4. And on account of these things all are groaning and lamenting with themselves; yet they have such a dread of his tyranny and power that they cannot venture on accusing him. And of these things, as we have said already, one might take account in the case of a man who held Catholic sentiments and belonged to our own number; but as to one who has betrayed [1403] the mystery (of the faith), and who swaggers [1404] with the abominable heresy of Artemas,--for why should we hesitate to disclose his father?--we consider it unnecessary to exact of him an account for these things.
5. Then at the close of the epistle they add the following words:--We have been compelled, therefore, to excommunicate this man, who thus opposeth God Himself, and refuses submission, and to appoint in his place another bishop for the Church Catholic, and that, as we trust, by the providence of God--namely, the son of Demetrianus, a man of blessed memory, and one who presided over the same Church with distinction in former times, Domnus by name, a man endowed with all the noble qualities which become a bishop. And this fact we have communicated to you in order that ye may write him, and receive letters of communion [1405] from him. And that other may write to Artemas, if it please him; and those who think with Artemas may hold communion with him, if they are so minded.
[1392] paroikia [= jurisdiction. See p. 163, note 3, supra.]
[1393] arnesitheou .
[1394] katabrabeuon, perhaps = "receiving" bribes from.
[1395] 1 Tim. vi. 5.
[1396] doukenarios, the name given under the Emperors to those procurators who received 200 sestertia of annual salary.
[1397] hupagoreuon. [Letters, e.g., from Zenobia.]
[1398] sekreton (from the Latin secerno, to separate) was the name given to the elevated place, railed in and curtained, where the magistrate sat to decide cases.
[1399] kataseiousi tais othonais, alluding to the custom of shaking the oraria or linen handkerchiefs as a token of applause. [Elucid. II.]
[1400] suneisaktous gunaikas, priests'-housekeepers. See Lange on Nicephorus vi. 30, and B. Rhenanus on Rufinus, vii. The third canon of the Nicene Council in the Codex Corbeiensis has this title, De subintroductis id est adoptivis sororibus. Of the subintroduced, that is, the adopted sisters.See also on the abuse, Jerome, in the Epistle to Eustochius. They appear also to have been called commanentes and agapetæ. See the note of Valesius in Migne. [Vol. ii. p. 47, and (same vol.) Elucidation II. p. 57.]
[1401] hierateion.
[1402] Referring either to Proverbs vi. or to Ecclesiasticus xxv.
[1403] exorchesamenon, danced away.
[1404] empompeuonta.
[1405] koinonika grammata. On this Valesius gives the following note:--The Latins call these litteræ communicatoriæ, the use of which is of very ancient date in the Church. They called the same also formatæ, as Augustine witnesses in Epistle 163. There were, moreover, two kinds of them. For there were some which were given to the clergy and laity when about to travel, that they might be admitted to communion by foreign bishops. And there were others which bishops were in the way of sending to other bishops, and which they in turn received from others, for the purpose of attesting their inter-communion; of which sort the Synod speaks here. These were usually sent by recently-ordained bishops soon after their ordination. Augustine, Epistle 162; Cyprian, in the Epistle to Cornelius, p. 320; and the Synodical Epistle of the Council of Sardica, appear to refer to these, though they may refer also to the formatæ. [Vol. i. p. 12, n. 9.]
II.--Fragments Apparently of the Same Epistle of the Synod of Antioch;
To Wit, of that Part of It Which It is Agreed that Eusebius Left Unnoticed. [1406]
------------------------
He says, therefore, in the commentaries (they speak of Paul), that he maintains the dignity of wisdom.
And thereafter:
If, however, he had been united [1407] according to formation and generation, this is what befalls the man. And again: For that wisdom, as we believe, was not congenerate [1408] with humanity substantially, but qualitatively. [1409]
And thereafter:
In what respect, moreover, does he mean to allege that the formation [1410] of Christ is different and diverse from ours, when we hold that, in this one thing of prime consequence, His constitution differs from ours, to wit, that what in us is the interior man, is in Him the Word.
