellows only. In this complaint one may discover more of readiness
to find fault than of regard for truth. I received the letters against
Athanasius from none other than Martyrius, Hesychius and their fellows, and I
necessarily wrote to them who had written against him. Either then Eusebius and his
fellows ought not alone to have written, apart from you all, or else you, to whom I
did not write, ought not to be offended that I wrote to them who had written
to me. If it was right that I should address my letter to you all, you also
ought to have written with them: but now considering what was reasonable, I wrote
to them, who had addressed themselves to me, and had given me information. But
if you were displeased because I alone wrote to them, it is but consistent that
you should also be angry, because they wrote to me alone. But for this also,
beloved, there was a fair and not unreasonable cause. Nevertheless it is
necessary that I should acquaint you that, although I wrote, yet the sentiments I
expressed were not those of myself alone, but of all the Bishops throughout Italy
and in these parts. I indeed was unwilling to cause them all to write, test the
others should be overpowered by their number. The Bishops however assembled on
the appointed day, and agreed in these opinions, which I again write to signify
to you; so that, dearly beloved, although I alone address you, yet you may be
assured that these are the sentiments of all. Thus much for the excuses, not
reasonable, but unjust and suspicious, which some of you have alleged for your
conduct.
27. Now although what has already been said were sufficient to shew that
we have not admitted to our communion our brothers Athanasius and Marcellus
either too readily, or unjustly, yet it is but fair briefly to set the matter
before you. Eusebius and his fellows wrote formerly against Athanasius and his
fellows, as you also have written now; but a great number of Bishops out of Egypt
and other provinces wrote in his favour. Now in the first place, your letters
against him are inconsistent with one another, and the second have no sort of
agreement with the first, but in many instances the former are answered by the
latter, and the latter are impeached by the former. Now where there is this
contradiction in letters, no credit whatever is due to the statements they contain.
In the next place if you require us to believe what you have written, it is lint
consistent that we should not refuse credit to those who have written in his
favour; especially, considering that you write from a distance, while they are
on the spot, are acquainted with the man, and the events which are occurring
there, and testify in writing to his manner of life, and positively affirm that he
has been the victim of a conspiracy throughout.
Again, a certain Bishop Arsenius was said at one time to have been made
away with by Athanasius, but we have learned that he is alive, nay, that he is on
terms of friendship with him. He has positively asserted that the Reports
drawn up in the Mareotis were ex parte ones; for that neither the Presbyter
Macarius, the accused party, was present, nor yet his Bishop, Athanasius himself. This
we have learnt, not only from his own mouth, but also from the Reports which
Martyrius, Hesychius and their fellows, brought to as[9]; for we found on
reading them, that the accuser Ischyras was present there, but neither Macarius, nor
the Bishop Athanasius; and that the Presbyters of Athanasius desired to attend,
but were not permitted. Now, beloved, if the trial was to be conducted
honestly, not only the accuser, but the accused also ought to have been present. As
the accused party Macarius attended at Tyre, as well as the accuser Ischyras,
when nothing was proved, so not only ought the accuser to have gone to the
Mareotis, but also the accused, so that in person he might either be convicted, or by
not being convicted might shew the falseness of the accusation. But now, as
this was not the case, but the accuser only went out thither, with those to whom
Athanasius objected, the proceedings wear a suspicious appearance.
28. And he complained also that the persons who went to the Mareotis went
against his wish, for that Theognius, Maris, Theodorus, Ursacius, Valens, and
Macedonius, who were the persons they sent out, were of suspected character.
This he shewed not by his own assertions merely, but from the letter of Alexander
who was Bishop of Thessalonica; for he produced a letter written by him to
Dionysius[1], the Count who presided in the Council, in which he shews most clearly
that there was a conspiracy on foot against Athanasius. He has also brought
forward a genuine document, all in the handwriting of the accuser Ischyras
himself[2], in which he calls God Almighty to witness that no cup was broken, nor
table overthrown, but that he had been suborned by certain persons to invent these
accusations. Moreover, when the Presbyters of the Mareotis arrived[3], they
positively affirmed that Ischyras was not a Presbyter of the Catholic Church and
that Macarius had not committed any such offence as the other had laid to his
charge. The Presbyters and Deacons also who came to us testified in the fullest
manner in favour of the Bishop Athanasius, strenuously asserting that none of
those things which were alleged against him were true, but that he was the
victim of a conspiracy.
And all the Bishops of Egypt and Libya wrote and protested[4] that his
ordination was lawful and strictly ecclesiastical, and that all that you had
advanced against him was false, for that no murder had been committed, nor any
persons despatched on his account, nor any cup broken, but that all was false. Nay,
the Bishop Athanasius also shewed from the ex parte reports drawn up in the
Mareotis, that a catechumen was examined and said[5], that he was within with
Ischyras, at the time when they say Macarius the Presbyter of Athanasius burst into
the place; and that others who were examined said,--one, that Ischyras was in
a small cell,--and another, that he was lying down behind the door, being sick
at that very time, when they say Macarius came thither. Now from these
representations of his, we are naturally led to ask the question, How was it possible
that a man who was lying behind the door sick could get up, conduct the service,
and offer? and how could it be that Oblations were offered when catechumens
were within[6]? for if there were catechumens present, it was not yet the time
for presenting the Oblations. These representations, as I said,were made by the
Bishop Athanasius, and he showed from the reports, what was also positively
affirmed by those who were with him, that Ischyras has never been a presbyter at
all in the Catholic Church, nor has ever appeared as a presbyter in the
assemblies of the Church; for not even when Alexander admitted those of the Meletian
schism, by the indulgence of the great Council, was he named by Meletius among his
presbyters, as they deposed[7]; which is the strongest argument possible that
he was not even a presbyter of Meletius; for otherwise, he would certainly have
been numbered with the rest. Besides, it was shewn also by Athanasius from the
reports, that Ischyras had spoken falsely in other instances: for he set up a
charge respecting the burning of certain books, when, as they pretend, Macarius
burst in upon them, but was convicted of falsehood by the witnesses he himself
brought to prove it.
29. Now when these things were thus represented to us, and so many
witnesses appeared in his favour, and so much was advanced by him in his own
justification, what did it become us to do? what did the rule of the Church require of
us, but that we should not condemn him, but rather receive him and treat him
like a Bishop, as we have done? Moreover, besides all this he continued here a
year and six months[8], expecting the arrival of yourselves and of whoever chose
to come, and by his presence he put everyone to shame, for he would not have
been here, had he not felt confident in his cause; and he came not of his own
accord, but on an invitation by letter from us, in the manner in which we wrote to
you[9]. But still you complain after all of our transgressing the Canons. Now
consider; who are they that have so acted? we who received this man with such
ample proof of his innocence, or they who, being at Antioch at the distance of
six and thirty posts[1], nominated a stranger to be Bishop, and sent him to
Alexandria with a military force; a thing which was not done even when Athanasius
was banished into Gaul, though it would have been done then, had he been really
proved guilty of the offence. But when he returned, of course he found his
Church unoccupied and waiting for him.
30. But now I am ignorant under what colour these proceedings have been
carried on. In the first place, if the truth must be spoken, it was not right,
when we had written to summon a council, that any persons should anticipate its
decisions: and in the next place, it was not fitting that such novel proceedings
should be adopted against the Church. For what canon of the Church, or what
Apostolical tradition warrants this, that when a Church was at peace, and so many
Bishops were in unanimity with Athanasius the Bishop of Alexandria, Gregory
should be sent thither, a stranger to the city, not having been baptized there,
nor known to the general body, and desired neither by Presbyters, nor Bishops,
nor Laity--that he should be appointed at Antioch, and sent to Alexandria,
accompanied not by presbyters, nor by deacons of the city, nor by bishops of Egypt,
but by soldiers? for they who came hither complained that this was the case.
Even supposing that Athanasius was in the position of a criminal after the
Council, this appointment ought not to have been made thus illegally and
contrary to the rule of the Church, but the Bishops of the province ought to have
ordained one in that very Church, of that very Priesthood, of that very
Clergy[2]; and the Canons received from the Apostles ought not thus to be set aside. Had
this offence been committed against any one of you, would you not have
exclaimed against it, and demanded justice as for the transgression of the Canons?
