believe, he apprehended an insurrection; for the Scythians openly deplored the absence of their bishop. He well knew that the Scythians were a courageous nation, and that their country possessed many natural advantages, which rendered it necessary to the Roman empire; for it served as a barrier to ward off the invasions of the barbarians. Thus were the designs of the emperor frustrated by Vetranio. The Scythians themselves testify to the virtues of this bishop, and to his eminent sanctity of life. The resentment of the emperor at the defeat of his schemes was visited upon all the clergy except those of the Western churches; for Valentinian, who reigned over the Western regions, was attached to the Nicene doctrines, and was imbued with so much reverence for religion, that he never imposed any commands upon the priests, nor ever attempted to introduce any alteration in ecclesiastical regulations. ever might have been his capabilities for guiding the reins of the empire, (as, indeed, was evidenced by his deeds,) he considered that ecclesiastical matters were beyond the range of his jurisdiction. What CHAP. XXII.-DEBATE CONCERNING THE NATURE OF THE HOLY GHOST. IT IS DECIDED THAT HE IS TO BE CONSIDERED CONSUBSTANTIAL WITH THE FATHER AND THE SON. A QUESTION was renewed at this juncture which had previously excited much inquiry,' namely-whether the Holy Ghost is or is not to be considered consubstantial with the Father and the Son. Lengthened debates ensued on this subject, similar to those which had been held concerning the nature of God the Word. Those who asserted that the Son is dissimilar from the Father, and those who insisted that he is similar in substance to the Father, came to one common opinion concerning the Holy Ghost; for both parties maintained that the Holy Ghost differs in substance from the other two Persons of the Trinity, and that he is but the Minister, and the third Person of the Trinity in point of dignity and order. Those, on the contrary, who believed that the Son is consubstantial with the Father, believed also that the Spirit is consubstantial with the Father and the Son. This doctrine was zealously maintained in Syria by Apollinarius, bishop of Laodicea; 1 Compare Socrates, Eccl. Hist. ii. 45. A. D. 375.] DEATH OF LIBERIUS. 275 in Egypt, by Athanasius,' the bishop; and, in Cappadocia and in Pontus, by Basil and Gregory. The bishop of Rome, on hearing that this question was agitated with great acrimony, and that the contention seemed daily to increase, wrote to the churches of the East, and urged them to receive the doctrine upheld by the Western clergy, namely that the three Persons of the Trinity are of the same substance, and of equal dignity. The question having been thus decided by the Roman churches, peace was restored, and an end was put to the debate. HE IS CHAP. XXIII.-DEATH OF LIBERIUS, BISHOP OF ROME. SUCCEEDED BY DAMASUS AND URSINUS. ORTHODOX DOCTRINES PREVAIL THROUGHOUT THE WEST, EXCEPT AT MILAN. SYNOD HELD AT ROME, BY WHICH AUXENTIUS IS DEPOSED. ABOUT this period Liberius died,2 and Damasus succeeded to the bishopric of Rome. A deacon named Ursinus,3 having obtained some votes in his favour, caused himself to be clandestinely ordained by some bishops of little note, and endeavoured to create a division among the people, so as to form separate assemblies. He succeeded in effecting this division, and some of the people followed him, while the rest adhered to Damasus. This gave rise to many disputes, and to much contention, which at length proceeded to murder and bloodshed. The prefect of Rome was obliged to interfere, and to punish many of the clergy and people; and he put an end to the usurpation of Ursinus. With respect to doctrine, however, no dissension arose either at Rome or in any other of the Western churches. The people unanimously adhered to the form of belief established at Nicæa, and regarded the three Persons of the Trinity as equal in dignity and in power. Auxentius alone differed from the others in opinion; he was then bishop of Milan, and, in conjunction with a few partisans, was intent upon the introduction of innovations, and the maintenance of the Arian dogma of the dissimilarity of the Son and of the But 1 Or, more probably, Peter; for Athanasius was recently dead. Sozomen (as Valesius remarks) is careless in observing the proper order of time. 2 Comp. Socrates, Eccl. Hist. iv. 29. Or Ursicius. Concerning his quarrel with Damasus, bishop of Rome, see Baronius, Annal. a. d. 367. Holy Ghost, in opposition to the unanimous decision of the Western priests. The bishops of Gaul and of Venice,1 having reported that similar attempts to disturb the peace of the church were being made by others, the bishops of several provinces assembled not long after at Rome, and decreed that Auxentius and those who held his sentiments should be excluded from communion. They confirmed the faith established by the council of Nicæa, and annulled all the decrees that had been issued at Ariminum contrary to that faith, under the plea that these decrees had not received the assent of the bishop of Rome, nor of other bishops, and that they were disapproved by many who had been present at the synod, and had assisted in their enactment. That such was the decision really formed by the synod is testified by the epistle2 addressed by Damasus, the Roman bishop, and the rest of the assembly, to the bishops of Illyria. It is as follows: "Damasus, Valerius,3 and the other bishops of the holy assembly at Rome, to the dearly beloved brethren the bishops of Illyria, greeting in the Lord. "We believe that you uphold and teach to the people our holy faith, which is founded on the doctrines of the apostles. This faith differs in no respect from that