And thereafter:
If he means to allege that Wisdom dwells in Him as in no other, this expresses indeed the same mode of inhabitation, though it makes it excel in respect of measure and multitude; He being supposed to derive a superior knowledge from the Wisdom, say for example, twice as large as others, or any other number of times as large; or, again, it may be less than twice as large a knowledge as others have. This, however, the catholic and ecclesiastical canons disallow, and hold rather that other men indeed received of Wisdom as an inspiration from without, which, though with them, is distinct from them; [1412] but that Wisdom in verity came of itself substantially into His body by Mary.
And after other matters:
And they hold that there are not two Sons. But if Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and if Wisdom also is the Son of God; and if the Wisdom is one thing and Jesus Christ another, there are two Sons.
And thereafter:
Moreover understand (Paul would say) the union with Wisdom in a different sense, namely as being one according to instruction and participation; [1413] but not as if it were formed according to the substance in the body.
And after other matters:
Neither was the God who bore the human body and had assumed it, without knowledge [1414] of human affections [1415] in the first instance; [1416] nor was the human body without knowledge, in the first instance, of divine operations in him in whom He (the God) was, and by whom He wrought these operations. He was formed, in the first instance, as man in the womb; and, in the second instance, [1417] the God also was in the womb, united essentially with the human, [1418] that is to say, His substance being wedded with the man.
[1406] In Leontius of Byzantium, contra Nestor., book iii., towards the end.
[1407] Copulatus erat.
[1408] Congeneratum.
[1409] Secundum qualitatem.
[1410] Formationem.
[1411] We say, that as the exterior and the interior man are one person, so God the Word and humanity have been assumed as one person, a thing which Paul denies.--Can.
[1412] Alia est apud ipos.
[1413] Secundum disciplinam et participationem. Paul of Samosata used to say that the humanity was united with the Wisdom as instruction (disciplina) is united with the learner by participation.--Can. [See Hooker, book v. cap. 52, sec. 4.]
[1414] Expers.
[1415] Passionum, sufferings.
[1416] Principaliter.
[1417] Secundario, i.e., kata deuteron logon.--Turrian.
[1418] sunousiomenos to anthropino.
III.--From the Acts of the Disputation Conducted by Malchion Against Paul of Samosata. [1419]
------------------------
The compound is surely made up of the simple elements, [1420] even as in the instance of Jesus Christ, who was made one (person), constituted by God the Word, and a human body which is of the seed of David, and who subsists without having any manner of division between the two, but in unity. You, however, appear to me to decline to admit a constitution [1421] after this fashion: to the effect that there is not in this person, the Son of God according to substance, but only the Wisdom according to participation. For you made this assertion, that the Wisdom bears dispensing, and therefore cannot be compounded; [1422] and you do not consider that the divine Wisdom remained undiminished, even as it was before it evacuated itself; [1423] and thus in this self-evacuation, which it took upon itself in compassion (for us), it continued undiminished and unchangeable. And this assertion you also make, that the Wisdom dwelt in Him, just as we also dwell in houses, the one in the other, [1424] and yet not as if we formed a part of the house, or the house a part of us.
[1419] In Petrus Diaconus, De Incarnat. ad Fulgentium, ch. 6. Among the works of Fulgentius, Epistle 16.
[1420] Ex simplicibus fit certe compositum.
[1421] Compositionem.
[1422] Quia sapientia dispendium patiatur et ideo composita esse non possit--the sense intended being perhaps just that Paul alleged that the divine Wisdom admitted of being dispensed or imparted to another, but not of being substantially united with him.--Tr.
[1423] Exinanisset.
[1424] Some read alter in altero, others alter in altera.
IV.--A Point in the Same Disputation. [1425]
------------------------
Did I not say before that you do not admit that the only-begotten Son, who is from all eternity before every creature, was made substantially existent [1426] in the whole person of the Saviour; [1427] that is to say, was united with Him according to substance?
[1425] From the same Acts in Leontius, as above.
[1426] ousiosthai.
[1427] In toto Salvatore.
Elucidations.
------------------------
I.
(The epistle written by Malchion, p. 169.)