Dearly beloved, we speak honestly, as in the presence of God, and declare, that
this proceeding was neither pious, nor lawful, nor ecclesiastical. Moreover, the
account which is given of the conduct of Gregory on his entry into the city,
plainly shews the character of his appointment. In such peaceful times, as those
who came from Alexandria declared them to have been, and as the Bishops also
represented in their letters, the Church was set on fire; Virgins were stripped;
Monks were trodden under foot; Presbyters and many of the people were scourged
and suffered violence; Bishops were cast into prison; multitudes were dragged
about from place to place; the holy Mysteries[3], about which they accused the
Presbyter Macarius, were seized upon by heathens and cast upon the ground; and
all to constrain certain persons to admit the appointment of Gregory. Such
conduct plainly shews who they are that transgress the Canons. Had the appointment
been lawful, he would not have had recourse to illegal proceedings to compel the
obedience of those who in a legal way resisted him. And notwithstanding all
this, you write that perfect peace prevailed in Alexandria and Egypt. Surely not,
unless the work of peace is entirely changed, and you call such doings as
these peace.
31. I have also thought it necessary to point out to you this
circumstance, viz. that Athanasius positively asserted that Macarius was kept at Tyre under
a guard of soldiers, while only his accuser accompanied those who went to the
Mareotis; and that the Presbyters who desired to attend the inquiry were not
permitted to do so, while the said inquiry respecting the cup and the Table was
carried on before the Prefect and his band, and in the presence of Heathens and
Jews. This at first seemed incredible, but it was proved to have been so from
the Reports; which caused great astonishment to us, as I suppose, dearly
beloved, it does to you also. Presbyters, who are the ministers of the Mysteries, are
not permitted to attend, but an enquiry concerning Christ's Blood and Christ's
Body is carried on before an external judge, in the presence of Catechumens,
nay, worse than that, before Heathens and Jews, who are in ill repute in regard
to Christianity. Even supposing that an offense had been committed, it should
have been investigated legally in the Church and by the Clergy, not by heathens
who abhor the Word and know not the Truth. I am persuaded that both you and all
men must perceive the nature and magnitude of this sin. Thus much concerning
Athanasius.
32. With respect to Marcellus[5], forasmuch as you have charged him also
of impiety towards Christ, I am anxious to inform you, that when he was here, he
positively declared that what you had written concerning him was not true; but
being nevertheless requested by us to give an account of his faith, he
answered in his own person with the utmost boldness, so that we recognised that he
maintain s nothing outside the truth. He made a confession[6] of the same godly
doctrines concerning our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ as the Catholic Church
confesses; and he affirmed that he had held these opinions for a very long time,
and had not recently adopted them: as indeed our Presbyters[7], who were at a
former date present at the Council of Nicaea, testified to his orthodoxy; for he
maintained then, as he has done now, his opposition to Arianism (on which
points it is right to admonish you, lest any of you admit such heresy, instead of
abominating it as alien from sound doctrine[8]). Seeing then that he professed
orthodox opinions, and had testimony to his orthodoxy, what, I ask again in his
case, ought we to have done, except to receive him as a Bishop, as we did, and
not reject him from our communion? These things I have written, not so much for
the purpose of defending their cause, as in order to convince you, that we
acted justly and canonically in receiving these persons, and that you are
contentious without a cause. But it is your duty to use your anxious endeavours and to
labour by every means to correct the irregularities which have been committed
contrary to the Canon, and to secure the peace of the Churches; so that the peace
of our Lord which has been given to us[9] may remain, and the Churches may not
be divided, nor you incur the charge of being authors of schism. For I
confess, your past conduct is an occasion of schism rather than of peace.
33. For not only the Bishops Athanasius and Marcellus and their fellows
came hither and complained of the injustice that had been done them, but many
other Bishops also[1], from Thrace, from Coele-Syria, from PhOEnicia and
Palestine, and Presbyters, not a few, and others from Alexandria and from other parts,
were present at the Council here, and in addition to their other statements,
lamented before all the assembled Bishops the violence and injustice which the
Churches had suffered, and affirmed that similar outrages to those which had been
committed in Alexandria had occurred in their own Churches, and in others also.
Again there lately came Presbyters with letters from Egypt and Alexandria, who
complained that many Bishops and Presbyters who wished to come to the Council
were prevented; for they said that, since the departure of Athanasius[2] even
up to this time, Bishops who are confessors[3] have been beaten with stripes,
that others have been cast into prison, and that but lately aged men, who have
been an exceedingly long period in the Episcopate, have been given up to be
employed in the public works, and nearly all the Clergy of the Catholic Church with
the people are the objects of plots and persecutions. Moreover they said that
certain Bishops and other brethren had been banished for no other reason than to
compel them against their will to communicate with Gregory and his Arian
associates. We have heard also from others, what is confirmed by the testimony of
the Bishop Marcellus, that a number of outrages, similar to those which were
committed at Alexandria, have occurred also at Ancyra in Galatia[4]. And in
addition to all this, those who came to the Council reported against some of you (for
I will not mention names) certain charges of so dreadful a nature that I have
declined setting them down in writing: perhaps you also have heard them from
others. It was for this cause especially that I wrote to desire you to come, that
you might be present to hear them, and that all irregularities might be
corrected and differences healed. And those who were called for these purposes ought
not to have refused, but to have come the more readily, lest by failing to do so
they should be suspected of what was alleged against them, and be thought
unable to prove what they had written.
34. Now according to these representations, since the Churches are thus
afflicted and treacherously assaulted, as our informants positively affirmed, who
are they that have lighted up a flame of discords[5]? We, who grieve for such
a state of things and sympathize with the sufferings of the brethren, or they
who have brought these things about? While then such extreme confusion existed
in every Church, which was the cause why those who visited us came hither, I
wonder bow you could write that unanimity prevailed in the Churches. These things
tend not to the edification of the Church, but to her destruction; and those
who rejoice in them are not sons of peace, but of confusion: but our God is not a
God of confusion, but of peace[6]. Wherefore, as the God and Father of our
Lord Jesus Christ knows, it was from a regard for your good name, and with prayers
that the Churches might not fall into confusion, but might continue as they
were regulated by the Apostles, that I thought it necessary to write thus unto
you, to the end that you might at length put to shame those who through the
effects of their mutual enmity have brought the Churches to this condition. For I
have heard, that it is only a certain few[7] who are the authors of all these
things.
Now, as having bowels of mercy, take ye care to correct, as I said before,
the irregularities which have been committed contrary to the Canon, so that if
any mischief has already befallen, it may be healed through your zeal. And
write not that I have preferred the communion of Marcellus and Athanasius to
yours, for such like complaints are no indications of peace, but of contentiousness
and hatred of the brethren. For this cause I have written the foregoing, that
you may understand that we acted not unjustly in admitting them to our
communion, and so may cease this strife. If you had come hither, and they had been
condemned, and had appeared unable to produce reasonable evidence in support of
their cause, you would have done well in writing thus. But seeing that, as I said
before, we acted agreeably to the Canon, and not unjustly, in holding communion
with them, I beseech you for the sake of Christ, suffer not the members of
Christ to be torn asunder, neither trust to prejudices, but seek rather the peace
of the Lord. It is neither holy nor just, in order to gratify the petty feeling
of a few persons, to reject those who have never been condemned and thereby to
grieve the Spirit[8]. But if you think that you are able to prove anything
against them, and to confute them face to face let those of you who please come
hither: for they also promised that they would be ready to establish completely
the truth of those things which they have reported to us.
35. Give us notice therefore of this, dearly beloved, that we may write
both to them, and to the Bishops who will have again to assemble, so that the
accused may be condemned in the presence of all, and confusion no longer prevail
in the Churches. What has already taken place is enough: it is enough surely
that Bishops have been sentenced to banishment in the presence of Bishops; of
which it behoves me not to speak at length, lest I appear to press too heavily on
those who were present on those occasions. But if one must speak the truth,
matters ought not to have proceeded so far; their petty feeling ought not to have
been suffered to reach the present pitch. Let us grant the "removal," as you
write, of Athanasius and Marcellus, front their own places, yet what must one say
of the case of the other Bishops and Presbyters who, as I said before, came
hither from various parts, and who complained that they also had been forced away,
and had suffered the like injuries? O beloved, the decisions of the Church are
no longer according to the Gospel, but tend only to banishment and death[9].
Supposing, as you assert, that some offence rested upon those persons, the case
ought to have been conducted against them, not after this manner, but
according to the Canon of the Church. Word should have been written of it to us all
[1], that so a just sentence might prceed from all. For the sufferers were
Bishops, and Churches of no ordinary note, but those which the Apostles
themselves had governed in their own persons[2].
