Page images
PDF
EPUB

APPEARANCE OF A CROSS IN THE HEAVENS.

149

who refused to conform to his sentiments. The emperor marched into Illyria, and entered Sirmium, whither Vetranio had repaired by appointment. The soldiers who had proclaimed him emperor suddenly changed their mind, and saluted Constantius as sole sovereign, and as Augustus. Vetranio, perceiving that he was betrayed, threw himself as a suppliant at the feet of Constantius. Constantius stripped him of the purple and the emblems of the imperial dignity, obliged him to return to private life, liberally provided for his wants out of the public treasury, and told him that at his advanced age he ought to live in quietude, without striving to burden himself with the cares of government. After terminating these arrangements in favour of Vetranio, Constantius sent a large army into Italy against Magnentius. He then conferred the title of Cæsar on his cousin Gallus, and sent him into Syria to defend the provinces of the East.

CHAP. V.-CYRIL SUCCEEDS MAXIMUS IN THE SACERDOTAL OFFICE; AND THE SIGN OF THE CROSS, SURPASSING THE SUN IN SPLENDOUR, AGAIN APPEARS IN THE HEAVENS, AND IS

VISIBLE DURING SEVERAL DAYS.

AT the time that Cyril succeeded Maximus in the government of the church of Jerusalem, the sign of the cross appeared in the heavens;2 its radiance was not feeble and divergent like that of comets, but splendid and concentrated. Its length was about fifteen stadia from Calvary to the Mount of Olives, and its breadth was in proportion to its length. So extraordinary a phenomenon excited universal terror. Men, women, and children left their houses, the marketplace, or their respective employments, and ran to the church, where they sang hymns to Christ together, and voluntarily confessed their belief in God. The intelligence was quickly transmitted throughout our dominions, and was conveyed, so to speak, throughout the earth by those who had witnessed the wonderful spectacle at Jerusalem. The emperor was made acquainted with the occurrence, partly by the numerous reports concerning it which were then current, and partly by 1 Compare Socrates, Eccl. Hist. ii. 25, 28.

2 Compare Socrates, Eccl. Hist. ii. 28, and Valesius' notes in loco.

a letter from Cyril1 the bishop. It was said that this prodigy was the fulfilment of an ancient prophecy contained in the Holy Scriptures. It was the means of the conversion of many Greeks and Jews to Christianity.

CHAP. VI.-PHOTINUS, BISHOP OF SIRMIUM, HIS HERESY, AND

THE COUNCIL CONVENED AT SIRMIUM IN OPPOSITION THERETO. THREE FORMULARIES OF FAITH.

:

ABOUT this time,2 Photinus, bishop of Sirmium, laid before the emperor, who was then staying at that city, a heresy which he had originated some time previously. His natural ease of utterance and powers of persuasion enabled him to lead many into his own way of thinking. He acknowledged that there was one God Almighty, by whose word all things were created, but would not admit that the generation and existence of the Son was before all ages; on the contrary, he alleged that Christ derived his existence from Mary. As soon as this opinion was divulged, it excited the indignation of the Eastern and of the Western bishops, and was rejected as contrary to the faith and it was equally opposed by those who maintained the doctrines of the Nicene council, and by those who favoured the tenets of Arius. The emperor also regarded the heresy with aversion, and convened a council at Sirmium, where he was then residing. Of the Eastern bishops, George, bishop of Alexandria, Basil, bishop of Ancyra, and Mark, bishop of Arethusa, were present at this council; and among the Western bishops were Valens bishop of Mursa, and Hosius the Confessor. This latter, who had attended the council of Nicæa, had not long previously been condemned to banishment through the machinations of the Arians; he was summoned to the council of Sirmium by the command of the emperor, extorted by the Arians, who believed that their party would be strengthened, if they could gain over, either by force or persuasion, a man held in universal admiration and esteem, as was Hosius. The period at which the council was convened at Sirmium, was the year

The letter here alluded to by Sozomen was addressed by Cyril to Constantius, and is extant among his Works, p. 305, ed. Oxon. 1703. 2 Compare Socrates, Eccl. Hist. ii. 29.

[ocr errors]

A. D. 351.]

COUNCIL OF SIRMIUM.

151

after the expiration of the consulate of Sergius and Nigrinian; and during this year there were no consuls either in the East or the West, owing to the insurrections excited by the tyrants. Photinus was deposed by this council, because he was accused of countenancing the errors of Sabellius and Paul of Samosata. The council then proceeded to draw up three formularies of faith, of which one was written in Greek, and the others in Latin. But they did not agree with each other, nor with any other of the former expositions of doctrine, either in word or import. It is not said in the Greek formulary, that the Son is consubstantial, or of like substance, with the Father; but it is there declared, that those who maintain that the Son had no commencement, or that he proceeded from an expansion of the substance of the Father, or that he is united to the Father without being subject to him, are excommunicated. In one of the Roman formularies, it is forbidden to say, of the substance of the Godhead, that the Son is either consubstantial, or of like substance with the Father, as such statements do not occur in the Holy Scriptures, and are beyond the reach of the understanding and knowledge of men. It is said, that the Father must be recognised as superior to the Son in honour, in dignity, in divinity, and in the relationship in which he stands as Father; and that it must be confessed that the Son, like all created beings, is subject to the Father, that the Father had no commencement, and that the generation of the Son is unknown to all save the Father. It is related, that when this formulary was completed, the bishops became aware of the errors it contained, and endeavoured to withdraw it from the public, and to correct it; and that the emperor threatened to punish those who should retain or conceal any of the copies that had been made of it. But having been once published, no efforts were adequate to suppress it altogether.