Malchion, though a presbyter of Antioch, reflects the teaching of Alexandria, and illustrates its far-reaching influence. Firmilian, presiding at the Council of Antioch, was a pupil of Origen; and Dionysius was felt in the council, though unable to be present. Malchion and Firmilian, therefore, vindicate the real mind of Origen, though speaking in language matured and guarded. This council was, providentially, a rehearsal for Nicæa.
II.
(Putting a stop to psalms, etc., p. 170.)
Coleridge notes this, with an amusing comment on Paulus Samosatenus, [1428] and refers to Pliny's letter, of which see vol. v. p. 604, this series. Jeremy Taylor, from whom Coleridge quotes, gives the passage of our author as follows: "Psalmos et cantus qui ad Dom. nostri J. C. honorem decantari solent, tanquam recentiores et a viris recentioris memoriæ editos, exploserit" (Works, ii. p. 281, ed. Bohn, 1844). Observe what Coleridge says elsewhere [1429] on errors attributed to Origen: "Never was a great man so misunderstood as Origen." He adds: "The caro noumenon was what Origen meant by Christ's flesh consubstantial with His Godhead.'"
[1428] Notes on English Divines, vol. i. p. 199.
[1429] Ibid., p. 313.
Archelaus
Archelaus.
[Translated by the Rev. S. D. F. Salmond, M.A.]
Introductory Notice
to
Archelaus.
------------------------
[a.d. 277.] The Manichæan heresy, which was destined to operate so terribly against the Church and the purity of the Gospel, encountered its earliest successful antagonism in the Thebaid; and I have not doubted the wisdom of prefixing this Disputation to the veritable name and work of Alexander of Lycopolis, as important to the complete history of the great Alexandrian school. The Edinburgh translator of this work regards it as an "authentic relic of antiquity," in spite of Beausobre, who treats it as a romance. I have forced myself, in this republication, to reject no theory of the Edinburgh collaborators to which I have not been able to give as much critical attention, at least, as they have evidently bestowed upon their work. It seems to me a well-sustained presumption that the work is fundamentally real, and Dr. Neander admits its base of fact. It is useful, at any rate, in its form and place, as here presented, and so much may be inferred from the following:--
Translator's Introductory Notice.
A certain memorable Disputation, which was conducted by a bishop of the name of Archelaus with the heretic Manes, is mentioned by various writers of an early date. [1430] What professes to be an account of that Disputation has come down to us in a form mainly Latin, but with parts in Greek. A considerable portion of this Latin version was published by Valesius in his edition of Socrates and Sozomen, and subsequently by others in greater completeness, and with the addition of the Greek fragments. [1431] There seems to be a difference among the ancient authorities cited above as to the person who committed these Acts to writing. Epiphanius and Jerome take it to have been Archelaus himself, while Heraclianus, bishop of Chalcedon, represents it to have been a certain person named Hegemonius. In Photius [1432] there is a statement to the effect that this Heraclianus, in confuting the errors of the Manichæans, made use of certain Acts of the Disputation of Bishop Archelaus with Manes which were written by Hegemonius. And there are various passages in the Acts themselves which appear to confirm the opinion of Heraclianus. [1433] Zacagnius, however, thinks that this is but an apparent discrepancy, which is easily reconciled on the supposition that the book was first composed by Archelaus himself in Syriac, and afterwards edited, with certain amendments and additions, by Hegemonius. That the work was written originally in Syriac is clear, not only from the express testimony of Jerome, [1434] but also from internal evidence, and specially from the explanations offered now and again of the use of Greek equivalents. It is uncertain who was the author of the Greek version; and we can only conjecture that Hegemonius, in publishing a new edition, may also have undertaken a translation into the tongue which would secure a much larger audience than the original Syriac. But that this Greek version, by whomsoever accomplished, dates from the very earliest period, is proved by the excerpts given in Epiphanius. As to the Latin interpretation itself, all that we can allege is, that it must in all probability have been published after Jerome's time, who might reasonably be expected to have made some allusion to it if it was extant in his day; and before the seventh century, because, in quoting the Scriptures, it does not follow the Vulgate edition, which was received generally throughout the West by that period. That the Latin translator must have had before him, not the Syriac, but the Greek copy, is also manifest, not only from the general idiomatic character of the rendering, but also from many nicer indications. [1435]