And why was nothing said to us concerning the Church of the Alexandrians
in particular? Are you ignorant that the custom has been for word to be written
first to us, and then for a just decision to be passed from this place[3]? If
then any such suspicion rested upon the Bishop there, notice thereof ought to
have been sent to the Church of this place; whereas, after neglecting to inform
us, and proceeding on their own authority as they pleased, now they desire to
obtain our concurrence in their decisions, though we never condemned him. Not so
have the constitutions[4] of Paul, not so have the traditions of the Fathers
directed; this is another form of procedure, a novel practice. I beseech you,
readily bear with me: what I write is for the common good. For what we have
received from the blessed Apostle Peter s, that I signify to you; and I should not
have written this, as deeming that these things were manifest unto all men, had
not these proceedings so disturbed us. Bishops are forced away from their sees
and driven into banishment, while others from different quarters are appointed
in their place; others are treacherously assailed, so that the people have to
grieve for those who are forcibly taken from them, while, as to those who are
sent in their room, they are obliged to give over seeking the man whom they
desire, and to receive those they do not.
I ask of you, that such things may no longer be, but that you will
denounce in writing those persons who attempt them; so that the Churches may no longer
be afflicted thus, nor any Bishop or Presbyter be treated with insult, nor any
one be compelled to act contrary to his judgment, as they have represented to
us, lest we become a laughing-stock among the heathen, and above all, lest we
excite the wrath of God against us. For every one of us shall give account in
the Day of judgment[6] of the things which he has done in this life. May we all
be possessed with the mind of God ! so that the Churches may recover their own
Bishops, and rejoice evermore in Jesus Christ our Lord; through Whom to the
Father be glory, for ever and ever. Amen.
I pray for your health in the Lord, brethren dearly beloved and greatly
longer for.
36. Thus wrote the Council of Rome by Julius, Bishop of Rome.
CHAPTER III.
Letters of the Council of Sardica to the Churches of Egypt and of Alexandria,
and to all Churches.
But when, notwithstanding, Eusebius and! his fellows proceeded without
shame, disturbing the Churches, and plotting the ruin of many, the most religious
Emperors Constantius and Constans being informed of this, commanded the Bishops
from both the West and East to meet together in the city of Sardica. In the
meantime Eusebius[6a] died: but a great number assembled from all parts, and we
challenged the associates of Eusebius and his fellows to submit to a trial. But
they, having before their eyes the things that they had done, and perceiving
that their accusers had come up to the Council, were afraid to do this; but,
while all besides met with honest intentions, they again brought with them the
Counts[7] Musonianus[8] and Hesychius the Castrensian[9], that, as their custom
was, they might effect their own aims by their authority. But when the Council met
without Counts, and no soldiers were permitted to be present, they were
con-rounded, and conscience-stricken, because they could no longer obtain the
judgment they wished, but such only as reason and truth required. We, however,
frequently repeated our challenge, and the Council of Bishops called upon them to come
forward, saying, "You have come for the purpose of undergoing a trial; why
then do you now withdraw yourselves? Either you ought not to have come, or having
come, not to conceal yourselves. Such conduct will prove your greatest
condemnation. Behold, Athanasius and his fellows are here, whom you accused while
absent; if therefore you think that you have any thing against them, you may convict
them face to face. But if you pretend to be unwilling to do so, while in truth
you are unable, you plainly shew yourselves to be calumniators, and this is
the decision the Council will give you." When they heard this they were
self-condemned (for they were conscious of their machinations and fabrications against
us), and were ashamed to appear, thereby proving themselves to have been guilty
of many base calumnies.
The holy Council therefore denounced their indecent and suspicious
flight[1], and admitted us to make our defence; and when we had related their conduct
towards us, and proved the truth of our statements by witnesses and other
evidence, they were filled with astonishment, and all acknowledged that our
opponents had good reason to be afraid to meet the Council, lest their guilt should be
proved before their faces. They said also, that probably they had come from the
East, supposing that Athanasius and his fellows would not appear, but that,
when they saw them confident in their cause, and challenging a trial, they fled.
They accordingly received us as injured persons who had been falsely accused,
and confirmed yet more towards us their fellowship and love. But they deposed
Eusebius's associates in wickedness, who had become even more shameless than
himself, viz., Theodorus[2] of Heraclea, Narcissus of Neronias, Acacius[3] of
Caesarea, Stephanus[4] of Antioch, Ursacius and Valens of Pannonia, Menophantus of
Ephesus, and George[5] of Laodicaea; and they wrote to the Bishops in all parts
of the world, and to the diocese of each of the injured persons, in the
following terms.
Letter of the Council of Sardica to the Church of Alexandria.
The Holy Council, by the grace of God assembled at Sardica, from[6] Rome,
Spain, Gaul, Italy, Campania, Calabria, Apulia, Africa, Sardinia, Pannonia,
Moesia, Dacia, Noricum, Siscia, Dardania, the other Dacia, Macedonia, Thessaly,
Achaia, Epirus, Thrace, Rhodope, Palestine, Arabia, Crete, and Egypt, to their
beloved brothers, the Presbyters and Deacons, and to all the Holy Church of God
abiding at Alexandria, sends health in the Lord. 37. We were not ignorant, but
the fact was well known to us, even before we received the letters of your
piety, that the supporters of the abominated heresy of the Arians were practising
many dangerous machinations, rather to the destruction of their own souls, than
to the injury of the Church. For this has ever been the object of their
unprincipled craft; this is the deadly design in which they have been continually
engaged; viz. how they may best expel from their places and persecute all who are to
be found anywhere of orthodox sentiments, and maintaining the doctrine of the
Catholic Church, which was delivered to them from the Fathers. Against some
they have laid false accusations; others they have driven into banishment; others
they have destroyed by the punishments inflicted on them. At any rate they
endeavoured by violence and tyranny to surprise the innocence of our brother and
fellow-Bishop Athanasius, and therefore conducted their enquiry into his case
without any care, without any faith, without any sort of justice. Accordingly
having no confidence in the part they had played on that occasion, nor yet in the
reports they had circulated against him, but perceiving that they were unable to
produce any certain evidence respecting the case, when they came to the city
of Sardica, they were unwilling to meet the Council of all the holy Bishops.
From this it became evident that the decision of our brother and fellow-Bishop
Julius was a just one[7]; for after cautious deliberation and care he had
determined, that we ought not to hesitate at all about communion with our brother
Athanasius. For he had the credible testimony of eighty Bishops, and was also able
to advance this fair argument in his support that by the mere means of our
dearly beloved brethren his own Presbyters, and by correspondence, he had defeated
the design of Eusebius and his fellows, who relied more upon violence than upon
a judicial enquiry.
Wherefore all the Bishops from all parts determined upon holding communion
with Athanasius on the ground that he was innocent. And let your charity also
observe, that when he came to the holy Council assembled at Sardica, the
Bishops of the East were informed of the circumstance, as we said before, both by
letter, and by injunctions conveyed by word of mouth, and were invited by us to be
present. But, being condemned by their own conscience, they had recourse to
unbecoming excuses, and set themselves to avoid the enquiry. They demanded that
an innocent man should be rejected from our communion, as a culprit, not
considering how unbecoming, or rather how impossible, such a proceeding was. And as
for the Reports which were framed in the Mareotis by certain most wicked and most
abandoned youths s, to whose hands one would not commit the very lowest office
of the ministry, it is certain that they were ex parte statements. For neither
was our, brother the Bishop Athanasius present on the occasion, nor the
Presbyter Macarius who was accused by them. And besides, their enquiry, or rather
their falsification of facts, was attended by the most disgraceful circumstances.
Sometimes heathens, sometimes Catechumens, were examined, not that they might
declare what they knew, but that they might assert those falsehoods which they
had been taught by others. And when you Presbyters, who were in charge in the
absence of your Bishop, desired to be present at the enquiry, in order that you
might shew the truth, and disprove the falsehoods, no regard was paid to you;
they would not permit you to be present, but drove you away with insult.
Now although their calumnies have been most plainly exposed before all men
by these circumstances; yet we found also, on reading the Reports, that the
most iniquitous Ischyras, who has obtained from them the empty title of Bishop as
his reward for the false accusation, had convicted himself of calumny. He
declares in the Reports that at the very time when, according to his positive
assertions, Macarius entered his cell, he lay there sick; whereas Eusebius and his
fellows had the boldness to write that Ischyras was standing up and offering
when Macarius came in.