inculcated by the Fathers; neither is it permitted to the priests of God, who are, by the right of their office, the instructors of the wise, to entertain any other sentiment. We have, however, been informed by some of our brethren of Gaul and of Venice, that certain individuals are bent upon the introduction of heresy. All bishops should diligently guard against this evil, lest some of their flock should be led by inexperience, and others by simplicity, to deviate from our own authorized interpretations. Those who devise strange doctrines ought not to be followed, but the opinions of our fathers ought to be retained, whatever may be the diversity of judgment around us. Hence Auxen tius, bishop of Milan, has been condemned, and with justice. It is, therefore, right that all the teachers of the Roman empire should be of one mind, and not pollute the faith by divers See the synodical epistle below. 2 This epistle is extant in Theodoret, Eccl. Hist. ii. 22. The synod by which it was written was probably held a. D. 369, and 93 bishops were present at its deliberations. 3 He was bishop of Aquileia. A. D. 375.] EPISTLE FROM THE SYNOD OF ROME. 277 conflicting doctrines. For, when the evil of heresy first began to develop itself, even as the blasphemy of the Arians is now exhibited, our fathers, to the number of three hundred and eighteen, assembled together at Nicæa, erected a wall of defence against the weapons of the devil, and prepared an antidote to the poison of corrupt doctrine. This antidote consists in the belief, that the Father and the Son have one Godhead, one virtue, and one substance (xpñμa). It is also requisite to believe that the Holy Ghost is of the same hypostasis as the Father and the Son. We have decreed, that those who hold any other doctrines are to be excluded from communion with us. Some have attempted to reverse this useful regulation and adorable decision; but the persons by whom this attempt was made at the council of Ariminum have since, in some measure, atoned for their presumption by confessing that they were deceived by certain specious arguments, which did not appear to them to be contrary to the principles laid down by our fathers at Nicæa. The number of individuals congregated at the council of Ariminum proves nothing in prejudice of orthodox doctrines, for the council was held without the sanction of the bishops of Rome, who ought to have been in the first place consulted, and without the assent either of Vincent, who during a very long series of years enjoyed the episcopal dignity, or of many other bishops who held the same sentiments as those last mentioned. Besides, as has been before stated, those persons who were deceived and induced to deviate from orthodox doctrines, testified their disapprobation of their own proceedings as soon as they made use of their own judgment. Is it not, therefore, manifest to you that the one true faith is that which was established at Nicea upon the authority of the apostles, and which must ever be retained inviolate, and that all bishops, whether of the East or of the West, who profess the Catholic religion, ought to consider it an honour to be in communion with us. We believe that it will not be long before those who maintain other sentiments will be excluded from communion, and deprived of the name and dignity of bishop; so that the people who are now oppressed by the yoke of those pernicious and deceitful principles, may have liberty to breathe. For it is not in the power of these bishops to undeceive the people, inasmuch as they are themselves deceived. Be then of one mind with all the priests of God; we believe that you adhere firmly to the faith, but that we may be more fully assured on this point, convince us of the same by your letters." CHAP. XXIV.-CONCERNING ST. AMBROSE AND HIS ELEVATION AND THE clergy of the West, having thus anticipated the designs of those who sought to introduce innovations among them,' carefully continued to preserve the inviolability of the faith which had from the beginning been handed down to them. With the solitary exception of Auxentius and his partisans, there were no individuals among them who entertained heterodox opinions. Auxentius, however, did not live long after this period. At his death, a sedition arose among the people of Milan concerning the appointment of a successor, and the city seemed in danger of a general insurrection. Those who had aspired to the bishopric, and been defeated in their expectations, were loud in their menaces, as is usual on such occasions. Ambrosius, who was then the governor of the province, being fearful lest further tumult should arise, went to the church and exhorted the people to cease from contention, to re-establish peace and concord, and to respect the laws. Before he had ceased speaking, all his auditors suppressed the angry feelings by which they had been mutually agitated against each other, and declared that he who was exhorting them to concord should be their bishop, and receive the rite of baptism, for he had never been baptized. After Ambrosius had repeatedly refused the proffered dignity, and even quitted the place that it might not be forced upon him, the people still persisted in their choice, and declared that the disputes would never be appeased unless he would accede to their wishes; and at length intelligence of these transactions was conveyed to court.2 It is said that the emperor Valentinian prayed and returned thanks to God, that the very man whom he had appointed governor, had been chosen to fill a priestly office. When he was informed of the earnest desires of the people and the refusal of Ambrosius, he inferred that Compare Socrates, Eccl. Hist. iv. 30. 2 See below, vii. 8, and the note there given. |