Chapter XXXIX.--Of Theodorus, bishop of Mopsuestia.
When the divine Theodorus was ruling the church of Antioch, Theodorus, bishop of Mopsuestia, a doctor of the whole church and successful combatant against every heretical phalanx, ended this life. He had enjoyed the teaching of the great Diodorus, and was the friend and fellow-worker of the holy John, for they both together benefited by the spiritual draughts given by Diodorus. Six-and-thirty years he had spent in his bishopric, fighting against the forces of Arius and Eunomius, struggling against the piratical band of Apollinarius, and finding the best pasture for God's sheep. [957] His brother Polychronius [958] was the excellent bishop of Apamea, a man gifted with great eloquence and of illustrious character.
I shall now make an end of my history, and shall entreat those who meet with it to requite my labour with their prayers. The narrative now embraces a period of 105 years, beginning from the Arian madness and ending with the death of the admirable Theodorus and Theodotus. [959] I will give a list of the bishops of great cities after the persecution.
List of the bishops of great cities.
Of Rome:--
Miltiades.............................................................. ............................... [Melchiades. 311-314]
Silvester.............................................................. .................................................... [314-335]
Julius................................................................. ............... [337-352. Mark Jan. to Oct., 336]
Liberius............................................................... .................................................... [352-366]
Damasus................................................................ ................................................. [366-384]
Siricius............................................................... ..................................................... [384-398]
Anastasius............................................................. .................................................. [398-401]
Innocentius............................................................ .................................................. [402-417]
Bonifacius............................................................. ............................................. [960] [418-422]
Zosimus................................................................ .................................................. [417-418]
Cælestinus............................................................. ................................................. [422-432]
Of Antioch:--
Vitalius (Orthodox)............................................................. .................................... [312-318]
Philogonius (Orthodox)............................................................. .............................. [318-323]
Eustathius (Orthodox)............................................................. ........................... [961] [325-328]
Eulalius (Arians)............................................................... ................................. [962] [328-330]
Euphronius (Arians)............................................................... .......................... [963] [330-332]
Placidus (Arians)............................................................... ...................................... [332-342]
Stephanus (Arians)............................................................... ................................... [342-348]
Leontius (Arians)............................................................... ...................................... [348-357]
Eudoxius (Arians)............................................................... ..................................... [357-359]
Meletius (Orthodox)............................................................. .......................... [360 (died) 381]
Flavianus (Orthodox)............................................................. ................................. [381-404]
Porphyrius (Orthodox)............................................................. ............................... [404-413]
Alexander (Orthodox)............................................................. ................................ [413-419]
Theodotus (Orthodox)............................................................. ............................... [419-429]
Paulinus III. (Eustathians).......................................................... .............................. [362-388]
Evagrius (Eustathians).......................................................... ....................................... [388- ]
Of Alexandria:--
Peter.................................................................. ..................................................... [301-312]
Achillas............................................................... .................................................... [312-313]
Alexander.............................................................. ................................................. [313-326]
Athanasius............................................................. ................................................. [326-341]
Gregory (Arian)................................................................ ...................................... [341-347]
Athanasius............................................................. ................................................. [347-356]
George (heretic).............................................................. ........................................ [356-362]
Athanasius............................................................. ................................................. [363-373]
Peter (disciple of Athanasius)............................................................ ....................... [373-373]
Lucius (Arian)................................................................ ......................................... [373-377]
Peter.................................................................. ..................................................... [377-378]
Timothy................................................................ .................................................. [378-385]
Theophilus............................................................. ................................................. [385-412]
Cyril.................................................................. ..................................................... [412-444]
Of Jerusalem:--
Macarius............................................................... .................................................. [324-336]
Maximus................................................................ ................................................. [336-350]
Cyril.................................................................. ..................................................... [350-388]
John................................................................... ..................................................... [388-416]
Praylius............................................................... .................................................... [416-425]
Juvenalius............................................................. ................................................... [425-458]
Of Constantinopole:
Alexander.............................................................. ................................................. [326-340]
Eusebius of Nicomedia (Arian)................................................................ ................ [340-342]
Paul the Confessor.............................................................. .................................... [342-342]
Macedonius the enemy of the Holy Ghost................................................................ [342-360]
The impious Eudoxius............................................................... ............................... [360-370]
Demophilus of Beroea in Thrace (heretic).............................................................. ....... [370- ]
Gregory of Nazianzus.............................................................. ......................... [964] [380-381]
Nectarius.............................................................. .................................................. [381-398]
John Chrysostom............................................................. ....................................... [398-404]
Arsacius............................................................... ................................................... [404-406]
Atticus................................................................ .................................................... [406-426]
Sissinnius............................................................. ................................................... [426-428]
[957] Theodorus was born at Antioch in 350, consecrated bishop of Mopsuestia in 392, and died in 428 in Cilicia.