38. The base and slanderous charge which they next alleged against him,
has become well-known to all men. They raised a great outcry, affirming that
Athanasius had committed murder, and had made away with one Arsenius a Meletian
Bishop, whose loss they pretended to deplore with feigned lamentations and
fictitious tears, and demanded that the body of a living man, as if a dead one, should
be given up to them. But their fraud was not undetected; one and all knew that
the person was alive, and was numbered among the living. And when these men,
who are ready upon any opportunity, perceived their falsehoods detected (for
Arsenius shewed himself alive, and so proved that he had not been made away with,
and was not dead), yet they would not rest, but proceeded to add other to their
former columnies[9], and to slander the man by a fresh expedient. Well; our
brother Athanasius, dearly beloved, was not confounded, but again in the present
case also with great boldness challenged them to the proof, and we too prayed
and exhorted them to come to the trial, and if they were able, to establish
their charge against him. O great arrogance ! O dreadful pride! or rather, if one
must say the truth, O evil and accusing conscience ! for this is the view which
all men take of it.
Wherefore, beloved brethren, we admonish and exhort you, above all things
to maintain the right faith of the Catholic Church. You have undergone many
severe and grievous trials; many are the insults and injuries which the Catholic
Church has suffered, but 'he that endureth to the end, the same shall be
saved[1].' Wherefore even though they still recklessly assail you, let your
tribulation be unto you for joy. For such afflictions are a sort of martyrdom, and such
confessions and tortures as yours will not be without their reward, but ye shall
receive the prize froth God. Therefore strive above all things in support of
the sound faith, and of the innocence of your Bishop and our fellow-minister
Athanasius. We also have not held our peace, nor been negligent of what concerns
your comfort, but have deliberated and done whatsoever the claims of charity
demand. We sympathize with our suffering brethren, and their affliction! we
consider as our own.
39. Accordingly we have written to beseech our most religious and godly
Emperors, that their kindness would give orders for the release of those who are
still suffering from affliction and oppression, and would command that none of
the magistrates, whose duty it is to attend only to civil causes, give judgment
upon Clergy[2], nor henceforward in any way, on pretence of providing for the
Churches, attempt anything against the brethren; but that every one may live,
as he prays and desires to do, free from persecution, from violence and fraud,
and in quietness and peace may follow the Catholic and Apostolic Faith. As for
Gregory, who has the reputation of being illegally appointed by the heretics,
and has been sent by them to your city, we wish your unanimity to understand,
that he has been deposed by a judgment of the whole sacred Council, although
indeed he has never at any time been considered to be a Bishop at all. Wherefore
receive gladly your Bishop Athanasius, for to this end we have dismissed him in
peace. And we exhort all those who either through fear, or through the intrigues
of certain persons, have held communion with Gregory, that now being
admonished, exhorted, and persuaded by us, they withdraw from that his detestable
communion, and straightway unite themselves to the Catholic Church.
40. But forasmuch as we have learnt that Aphthonius, Athanasius the son of
Capito, Paul, and Plutio, our fellow Presbyters[3], have also suffered from
the machinations of Eusebius and his fellows, so that some of them have had trial
of exile, and others have fled on peril of their lives, we have in consequence
thought it necessary to make this known unto you, that you may understand that
we have received and acquitted them also, being aware that whatever has been
done by Eusebius and his fellows against the orthodox has tended to the glory
and commendation of those who have been attacked by them. It were fitting that
your Bishop and our brother Athanasius should make this known to you respecting
them, to his own respecting his own; but as for more abundant testimony he
wished the holy Council also to write to you, we deferred not to do so, but hastened
to signify this unto you, that you may receive them as we have done, for they
also are deserving of praise, because through their piety towards Christ they
have been thought worthy to endure violence at the hands of the heretics.
What decrees have been passed by the holy Council against those who are at
the head of the Arian heresy, and have offended against you, and the rest of
the Churches, you will learn from the subjoined documents[4]. We have sent them
to you, that you may understand from them that the Catholic Church will not
overlook those who offend against her.
Letter of the Council of Sardica to the Bishops of Egypt and Libya.
The holy Council, by the grace of God assembled at Sardica, to the Bishops
of Egypt and Libya, their fellow-ministers and dearly beloved brethren, sends
health in the Lord.
41. We were not ignorant[5], but the fact was well known to us, even
before we received the letters of your piety, that the supporters of the abominated
heresy of the Arians were practising many dangerous machinations, rather to the
destruction of their own souls, than to the injury of the Church. For this has
ever been the object of their craft and villainy: this is the deadly design in
which they have been continually engaged, viz. how they may best expel from
their places and persecute all who are to be found anywhere of orthodox
sentiments, and maintaining the doctrine of the Catholic Church, which was delivered to
them from the Fathers. Against some they have laid false accusations; others
they have driven into banishment; others they have destroyed by the punishments
inflicted on them. At any rate they endeavoured by violence and tyranny to
surprise the innocence of our brother and fellow-Bishop Athanasius, and therefore
conducted their enquiry into his case without any faith, without any sort of
justice. Accordingly having no confidence in the part they had played on that
occasion, nor yet in the reports they had circulated against him, but perceiving
that they were unable to produce any certain evidence respecting the case, when
they came to the city of Sardica, they were unwilling to meet the Council of all
the holy Bishops. From this it became evident that the decision of our brother
and fellow-Bishop Julius was a just one; for after cautious deliberation and
care he had decided, that we ought not to hesitate at all about communion with
our brother Athanasius. For he had the credible testimony of eighty Bishops, and
was also able to advance this fair argument in his support, that by the mere
means of our dearly' beloved brethren his own Presbyters, and by correspondence,
he had defeated the designs of Eusebius and his fellows, who relied more upon
violence than upon a judicial inquiry.
Wherefore all the Bishops from all parts determined upon holding communion
with Athanasius on the ground that he was innocent. And let your charity also
observe, that when he came to the holy Council assembled at Sardica, the
Bishops of the East were informed of the circumstance, as we said before, both by
letter, and by injunctions conveyed by word of mouth, and were invited by us to be
present. But, being condemned by their own conscience, they had recourse to
unbecoming excuses, and began to avoid the enquiry. They demanded that an
innocent man should be rejected from our communion, as a culprit, not considering how
unbecoming, or rather how impossible, such a proceeding was. And as for the
reports which were framed in the Mareotis by certain most wicked and abandoned
youths, to whose hands one would not commit the very lowest office of the
ministry, it is certain that they were ex parte statements. For neither was our brother
the Bishop Athanasius present on the occasion, nor the Presbyter Macarius, who
was accused by them. And besides, their enquiry, or rather their falsification
of facts, was attended by the most disgraceful circumstances. Sometimes
Heathens, sometimes Catechumens, were examined, not that they might declare what they
knew, but that they might assert those falsehoods which they had been taught
by others. And when you Presbyters, who were in charge in the absence of your
Bishop, desired to be present at the enquiry, in order that you might shew the
truth, and disprove falsehood, no regard was paid to you; they would not permit
you to be present, but drove you away with insult.
Now although their calumnies have been most plainly exposed before all men
by these circumstances; yet we found also, on reading the Reports, that the
most iniquitous Ischyras, who has obtained from them the empty title of Bishop as
his reward for the false accusation, had convicted himself of calumny. He
declares in the Reports, that at the very time when, according to his positive
assertions, Macarius entered his cell, he lay there sick; whereas Eusebius and his
fellows had the boldness to write that Ischyras was standing offering when
Macarius came in.
42. The base and slanderous charge which they next alleged against him has
become well known unto all men. They raised a great outcry, affirming that
Athanasius had committed murder, and made away with one Arsenius a Meletian
Bishop, whose loss they pretended to deplore with feigned lamentations, and
fictitious tears, and demanded that the body of a living man, as if a dead one, should
be given up to them. But their fraud was not undetected; one and all knew that
the person was alive, and was numbered among the living. And when these men, who
are ready upon any opportunity, perceived their falsehood detected (for
Arsenius shewed himself alive, and so proved that he had not been made away with, and
was not dead), yet they would not rest, but proceeded to add other to their
former calumnies, and to slander the man by a fresh expedient. Well: our brother
Athanasius, dearly beloved, was not confounded, but again in the present case
also with great boldness challenged them to the proof, and we too prayed and
exhorted them to come to the trial, and if they were able, to establish their
charge against him. O great arrogance ! O dreadful pride ! or rather, if one must
say the truth, O evil and accusing conscience ! for this is the view which all
men take of it.