The third formulary is of the same import as the others. It prohibits the use of the term "substance," and assigns the following reason for the prohibition. "The term 'substance' having been used with too much simplicity by the Fathers, and having been a cause of offence to many of the unlearned multitude, we have deemed it right totally to reject the use of it and we would enjoin the omission of all mention of the term in allusion to the Godhead, for it is nowhere said in the Holy Scriptures, that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are of

the same substance.' But we say, in conformity with the Holy Scriptures, that the Son is like unto the Father."

Such was the decision arrived at in the presence of the emperor concerning the faith. Hosius at first refused to assent to it. Compulsion, however, was resorted to; and, being extremely old, he sunk, so to speak, beneath the blows that were inflicted on him, and yielded his consent and signature.2

The bishops strove to entice Photinus, by the promise of re-establishment in his bishopric, to reject his former sentiments and sign their formulary; but, far from yielding to them, he challenged them to hold a disputation with him. On the day appointed for this purpose, the bishops, therefore, assembled with the judges who had been appointed by the emperor to preside at their meetings, and who, in point of eloquence and dignity, held the first rank in the palace. Basil, bishop of Ancyra, was selected to commence the disputation against Photinus. The conflict lasted a long time, on account of the numerous questions started and the answers given by each party, and which were immediately taken down in writing; but finally the victory declared itself in favour of Basil. Photinus was banished, but remained firm in his original sentiments. He wrote many works in Greek and Latin, in which he endeavoured to show that all opinions except his own were erroneous. I have now concluded all that I had to say concerning Photinus and the heresy to which his name was affixed.

CHAP. VII.-DEATH OF THE TYRANTS MAGNENTIUS AND SILVANUS. SEDITION OF THE JEWS IN PALESTINE. GALLUS CESAR IS SLAIN.

In the mean time3 Magnentius made himself master of ancient Rome, and put numbers of the senators and of the people to death. Hearing that the troops of Constantius were

1 Valesius remarks that there is a discrepancy between the account given here and as it stands in the treatise of Athanasius de Synodis, and in Socrates' narrative of the synod of Ariminum, Eccl. Hist. ii. 37.

2 Compare Socrates, Eccl. Hist. ii. 13, and notes in loco. 3 Compare Socrates, Eccl. Hist. ii. 32.

A. D. 354.]

DEATH OF GALLUS CÆSAR.

153

approaching, he retired into Gaul, and here the two parties had frequent encounters, in which sometimes the one and sometimes the other was victorious. At length, however, Magnentius was defeated, and fled to Mursa, which is the fortress of Gaul,' and here he strove to revive the courage of his soldiers, who were much dispirited by their defeat. But although they received Magnentius with the honours usually paid to emperors, and rendered him the customary demonstrations of respect, they proclaimed Constantius emperor. Magnentius, concluding, from this circumstance, that he was not destined by God to hold the reins of empire, endeavoured to retreat from the fortress to some distant place. But he was pursued by the troops of Constantius, and being overtaken at a spot called Mount Seleucus, he escaped alone from the encounter, and fled to Lugduna. On his arrival there he slew his own mother and his brother, whom he had named Cæsar, and lastly he killed himself. Not long after, Decentius, another of his brothers, put an end to his own existence. Still the public tumults were not quelled; for not long after, Silvanus assumed the supreme authority in Gaul: but he was put to death by the generals of Constantius.

The Jews of Diocæsarea also took up arms and invaded Palestine and the neighbouring territories, with the design of shaking off the Roman yoke.2 On hearing of their insurrection, Gallus Cæsar, who was then at Antioch, sent troops against them, defeated them, and destroyed Diocæsarea. Gallus, intoxicated with success, aspired to the supreme power, and he slew Magnus the treasurer, and Domitian, the prefect of the East, because they apprized the emperor of his designs. The anger of Constantius was excited; and he summoned him to his presence. Gallus did not dare to refuse obedience, and set out on his journey. When, however, he reached the island Havonius, he was killed by the emperor's order; this event occurred in the third year of his consulate, and in the seventh year of the reign of Constantius.

The fortress of Mursa was not in Gaul, but Pannonia. Socrates has made the same mistake as Sozomen. See Spanheim's Observations on the Emperor Julian's Orat. i. p. 230.

2 Compare Socrates, Eccl. Hist. ii. 33, 34,

« PreviousContinue »