[958] The evidence is in favour of distinguishing this Polychronius from the monk described in the Religious History.
[959] "The date of the death of Theodotus is fixed for a.d. 429 by a passage of Theodoret's letter to Dioscorus, where, when speaking of his having taught for six years under him at Antioch, he refers to his blessed and holy memory, combined with one in his history, stating that the death of Theodore of Mopsuestia took place in the episcopate of Theodotus." Dict. Christ. Biog. iv. 983. The last event referred to by Theodoretus seems to be the accession of Isdigirdes II. in 440. Vide pp. 155, 156.
[960] cf. note on p. 156.
[961] Paulinus I. intervenes, 321-325.
[962] Paulinus II., 328-329, intervenes.
[963] On the difficulty of the Paulini, cf. Dict. of Christ. Biog. iv. 232 and ii. 322.
[964] Evagrius intervenes 370.
Dialogues.
The "Eranistes" [965] or "Polymorphus" [966] of the Blessed Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus.
------------------------
Prologue.
Some men, distinguished neither by family nor education, and without any of the honourable notoriety that comes of an upright life, are ambitious of achieving fame by wicked ways. Of these was the famous Alexander, the coppersmith, [967] a man of no sort of distinction at all,--no nobility of birth, no eloquence of speech, who never led a political party nor an army in the field; who never played the man in fight, but plied from day to day his ignominious craft, and won fame for nothing but his mad violence against Saint Paul.
Shimei, [968] again, an obscure person of servile rank, has become very renowned for his audacious attack on the holy David.
It is said too that the originator of the Manichæan heresy was a mere whipping-block of a slave, and, from love of notoriety, composed his execrable and superstitious writings.
The same line of conduct is pursued by many now, who after turning their backs on the honourable glory of virtue on account of the toil to be undergone ere it be won, purchase to themselves the notoriety that comes of shame and disgrace. For through eagerness to pose as champions of new doctrines they pick up and get together the impiety of many heresies, and compile this heresy of death.
Now I will endeavour briefly to dispute with them, with the double object of curing them, if I can, of their unsoundness, and of giving a word of warning to the whole.
I call my work "Eranistes, or Polymorphus," for, after getting together from many unhappy sources their baleful doctrines, they produce their patchwork and incongruous conceit. For to call our Lord Christ God only is the way of Simon, of Cerdo, of Marcion, [969] and of others who share this abominable opinion.
The acknowledgment of His birth from a Virgin, but coupled with the assertion that this birth was merely a process of transition, and that God the Word took nothing of the Virgin's nature, is stolen from Valentinus and Bardesanes and the adherents of their fables. [970]
To call the godhead and the manhood of the Lord Christ one nature is the error filched from the follies of Apollinarius. [971]
Again the attribution of capacity of suffering to the divinity of the Christ is a theft from the blasphemy of Arius and Eunomius. Thus the main principle of their teaching is like beggars' gabardines--a cento of ill-matched rags.
So I call this work Eranistes or Polymorphus. I shall write it in the form of a dialogue with questions and answers, propositions, solutions, and antitheses, and all else that a dialogue ought to have. I shall not insert the names of the questioners and respondents in the body of the dialogue as did the wise Greeks of old, but I shall write them at the side at the beginning of the paragraphs. They, indeed, put their writings in the hands of readers highly and variously educated, and to whom literature was life. I, on the contrary, wish the reading of what I write, and the discovery of whatever good it may give, to be an easy task, even to the illiterate. This I think will be facilitated if the characters of the interlocutors are plainly shown by their names in the margin, so the disputant who argues on behalf of the apostolical decrees is called "Orthodoxos," and his opponent "Eranistes." A man who is fed by the charity of many we commonly call "Beggar;" a man who knows how to get money together we call a "Chrematistes." So we have given our disputant this name from his character and pursuits.
I beg that all those into whose hands my book may fall will lay aside all preconceived opinion and put the truth to the test. For clearness' sake I will divide my book into three dialogues. The first will contain the contention that the Godhead of the only-begotten Son is immutable. The second will by God's help show that the union of the Godhead and the manhood of the Lord Christ is without confusion. The third will contend for the impassibility of the divinity of our saviour. After these three disputations we will subjoin several others as it were to complete them, giving formal proof under each head, and making it perfectly plain that the apostles' doctrine is preserved by us.
[965] eranos--a meal to which every one contributes a share; a club feast, or pic-nic, and eranistes is in classical Greek a contributor to such a feast. But eranizo = (a) "contribute," and (b) "beg for contributions." So eranistes is by some rendered "beggar." The idea of Theodoretus seems rather that his worse character is a picker up of various scraps of heresy from different quarters, and this explanation of the name is borne out by his use of the cognate verb eranizomai in reference to the selection by Audæus of some of the doctrines of Manes in Hist. iv. 9.
[966] Polymorphus = Multiform.