Wherefore, beloved brethren, we admonish and exhort you, above all things,
to maintain the right faith of the Catholic Church. You have undergone many
severe and grievous trials; many are the insults and injuries which the Catholic
Church has suffered, but 'he that endureth to the end, the same shall be
saved[6].' Wherefore, even though they shall still recklessly assail you, let your
tribulation be unto you for joy. For such afflictions are a sort of martyrdom,
and such confessions and tortures as yours will not be without their reward, but
ye shall receive the prize from God. Therefore strive above all things in
support of the sound Faith, and of the innocence of your Bishop and our brother
Athanasius. We also have not held our peace, nor been negligent of what concerns
your comfort, but have deliberated and done whatsoever the claims of charity
demand. We sympathize with our suffering brethren, and their afflictions we
consider as our own, and have mingled our tears with yours. And you, brethren, are not
the only persons who have suffered: many others also of our brethren in
ministry have come hither, bitterly lamenting these things.
43. Accordingly, we have written to beseech our most religious and godly
Emperors, that their kindness would give orders for the release of those who are
still suffering from affliction and oppression, and would command that none of
the magistrates, whose duty it is to attend only to civil causes, give
judgment upon Clergy, nor henceforward in any way, on pretence of providing for the
Churches, attempt anything against the brethren, but that every one may live, as
he prays and desires to do, free front persecution, from violence and fraud,
and in quietness and peace may follow the Catholic and Apostolic Faith. As for
Gregory, who has the reputation of being illegally appointed by the heretics, and
who has been sent by them to your city, we wish your unanimity to understand,
that he has been deposed by the judgment of the whole sacred Council, although
indeed he has never at any time been considered to be a Bishop at all.
Wherefore receive gladly your Bishop Athanasius; for to this end we have dismissed him
in peace. And we exhort all those, who either through fear, or through
intrigues of certain persons, have held communion with Gregory, that being now
admonished, exhorted, and persuaded by us, they withdraw from his detestable communion,
and straightway unite themselves to the Catholic Church.
What decrees have been passed by the holy Council against Theodorus,
Narcissus, Stephanus, Acacius, Menophantus, Ursacius, Valens, and George[7], who are
the heads of the Arian heresy, and have offended against you and the rest of
the Churches, you will learn from the subjoined documents. We have sent them to
you, that your piety may assent to our decisions, and that you may understand
from them, that the Catholic Church will not overlook those who offend against
her.
Encyclical Letter of the Council of Sardica.
The holy Council[8], by the grace of God, assembled at Sardica, to their
dearly beloved brethren, the Bishops and fellow-Ministers of the Catholic Church
every where, sends health in the Lord.
44. The Arian madmen have dared repeatedly to attack the servants of God,
who maintain the right faith; they attempted to substitute a spurious doctrine,
and to drive out the orthodox; and at last they made so violent an assault
against the Faith, that it became known even to the piety of our most religious
Emperors. Accordingly, the grace of God assisting them, our most religious
Emperors have themselves assembled us together out of different provinces and cities,
and have permitted this holy Council to be held in the city of Sardica; to the
end that all dissension may be done away, and all false doctrine being driven
from us, Christian godliness may alone be maintained by all men. The Bishops of
the East also attended, being exhorted to do so by the most religious
Emperors, chiefly on account of the reports they have so often circulated concerning
our dearly beloved brethren and fellow-ministers Athanasius, Bishop of
Alexandria, and Marcellus, Bishop of Ancyro-Galatia. Their calumnies have probably
already reached you, and perhaps they have attempted to disturb your ears, that you
may be induced to believe their charges against the innocent, and that they may
obliterate from your minds any suspicions respecting their own wicked heresy.
But they have not been permitted to effect this to any great extent; for the
Lord is the Defender of His Churches, Who endured death for their sakes and for us
all, and provided access to heaven for us all through Himself. When therefore
Eusebius and his fellows wrote long ago to Julius our brother and Bishop of the
Church of the Romans, against our fore-mentioned brethren, that is to say,
Athanasius, Marcellus, and Asclepas[9], the Bishops from the other parts wrote
also, testifying to the innocence of our fellow-minister Athanasius, and declaring
that the representations of Eusebius and his fellows were nothing else but
mere falsehood and calumny.
And indeed their calumnies were clearly proved by the fact that, when they
were invited to a Council by our dearly beloved fellow-minister Julius, they
would not come, and also by what was written to them by Julius himself. For had
they had confidence in the measures and the acts in which they were engaged
against our brethren, they would have come. And besides, they gave a still more
evident proof of their conspiracy by their conduct in this great and holy
Council. For when they arrived at the city of Sardica, and saw our brethren
Athanasius, Marcellus, Asclepas, and the rest, they were afraid to come to a trial and
though they were repeatedly invited to attend, they would not obey the summons.
Although all we Bishops met together, and above all that man of most happy old
age, Hosius, one who on account of his age, his confession, and the many
labours he has undergone, is worthy of all reverence; and although we waited and
urged them to come to the trial, that in the presence of our fellow-ministers they
might establish the truth of those charges which they had circulated and
written against them in their absence; yet they would not come, when they were thus
invited, as we said before, thus giving proof of their calumnies, and almost
proclaiming to the world by this their refusal, the plot and conspiracy in which
they have been engaged. They who are confident of the truth of their assertions
are able to make them good against their opponents face to face. But as they
would not meet us, we think that no one can now doubt, however they may again
have recourse to their bad practices, that they possess no proof against our
fellow-ministers, but calumniate them in their absence, while they avoid their
presence.
45. They fled, beloved brethren, not only on account of the calumnies they
had uttered, but because they saw that those had come who had various charges
to advance against them. For chains and irons were brought forward which they
had used; persons appeared who had returned from banishment; there came also our
brethren, kinsmen of those who were still detained in exile, and friends of
such as had perished through their means. And what was the most weighty ground of
accusation, Bishops were present, one[1] of whom brought forward the irons and
chains which they had caused him to wear, and others appealed to the death
which had been brought about by their calumnies. For they had proceeded to such a
pitch of madness, as even to attempt to destroy Bishops; and would have
destroyed them, had they not escaped their hands. Our fellow-ministers, Theodulus of
blessed memory[2], died during his flight from their false accusations, orders
having been given in consequence of these to put him to death. Others also
exhibited sword-wounds; and others complained that they had been exposed to the
pains of hunger through their means. Nor were they ordinary persons who testified
to these things, but whole Churches, in whose behalf legates appeared[3], and
told us of soldiers sword in hand, of multitudes armed with clubs, of the threats
of judges, of the forgery of false letters. For there were read certain false
letters of Theognius and his fellows against our fellow-ministers Athanasius,
Marcellus, and Asclepas, written with the design of exasperating the Emperors
against them; and those who had then been Deacons of Theognius proved the fact.
From these men, we heard of virgins stripped naked, churches burnt, ministers in
custody, and all for no other end, but only for the sake of the accursed
heresy of the Arian madmen, whose communion whoso refused was forced to suffer these
things.
When they perceived then how matters lay, they were in a strait what
course to choose. They were ashamed to confess what they had done, but were unable
to conceal it any longer. They therefore came to the city of Sardica, that by
their arrival they might seem to remove suspicion from themselves of such
offences. But when they saw those whom they had calumniated, and those who had
suffered at their hands; when they had before their eyes their accusers and the proofs
of their guilt, they were unwilling to come forward, though invited by our
fellow-ministers Athanasius, Marcellus, and Asclepas, who with great freedom
complained of their conduct, and urged and challenged them to the trial, promising
not only to refute their calumnies, but also to bring proof of the offences
which they had committed against their Churches. But they were seized with such
terrors of conscience, that they fled; and in doing so they exposed their own
calumnies and confessed by running away the offences of which they had been guilty.
46. But although their malice and their calumnies have been plainly
manifested on this as well as on former occasions, yet that they may not devise means
of practising a further mischief in consequence of their flight, we have
considered it advisable to examine the part they have played according to the
principles of truth; this has been our purpose, and we have found them calumniators
by their acts, and authors of nothing else than a plot against our brethren in
ministry. For Arsenius, who they said had been murdered by Athanasius, is still
alive, and is numbered among the living; from which we may infer that the
reports they have spread abroad on other subjects are fabrications also. And whereas
they spread abroad a rumour concerning a cup, which they said had been broken
by Macarius the Presbyter of Athanasius, those who came from Alexandria, the
Mareotis, and the other parts, testified that nothing of the kind had taken
place. And the Egyptian Bishops[2] who wrote to Julius our fellow-minister,
positively affirmed that there had not arisen among them even any suspicion whatever of
such a thing.
