CHAP. IX.-SUFFERINGS OF THOSE WHO MAINTAINED THE NICENE FAITH. AGELIUS, BISHOP OF THE NOVATIANS. THE Christians who adhered to the Nicene doctrines, and the followers of the Novatian heresy,1 were treated with equal severity in the city of Constantinople. They were all ultimately expelled from the city; and the churches of the Novatians were closed by order of the emperor. The other party had no churches to be closed, having been deprived of them all during the reign of Constantius. At this period, Agelius, who from the time of Constantius had governed the church of the Novatians at Constantinople, was condemned to banishment. It is said that he was noted for his accurate and implicit observance of the ecclesiastical laws. With respect to his mode of life, he had attained to the highest degree of philosophy, namely, freedom from worldly possessions: this was evidenced by his daily conduct; he had but one coat, and always walked barefooted. Not long after his banishment he was recalled and restored to his church through the influence of Marcion, a man of extraordinary virtue and eloquence, who had formerly been enrolled among the troops of the palace, but was at this period a presbyter of the Novatians, and the teacher of grammar to Anastasia and Carosa,2 the daughters of the emperor. There are still baths at Constantinople which bear the names of these princesses. It was for the sake of Marcion alone that the privilege above-mentioned was conceded to the Novatians.

CHAP. X.-CONCERNING VALENTINIAN THE YOUNGER, AND

GRATIAN.

PERSECUTION EXCITED BY VALENS. THE HOMOOUSIANS, BEING PERSECUTED BY THE ARIANS AND MACEDONIANS, SEND AN EMBASSY TO ROME.3,

ABOUT this period, a son was born to Valentinian in the West, to whom the emperor gave his own name.

1 Compare Socrates, Eccl. Hist. iv. 9.

2 See the notes of Valesius on Socrates, Eccl. Hist. iv. 8.

Not long

3 Valesius remarks that the title of this chapter is incorrect, and that it was the Macedonians, and not the orthodox Christians, who sent the embassy to Rome.

PERSECUTION UNDER VALENS AND EUDOXIUS.

259

after, he proclaimed his son Gratian emperor; this prince was born before his father succeeded to the throne.

In the mean time, although hailstones of extraordinary magnitude fell in various places, and although many cities, particularly Nicea in Bithynia, were shaken by earthquakes, yet Valens the emperor, and Eudoxius the bishop, paused not in their career, but continued to persecute all Christians who differed from them in opinion. They succeeded to the utmost of their expectations in their machinations against those who adhered to the Nicene doctrines, for throughout many of the more distant provinces, and particularly in Thrace, Bithynia, and the Hellespont, these Christians were, during the greater part of the reign of Valens, deprived of their churches and of their priests. Valens and Eudoxius then directed their resentment against the Macedonians, who were more in number than the Christians above-mentioned in that reign, and persecuted them without mercy. The Macedonians, in apprehension of further sufferings, sent deputies to various cities, and finally agreed to have recourse to Valentinian and to Liberius, bishop of Rome, rather than conform to the doctrines of Eudoxius and Valens. In prosecution of this design, they selected three of their own number, namely, Eustathius, bishop of Sebaste, Silvanus, bishop of Tarsus, and Theophilus, bishop of Castabalis, and sent them to the emperor Valentinian; they likewise intrusted them with a letter, addressed to Liberius, bishop of Rome, and to the other bishops of the West, in which they entreated them, as prelates who had undeviatingly adhered to the faith of the apostles, and who were peculiarly called upon to watch over the purity of religion, to receive their deputies favourably, and to confer with them concerning the re-establishment of order in the church. When the deputies arrived in Italy, they found that the emperor was in Gaul, engaged in a war against the barbarians. As they considered that it would be perilous to visit the seat of war in Gaul, they delivered their letter to Liberius.1 After having conferred with him concerning the objects of their embassy, they condemned Arius and those who held and taught his doctrines; they renounced all heresies opposed to the faith established at Nicæa; and received the term "consubstantial," as being a word that conveys the same 1 Socrates (Eccl. Hist. iv. 12) places this mission A. D. 368. But Baronius would place it two, or even three, years earlier.

signification as the expression "like in substance." When they had presented a confession of faith analogous to the above to Liberius, he received them into communion with himself, and wrote to the bishops of the East, commending the orthodoxy of their faith, and detailing what had passed in the conference he had held with them. The confession of faith made by Eustathius and his companions was as follows.

CHAP. XI.-THE CONFESSION OF EUSTATHIUS, SILVANUS, AND THEOPHILUS, THE DEPUTIES OF THE MACEDONIANS, TO LIBERIUS, BISHOP OF ROME..