[967] 2 Tim. iv. 14
[968] 2 Kings xvi. 5
[969] Cerdo, the gnostic teacher of the middle of the 2nd c., and placed by Theodoretus (Hær. Fab. i. 24) in the reign of Antoninus, a.d. 138-161, is described by the Ps. Tertullian as denying that Christ came in the substance of the flesh, but in appearance only. According to Marcion the greater follower of Cerdo, Christ was not born at all, but came down from heaven to Capernaum a.d. 29, his body being an appearance and his death an illusion. Simon Magus, the "father of all heretics" of Irenæus (adv. Hær. pr. in lib. iii.) is apparently quoted rather as the supposed originator of Gnosticism, than from any definite knowledge of his tenets.
[970] Valentinus (taught at Rome c. 140) the arch-gnostic is identified with the doctrine of emanation. Bardesanes (Bar Daisan), who lived some thirty years later at Edessa, was a great leader of the Syrian school of oriental dualism. For mention of his son Harmonius vide Hist. p. 129.
[971] Condemned at Constantinople in 381.
Dialogue I.--The Immutable.
Orthodoxos and Eranistes.
Orth.--Better were it for us to agree and abide by the apostolic doctrine in its purity. But since, I know not how, you have broken the harmony, and are now offering us new doctrines, let us, if you please, with no kind of quarrel, investigate the truth.
Eran.--We need no investigation, for we exactly hold the truth.
Orth.--This is what every heretic supposes. Aye, even Jews and Pagans reckon that they are defending the doctrines of the truth; and so also do not only the followers of Plato and Pythagoras, but Epicureans too, and they that are wholly without God or belief. It becomes us, however, not to be the slaves of a priori assumption, but to search for the knowledge of the truth.
Eran.--I admit the force of what you say and am ready to act on your suggestion.
Orth.--Since then you have made no difficulty in yielding to this my preliminary exhortation, I ask you in the next place not to suffer the investigation of the truth to depend on the reasonings of men, but to track the footprints of the apostles and prophets, and saints who followed them. For so wayfarers when they wander from the high-road are wont to consider well the pathways, if haply they shew any prints of men or horses or asses or mules going this way or that, and when they find any such they trace the tracks as dogs do and leave them not till once more they are in the right road.
Eran.--So let us do. Lead on yourself, as you began the discussion.
Orth--Let us, therefore, first make careful and thorough investigation into the divine names,--I mean substance, and essences, and persons and proprieties, and let us learn and define how they differ the one from the other. Then let us thus handle afterwards what follows.
Eran.--You give us a very admirable and proper introduction to our argument. When these points are clear, our discussion will go forward without let or obstacle.
Orth.--Since we have decided then that this must be our course of procedure, tell me, my friend, do we acknowledge one substance of God, alike of Father and of the only begotten Son and of the Holy Ghost, as we have been taught by Holy Scripture, both Old and New, and by the Fathers in Council in Nicæa, or do we follow the blasphemy of Arius?
Eran.--We confess one substance of the Holy Trinity.
Orth.--And do we reckon hypostasis to signify anything else than substance, or do we take it for another name of substance?
Eran.--Is there any difference between substance and hypostasis? [972]
Orth--In extra Christian philosophy there is not, for ousia signifies to on, that which is, and hupostasis that which subsists. But according to the doctrine of the Fathers there is the same difference between ousia and hupostasis as between the common and the particular, and the species and the individual.
Eran.--Tell me more clearly what is meant by race or kind, and species and individual.
Orth.--We speak of race or kind with regard to the animal, for it means many things at once. It indicates both the rational and the irrational; and again there are many species of irrational, creatures that fly, creatures that are amphibious, creatures that go on foot, and creatures that swim. And of these species each is marked by many subdivisions; of creatures that go on foot there is the lion, the leopard, the bull, and countless others. So, too, of flying creatures and the rest there are many species; yet all of them, though the species are the aforesaid, belong to one and the same animal race. Similarly the name man is the common name of mankind; for it means the Roman, the Athenian, the Persian, the Sauromatian, [973] the Egyptian, and, in a word, all who are human, but the name Paulus or Petrus does not signify what is common to the kind but some particular man; for no one on hearing of Paul turns in thought to Adam or Abraham or Jacob, but thinks of him alone whose name he has heard. But if he hears the word man simply, he does not fix his mind on the individual, but bethinks him of the Indian, the Scythian, and the Massagete, and of all the race of men together, and we learn this not only from nature, but also from Holy Scripture, for God said, we read, "I will destroy man from the face of the earth," [974] and this he spake of countless multitudes, and when more than two thousand and two hundred years had gone by after Adam, he brought universal destruction on men through the flood, and so the blessed David says: "Man that is in honour and understandeth not," [975] accusing not one here nor one there, but all men in common. A thousand similar examples might be found, but we must not be tedious.