Moreover, the Reports, which they say they have to produce against him,
are, as is notorious, exparte statements; and even in the formation of these very
Reports, Heathens and Catechumens were examined; one of whom, a Catechumen,
said[3] in his examination that he was present in the room when Macarius broke in
upon them; and another declared, that Ischyras of whom they speak so much, lay
sick in his cell at the time; from which it appears that the Mysteries were
never celebrated at all, because Catechumens were present, and also that Ischyras
was not present, but was lying sick on his bed. Besides, this most worthless
Ischyras, who has falsely asserted, as he was convicted of doing, that
Athanasius bad burnt some of the sacred books, has himself confessed that he was sick,
and was lying in his bed when Macarius came; from which it is plain that he is
a slanderer. Nevertheless, as a reward for these his calumnies, they have
given to this very Ischyras the title of Bishop, although he is not even a
Presbyter. For two Presbyters, who were once associated with Meletius, but were
afterwards received by the blessed Alexander, Bishop of Alexandria, and are now with
Athanasius, appeared before the Council, and testified that he was not even a
Presbyter of Meletius, and that Meletius never had either Church or Minister in
the Mareotis. And yet this man, who has never been even a Presbyter, they have
now brought forward as a Bishop, that by this name they may have the means of
overpowering those who are within hearing of his calumnies.
47. The book of our fellow-minister Marcellus was also read, by which the
fraud of Eusebius and his fellows was plainly discovered. For what Marcellus
had advanced by way of enquiry[4], they falsely represented as his professed
opinion; but when the subsequent parts of the book were read, and the parts
preceding the queries themselves, his faith was found to be correct. He had never
pretended, as they positively affirmed[5], that the Word of God had His beginning
from holy Mary, nor that His kingdom had an end; on the contrary he had written
that His kingdom was both without beginning and without end. Our
fellow-minister Asclepas also produced Reports which had been drawn up at Antioch in the
presence of his accusers and Eusebius of Caesarea, and proved that he was innocent
by the declarations of the Bishops who judged his cause[6]. They had good
reason therefore, dearly beloved brethren, for not hearkening to our frequent
summons, and for deserting the Council. They were driven to this by their own
consciences; but their flight only confirmed the proof of their own calumnies, and
caused those things to be believed against them, which their accusers, who were
present, were asserting and arguing. But besides all these things, they had not
only received those who were formerly degraded and ejected on account of the
heresy of Arius, but had even promoted them to a higher station, advancing Deacons
to the Presbytery, and of Presbyters making Bishops, for no other end, but
that they might disseminate and spread abroad impiety, and corrupt the orthodox
faith.
48. Their leaders are now, after Eusebius and his fellows, Theodorus of
Heraclea, Narcissus of Neronias in Cilicia, Stephanus of Antioch, George of
Laodicea, Acacius of Caesarea in Palestine, Menophantus of Ephesus in Asia, Ursacius
of Singidunum in Moesia, and Valens of Mursa in Pannonia[7]. These men would
not permit those who came with them from the East to meet the holy Council, nor
even to approach the Church of God; but as they were coming to Sardica, they
held Councils in various places by themselves, and made an engagement under
threats, that when they came to Sardica, they would not so much as appear at the
trial, nor attend the assembling of the holy Council, but simply coming and making
known their arrival as a matter of form, would speedily take to flight. This
we have been able to ascertain from our fellow-ministers, Macarius of Palestine
and Asterius of Arabia[8], who after coming in their company, separated
themselves from their unbelief. These came to the holy Council, and complained of the
violence they had suffered, and said that no right act was being done by them;
adding that there were many among them who adhered to orthodoxy, but were
prevented by those men from coming hither, by means of the threats and promises
which they held out to those who wished to separate from them. On this account it
was that they were so anxious that all should abide in one dwelling, and would
not suffer them to be by themselves even for the shortest space of time.
49. Since then it became us not to hold our peace, nor to pass over
unnoticed their calumnies, imprisonments, murders, wounds, conspiracies by means of
false letters, outrages, stripping of the virgins, banishments, destruction of
the Churches, burnings, translations from small cities to larger dioceses, and
above all, the rising of the ill-named Arian heresy by their means against the
orthodox faith; we have therefore pronounced our dearly beloved, brethren and
fellow-ministers Athanasius, Marcellus, and Asclepas, and those who minister to
the Lord with them, to be innocent and clear of offence, and have written to the
diocese of each, that the people of each Church may know the innocence of
their own Bishop, and may esteem him as their Bishop and expect his coining.
And as for those who like wolves[9] have invaded their Churches, Gregory
at Alexandria Basil at Ancyra, and Quintianus at Gaza, let them neither give
them the title of Bishop, nor hold any communion at all with them, nor receive
letters[10] from them, nor write to them. And for Theodorus, Narcissus, Acacius,
Stephanus, Ursacius, Valens, Menophantus, and George, although the last from
fear did not come from the East, yet because he was deposed by the blessed
Alexander, and because both he and the others were connected with the Arian madness,
as well as on account of the charges which lie against them, the holy Council
has unanimously deposed them from the Episcopate, and we have decided that they
not only are not Bishops, but that they are unworthy of holding communion with
the faithful.
For they who separate the Son and alienate the Word from the Father, ought
themselves to be separated from the Catholic Church and to be alien from the
Christian name. Let them therefore be anathema to you, because they have
'corrupted the word of truth[1].' It is an Apostolic injunction[2], ' If any man
preach any other Gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him he accursed.'
Charge your people that no one hold communion with them, for there is no
communion of light with darkness; put away from you all these, for there is no concord
of Christ in Belial[3]. And take heed, dearly beloved, that ye neither write
to them, nor receive letters from them; but desire rather, brethren and
fellow-ministers, as being present in spirit[3a] with our Council, to assent to our
judgments by your subscriptions[4], to the end that concord may be preserved by
all our fellow-ministers everywhere. May Divine Providence protect and keep you,
dearly beloved brethren, in sanctification and joy.
I, Hosius, Bishop, have subscribed this, and all the rest likewise.
This is the letter which the Council of Sardica sent to those who were
unable to attend, and they on the other hand gave their judgment in accordance;
and the following are the names both of those Bishops who subscribed in the
Council, and of the others also.
50. Hosius of Spain[5], Julius of Rome by his Presbyters Archidamus and
Philoxenus, Protogenes of Sardica, Gaudentius, Macedonius, Severus, PrAEtextatus,
Ursicius, Lucillus, Eugenius, Vitalius, Calepodius, Florentius, Bassus,
Vincentius, Stercorius, Palladius, Domitianus, Chalbis, Gerontius, Protasius,
Eulogus, Porphyrius, Dioscorus, Zosimus, Januarius, Zosimus, Alexander, Eutychius,
Socrates, Diodorus, Martyrius, Eutherius, Eucarpus, Athenodorus, Irenaeus,
Julianus, Alypius, Jonas, Aetius, Restitutus, Marcellinus, Aprianus, Vitalius, Valens,
Hermogenes, Castus, Domitianus, Fortunatius, Marcus, Anuianus, Heliodorus,
Musaeus, Asterius, Paregorius, Plutarchus, Hymenaeus, Athanasius, Lucius,
Amantius, Arius, Asclepius, Dionysius, Maximus, Tryphon, Alexander, Antigonus,
AElianus, Petrus, Symphorus, Musonius, Eutychus, Philologius, Spudasius, Zosimus,
Patricius, Adolius, Sapricius[6].
From Gaul the following; Maximianus[6a], Verissimus[6b], Victurus,
Valentinus[1], Desiderius, Eulogius, Sarbatius, Dyscolius[2], Superior, Mercurius,
Declopetus, Eusebius, Severinus[3], Satyrus, Martinus, Paulus, Optatianus,
Nicasius, Victor[4], Sempronius, Valerinus, Pacatus, Jes-ses, Ariston, Simplicius,
Metianus, Amantus[5], Amillianus, Justinianus, Victorinus[6], Satornilus,
Abundantius, Donatuanus, Maximus.