"To Liberius, our Lord and Brother, and Fellow Minister -Eustathius, Silvanus, and Theophilus, send greeting in the Lord.1

"THE desire of suppressing the absurd dogmas which heretics are perpetually broaching, to the scandal of the Catholic churches, has impelled us to assent to the decrees enacted at Lampsacus, at Smyrna, and at councils in other places, by the orthodox bishops. Having been sent on an embassy to your Holiness, as likewise to all the other bishops of Italy, and of the West, we hereby attest and declare that we adhere to the Catholic faith which was established at the holy council of Nicæa, by the blessed Constantine and three hundred and eighteen inspired fathers. This form of belief has ever since

We

remained inviolate; and it most justly admits the term 'consubstantial,' in testimony against the errors of Arius. attest, by these our signatures, that we have always held this faith, that we still hold it, and that we shall adhere to it to the last. We condemn Arius, his impious dogmas, and his disciples. We also condemn the heresies of Patropassius, of Sabellius, of Marcion, of Marcellus, of Paul of Samosata, and all who maintain such doctrines, as well as the doctrines themselves. We anathematize all heresies opposed to the holy faith established by the saintly fathers at Nicæa. We anathemátize Arius, and condemn all such decrees as were enacted at Ariminum, in opposition to the faith established by the holy council of Nicæa. We were formerly deluded by the guile

1 Compare Socrates, Eccl. Hist. iv. 12,

A. D. 366.]

COUNCILS OF SICILY AND TYANE.

261

and perjury of certain parties, and subscribed to these decrees when they were transmitted to Constantinople, from Nicæa, a city of Thrace."

At the conclusion of this document, they subjoined a copy of the entire formulary of Nicæa, and, having received from Liberius a written account of all that they had transacted, they embarked on board a ship then sailing from Sicily.

CHAP. XII-COUNCILS OF SICILY AND OF TYANE.

PERSECUTION
ATHANASIUS.

RENEWED

OF THE ORTHODOX. EXILE AND RETURN OF

A COUNCIL was convened in Sicily; and, after the same doctrines had been confirmed as those set forth in the confession of the deputies, the assembly was dissolved. At the same time, a council was held at Tyane;1 and Eusebius, bishop of Cæsarea in Cappadocia, Athanasius, bishop of Ancyra, Pelagius, bishop of Laodicea, Zeno, bishop of Tyre, Paul, bishop of Emesa, Otreius,2 bishop of Melitine, and Gregory, bishop of Nazianzen, were present, with many other prelates who, during the reign of Jovian, had assembled at Antioch, and determined to maintain the doctrine of the Son being consubstantial with the Father. The letter of Liberius and that addressed to the Western bishops were read at this council. These letters afforded high satisfaction to the members of the council; and they wrote to all the churches, desiring them to peruse the decrees of the Western bishops, and the documents written by Liberius and the bishops of Italy, of Africa, of Gaul, and of Sicily, which had been intrusted to the deputies of the council of Lampsacus. They urged them to reflect on the great number of prelates by whom these documents had been drawn up, and who were far more in number than the members of the council of Ariminum, and exhorted them to be of one mind, and to enter into communion with them, to signify the same by writing, and finally to assemble together at Tarsus in Cilicia, before the end of the spring. On the approach of the appointed day, when these bishops were accordingly on the point of repairing to Tarsus, about thirty-four of the Asiatic bishops assembled

1 This council was held probably A. D. 367, or early in 368.
2 He is mentioned by Basil the Great in his 316th Epistle.

1

66

in Caria, commended the design of establishing uniformity of belief in the church, but objected to the term consubstantial," and insisted that the formularies of faith set forth by the councils of Antioch and Seleucia, and maintained by Lucian the martyr, and by many of their predecessors, in the midst of great tribulations, ought to obtain the ascendency over all others. The emperor, at the instigation of Eudoxius, prevented the council from being convened in Cilicia, and even prohibited it under severe penalties. He also wrote to the governors of the provinces, commanding them to eject all bishops from their churches who had been banished by Constantine and recalled by Julian. Those who were at the head of the government of Egypt were anxious to deprive Athanasius of his bishopric, and expel him from the city for, according to the edict of the emperor, pecuniary and other punishments were to be visited upon all magistrates and officers who neglected the execution of the mandate. The Christians of the city, however, assembled, and besought the governor not to banish Athanasius without further consideration of the terms of the mandate, which merely specified all bishops who had been banished by Constantine and recalled by Julian; and it was manifest that Athanasius was not of this number, inasmuch as he had been recalled by Constantius, and banished by Julian at the very time that all the other bishops had been recalled, and had been finally recalled by Jovian. The governor was by no means convinced by these arguments; but, perceiving that Athanasius could only be conveyed away by force, as the people assembled in crowds, and as commotion and perturbation prevailed throughout the city, he began to apprehend an insurrection, and therefore wrote to the emperor, without making any attempt against the bishop. Some days afterwards, when the popular excitement had abated, Athanasius secretly quitted the city at dusk, and concealed himself. The very same night, the governor of Egypt and the military chiefs took possession of the church in which Athanasius generally dwelt, and sought him in every part of the edifice, and even on the roof, but in vain; for they had calculated upon seizing the moment when the popular commo

It is probable that we should read here Antioch for Caria, as Valesius suggests. Another synod held at Antioch in Caria is mentioned by Sozomen below, vii. 2.