From Africa; Nessus, Gratus[7], Megasius, Coldaeus, Rogatianus,
Consortius, Rufinus, Manninus, Cessilianus, Herennianus, Marianus, Valerius, Dynamius,
Mizonius, Justus, Celestinus, Cyprianus, Victor, Honoratus, Marinus, Pantagathus,
Felix, Baudius, Liber, Capito, Minervalis, Cosmus, Victor, Hesperio, Felix,
Severianus, Optantius, Hesperus, Fidentius, Salustius, Paschasius.
From Egypt; Liburnius, Amantius, Felix, Ischyrammon, Romulus, Tiberinus,
Consortius, Heraclides, Fortunatius, Dioscorus, Fortuna-tianus, Bastamon,
Datyllus, Andreas, Serenus, Arius, Theodorus, Evagoras, Helias, Timotheus, Orion,
Andronicus, Paphnutius, Hermias, Arabion, Psenosiris, Apollonius, Muis,
Sarapampon[8], Philo, Philippus, Apollonius, Paphnutius, Paulus, Dioscorus, Nilammon,
Serenus, Aquila, Aotas, Harpocration, Isac, Theodorus, Apollos, Ammonianus, Nilus,
Her-aclius, Arion, Athas, Arsenius, Agathammon, Theon, Apollonius, Helias,
Paninuthius, Andragathius, Nemesion, Sarapion, Ammonius, Ammonius, Xenon,
Gerontius, Quintus, Leonides, Sempronianus, Philo, Heraclides, Hieracys, Rufus,
Pasophius, Macedonius, Apollodorus, Flavianus, Psaes, Syrus, Apphus, Sarapion, Esaias,
Paphnutius, Timotheus, Elurion, Gaius, MusAEus, Pistus, Heraclammon, Heron,
Helias, Anagamphus, Apollonius, Gaius, Philotas, Paulus, Tithoes, Eudaemon,
Julius. Those on the road[9] of Italy are Probatius, Viator, Facundinus, Joseph,
Numedius, Sperantius, Severus, Heraclianus, Faustinus, Antoninus, Heraclius,
Vitalins, Felix, Crispinus, Paulianus.
From Cyprus; Auxibius, Photius, Gerasius, Aphrodisius, Irenicus,
Nunechius, Athanasius, Macedonius, Triphyllius, Spyridon, Norbanus, Sosicrates.
From Palestine; Maximus, Aetius, Arius, Theodosius, Germanus, Silvanus,
Paulus, Claudius, Patricius, Elpidius, Germanus, Eusebius, Zenobius, Paulus,
Petrus.
These are the names of those who subscribed to the acts of the Council;
but there are very many beside, out of Asia, Phrygia, and Isauria[9a], who wrote
in my behalf before this Council was held, and whose names, nearly sixty-three
in member, may be found in their own letters. They amount altogether to three
hundred and forty-four[10].
CHAPTER IV.
Imperial and Ecclesiastical Acts in consequence of the Decision of the Council
of Sardica.
51. When the most religious Emperor Constantius heard of these things, he
sent for me, having written privately to his brother Constans of blessed
memory, and to me three several times in the following terms. Constantius Victor
Augustus to Athanasius[1]. Our benignant clemency will not suffer you to be any
longer tempest-tossed by the wild waves of the sea; for our unwearied piety has
not lost sight of you, while you have been bereft of your native home, deprived
of your goods, and have been wandering in savage wildernesses. And although I
have for a long time deferred expressing by letter the purpose of my mind
concerning you, principally because I expected that you would appear before us of your
own accord, and would seek a relief of your sufferings; yet forasmuch as fear,
it may be, has prevented you from fulfilling your intentions, we have
therefore addressed to your fortitude letters full of our bounty, to the end that you
may use all speed and without fear present yourself in our presence, thereby to
obtain the enjoyment of your wishes, and that, having experience of our
kindness, you may be restored again to your own. For this purpose I have besought my
lord and brother Constans Victor Augustus, in your behalf, that he would give
you permission to come, in order that you may be restored to your country with
the consent of us both, receiving this as a pledge of our favour.
The Second Letter.
Although we made it very plain to you in a former letter that you may
without hesitation come to our Court, because we greatly wished to send you home,
yet, we have further sent this present letter to your fortitude to exhort you
without any distrust or apprehension, to place yourself in the public
conveyances[2], and to hasten to us, that you may enjoy the fulfilment of your wishes.
The Third Letter.
Our pleasure was, while we abode at Edessa, and your Presbyters were
there, that, on one of them being sent to you, you should make haste to come to our
Court, in order that you might see our face, and straightway proceed to
Alexandria. But as a very long period has elapsed since you received letters from us,
and you have not yet come, we therefore hasten to remind you again, that you
may endeavour even now to present yourself before us with speed, and so may be
restored to your country, and obtain the accomplishment of your prayers. And for
your fuller information we have sent Achitas the Deacon, from whom you will be
able to learn the purpose of our soul, that you may now secure the objects of
your prayers.
Such was the tenor of the Emperor's letters; on receiving which I went up
to Rome to bid farewell to the Church and the Bishop: for I was at Aquileia[3]
when the above was written. The Church was filled with all joy, and the Bishop
Julius rejoiced with me in my return and wrote to the Church[4]; and as we
passed along, the Bishops of every place sent us on our way in peace. The letter of
Julius was as follows.
52. Julius to the Presbyters, Deacons, and people residing at
Alexandria[5].
I congratulate you, beloved brethren, that you now behold the fruit of
your faith before your eyes; for any one may see that such indeed is the case with
respect to my brother and fellow-Bishop Athanasius, whom for the innocency of
his life, and by reason of your prayers, God is restoring to you again.
Wherefore it is easy to perceive, that you have continually offered up to God pure
prayers and full of love. Being mindful of the heavenly promises, and of the
conversation that leads to them, which you have learnt from the teaching of my
brother aforesaid, you knew certainly and understood by the right faith that is in
you, that he, whom you always had as present in your most pious minds, would not
be separated from you for ever. Wherefore there is no need that I should use
many words in writing to you; for your faith has already anticipated whatever I
could say to you, and has by the grace of God procured the accomplishment of
the common prayers of you all. Therefore, I repeat again, I congratulate you,
because you have preserved your souls unconquered in the faith; and I also
congratulate no less my brother Athana-sius, in that, though he is enduring many
afflictions, he has at no time been forgetful of your love and earnest desires
towards him. For although for a season he seemed to be withdrawn from you in body,
yet he has continued to live as always present with you in spirit[6].
53. Wherefore he returns to you now more illustrious than when he went
away from you. Fire tries and purifies the precious materials, gold and silver:
but how can one describe the worth of such a man, who, having passed victorious
through the perils of so many tribulations, is now restored to you, being
pronounced innocent not by our voice only, but by the voice of the whole Council[7]?
Receive therefore, beloved brethren, with all godly honour and rejoicing, your
Bishop Athanasius, together with those who have been partners with him in so
many labours. And rejoice that you now obtain the fulfilment of your prayers,
after that in your salutary letter you have given meat and drink to your Pastor,
who, so to speak, longed and thirsted after your godliness. For while he
sojourned in a foreign land, you were his consolation; and you refreshed him during
his persecutions by your most faithful minds and spirits. And it delights me now
to conceive and figure to nay mind the joy of every one of you at his return,
and the pious greetings of the concourse, and the glorious festivity of those
that run to meet him. What a day will that be to you, when my brother comes back
again, and your former sufferings terminate, and his much-prized and desired
return inspires you all with an exhilaration of perfect joy! The like joy it is
ours to feel in a very great degree, since it has been granted us by God, to be
able to make the acquaintance of so eminent a man. It is fitting therefore that
I should conclude my letter with a prayer. May Almighty God, and His Son our
Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, afford you continual grace, giving you a reward
for the admirable faith which you displayed in your noble confession in behalf
of your Bishop, that He may impart unto you and unto them that are with you,
both here and hereafter, those better things, which 'the eye hath not seen, nor
ear heard, neither hath entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath
prepared for them that love Him[8],' through our Lord Jesus Christ, through
Whom to Almighty God be glory for ever and ever. Amen. I pray, dearly beloved
brethren, for your health and strength in the Lord.
54. The Emperor, when I came to him[9] with these letters, received me
kindly, and sent me forth to my country and Church addressing the following to the
Bishops, Presbyters, and People.
Constantius, Victor, Maximus, Augustus, to the Bishops and Presbyters of
the Catholic Church.
The most reverend Athanasius has not been deserted by the grace of God,
but although for a brief season he was subjected to trial to which human nature
is liable, he has obtained from the all-surveying Providence such an answer to
his prayers as was meet, and is restored by the will of the Most High, and by
our sentence, at once to his country and to the Church, over which by divine
permission he presided. Wherefore, in accordance with this, it is fitting that it
should be provided by our clemency, that all the decrees which have heretofore
been passed against those who held communion with him, be now consigned to
oblivion, and that all suspicions respecting them be henceforward set at rest, and
that immunity, such as the Clergy who are associated with him formerly enjoyed,
be duly confirmed to them. Moreover to our other acts of favour towards him we
have thought good to add the following, that all persons of the sacred
catalogue' should understand, that an assurance of safety is given to all who adhere to
him, whether Bishops, or other Clergy. And union with him will be a sufficient
guarantee, in the case of any person, of an upright intention. For whoever,
acting according to a better judgment and part, shall choose to hold communion
with him, we order, in imitation of that Providence which has already gone
before, that all such should have the advantage of the grace which by the will of the
Most High is now offered to them from us. May God preserve you.
The Second Letter.
Constantius, Victor, Maximus, Augustus, to the people of the Catholic
Church at Alexandria.
55. Having in view your welfare in all respects, and knowing that you have
for a long time been deprived of episcopal superintendence, we have thought
good to send back to you your Bishop Athanasius, a man known to all men for the
uprightness that is in him, and for the good disposition of his personal
character. Receive him, as you are wont to receive every one, in a suitable manner,
and, using his advocacy as your succour in your prayers to God, endeavour to
preserve continually that unanimity and peace according to the order of the
Church which is at the same time becoming in you, and most advantageous for us. For
it is not becoming that any dissension or faction should be raised among you,
contrary to the prosperity of our times. We desire that this offence may be
altogether removed from you, and we exhort you to continue stedfastly in your
accustomed prayers, and to make him, as we said before, your advocate and helper
towards God. So that, when this your determination, beloved, has influenced the
prayers of all men, even those heathen who are still addicted to the false
worship of idols may eagerly desire to come to the knowledge of our sacred religion.
Again therefore we exhort you to continue in these things, and gladly to
receive your Bishop, who is sent back to you by the decree of the Most High, and by
our decision, and determine to greet him cordially with all your soul and with
all your mind. For this is what is both becoming in you, and agreeable to our
clemency. In order that all occasions of disturbance and sedition may be taken
away from those who are maliciously disposed, we have by letter commanded the
magistrates who are among you to subject to the vengeance of the law all whom they
find to be factious. Wherefore taking into consideration both these things,
our decision in accordance with the will of the Most High, and our regard for you
and for concord among you, and the punishment that awaits the disorderly,
observe such things as are proper and suitable to the order of our sacred religion,
and receiving the aforementioned Bishop with all reverence and honour, take
care to offer up with him your prayers to God, the Father of all, in behalf of
yourselves, and for the well-being of your whole lives.
56. Having written these letters, he also commanded that the decrees,
which he had formerly sent out against me in consequence of the calumnies of
Eusebius and his fellows, should be cancelled and struck out from the Orders of the
Duke and the Prefect of Egypt; and Eusebius the Decurion[2] was sent to withdraw
them from the Order-books. His letter on this occasion was as follows.
Constantius, Victor, Augustus, to Nestorius[3]. (And in the same terms, to the
Governors of Augustamnica, the Thebais, and Libya.)
Whatever Orders are found to have been passed heretofore, tending to the
injury and dishonour of those who hold communion with the Bishop Athanasius, we
wish them to be now erased. For we desire that whatever immunities his Clergy
possessed before, they should again possess the same. And we wish this our Order
to be observed, that when the Bishop Athanasius is restored to his Church,
those who hold communion with him may enjoy the immunities which they have always
enjoyed, and which the rest of the Clergy enjoy; so that they may have the
satisfaction of being on an equal footing with others.
57. Being thus set forward on my journey, as I passed through Syria, I met
with the Bishops of Palestine, who when they had called a Council[4] at
Jerusalem, received me cordially, and themselves also sent me on my way in peace, and
addressed the following letter to the Church and the Bishops.
The Holy Council, assembled at Jerusalem, to the fellow-ministers in Egypt
and Libya, and to the Presbyters, Deacons, and People at Alexandria, brethren
beloved and greatly longed for, sends health in the Lord.
We cannot give worthy thanks to the God of all, dearly beloved, for the
wonderful things which He has done at all times, and especially at this time for
your Church, in restoring to you your pastor and lord, and our fellow-minister
Athanasius. For who ever hoped that his eyes would see what you are now
actually obtaining? Of a truth, your prayers have been heard by the God of all, Who
cares for His Church, and has looked upon your tears and groans, and has
therefore heard your petitions. For ye were as sheep scattered and fainting, not having
a shepherd[5]. Wherefore the true Shepherd, Who careth for His own sheep, has
visited you from heaven, and has restored to you him whom you desire. Behold,
we also, being ready to do all things for the peace of the Church, and being
prompted by the same affection as yourselves, have saluted him before you; and
communicating with you through him, we send you these greetings, and our offering
of thanksgiving, that you may know that we also are united in the bond of love
that joins you to him. You are bound to pray also for the piety of our most
God-beloved Emperors, who, when they knew your earnest longings after him, and his
innocency, determined to restore him to you with all honour. Wherefore receive
him with uplifted hands, and take good heed that you offer up due thanksgiving
on his behalf to God Who has bestowed these blessings upon you; so that you
may continually rejoice with God and glorify our Lord, in Christ Jesus our Lord,
through Whom to the Father be glory for ever. Amen.
I have set down here the names of those who subscribed this letter,
although I have mentioned them before[6]. They are these; Maximus, Aetius, Arius,
Theodorus[7], Germanus, Silvanus, Paulus, Patricius, Elpidius, Germanus, Eusebius,
Zenobius, Paulus, Macrinus[8], Petrus, Claudius.
58. When Ursacius and Valens saw all this, they forthwith condemned
themselves for what they had done, and going up to Rome, confessed their crime,
declared themselves penitent, and sought forgiveness[9], addressing the following
letters to Julius, Bishop of ancient Rome, and to ourselves. Copies of them were
sent to me from Paulinus, Bishop of Treveri [10].
A Translation from the Latin of a Letter[1] to Julius, concerning the
recantation of Ursacius and Valens[2].
Ursacius and Valens to the most blessed lord, pope Julius.
Whereas it is well known that we have heretofore in letters laid many
grievous charges against the Bishop Athanasius, and whereas when we were corrected
by the letters of your Goodness, we were unable to render an account of the
statement we had made; we do now confess before your Goodness, and in the presence
of all the Presbyters our brethren, that all the reports which have heretofore
come to your hearing respecting the case of the aforesaid Athanasius, are
falsehoods and fabrications, and are utterly inconsistent with his character.
Wherefore we earnestly desire communion with the aforesaid Athanasius, especially
since your Piety, with your characteristic generosity, has vouchsafed to pardon
our error. But we also declare, that if at any time the Eastern Bishops, or even
Athanasius himself, ungenerously should wish to bring us to judgment for this
matter, we will not depart contrary to your judgment. And as for the heretic
Arius and his supporters, who say that once the Son was not, and that the Son was
made of that which was not, and who deny that Christ is God and the Son of God
before the worlds, we anathematize them both now and for evermore, as also we
have set forth in our former declaration at Milan[3]. We have written this with
our own hands, and we profess again, that we have renounced for ever, as we
said before, the Arian heresy and its authors.
I Ursacius subscribed this my confession in person; and likewise I Valens.
Ursacius and Valens, Bishops, to their lord and brother, the Bishop
Athanasius.
Having an opportunity of sending by our brother and fellow Presbyter
Musaeus, who is coming to your Charity, we salute you affectionately, beloved
brother, through him, from Aquileia, and pray you, being as we trust in health, to
read our letter. You will also give us confidence, if you will return to us an
answer in writing. For know that we are at peace with you, and in communion with
the Church, of which the salutation prefixed to this letter is a proof. May
Divine Providence preserve you, my Lord, our beloved brother!
Such were their letters, and such the sentence and the judgment of the
Bishops in my behalf. But in order to prove that they did not act thus to
ingratiate themselves, or under compulsion in any quarter, I desire, with your
permission, to recount the whole matter from the beginning, so that you may perceive
that the bishops wrote as they did with upright and just intentions, and that
Ursacius and Valens, though they were slow to do so, at last confessed the truth.