Church History 2.17–2.24

About this time Alexander, bishop of Alexandria, being about to depart this life, left Athanasius as his successor, having directed the vote to him, as I think, by divine commands. For they say that Athanasius tried to flee, and was compelled against his will by Alexander to accept the episcopate. Apolinarius the Syrian bears witness to this, saying: “Impiety does not hesitate to make war afterward too. First it armed itself against the man's blessed teacher, and he was present as his advocate, as a son for his father. Then it turned against him himself, when he came to succeed to the episcopate, after much flight, but found according to God, as had been shown beforehand by divine revelations to the blessed man who entrusted the episcopate to him, that the successor would be no other than he. For he was being called from life; and being already at the point of departure, he called Athanasius by name, who was not present. When a man of the same name who was present answered the call, he said nothing to him, as not calling him. Again he called; and when this happened many times, the one present was passed over in silence, and the one absent was made known. And the blessed Alexander said prophetically: ‘Athanasius, you think you have escaped; but you will not escape,’ showing that he was being called to the contest.” This is what Apolinarius writes about Athanasius. Those of the heresy of Arius say that after Alexander's death those who held with Alexander and with Melitius were in communion with one another; that fifty-four bishops came together from the Thebaid and the rest of Egypt and agreed on oath to choose by common vote the man who should govern the church of Alexandria; but that seven of the bishops broke their oath and, against the judgment of all, ordained Athanasius by stealth; and that for this reason many of the people and of the clergy in Egypt avoided communion with him. But I am persuaded that this man did not come to the high priesthood without God, being able in speech and thought and able to withstand plots, such a man as his time particularly needed. He was a churchman in the fullest degree and most fitted for the priesthood, having shown himself such from youth, so to speak, self-taught. Indeed, they say that the following happened to him when he was not yet grown up. The Alexandrians still hold a public and very splendid festival on the yearly day of the martyrdom of Peter, who had been their bishop. Alexander, who then led the church, was keeping it; and having already completed the liturgy, he was waiting for those who were to dine with him. Spending the time by himself, he had his eyes on the sea. Seeing from a distance some boys playing on the shore and imitating a bishop and the customs of the church, so long as he saw that the imitation was harmless, he enjoyed the sight and was pleased with what was done. But when they touched also on the secret rites, he was troubled; and calling the leading clergy, he pointed out the boys, ordered them to be caught and brought to him, and asked what their game was, and what words and actions there were in it. At first they were afraid and denied it; but when he persisted in his questioning, they revealed that Athanasius had been their bishop and leader, and that some of the uninitiated boys had been baptized by him. Alexander carefully examined them as to what the priest of the game had asked them or done, and what they had answered or been taught. Finding that the whole order of the church had been exactly observed with them, he decided, after consulting the priests about him, that those who had once in simplicity been counted worthy of divine grace ought not to be baptized again. But he completed for them the other rites that only those who are ordained and administer the mysteries may perform. Athanasius, and the other boys who had been presbyters and deacons in the game, he handed over to their families, with God as witness, to be brought up for the church and led on to what they had imitated. Not long afterward he had Athanasius as his companion at table and his secretary. Well brought up, and having attended grammarians and rhetoricians, he was already reaching manhood when, before his episcopate, he gave those who talked with him proof that he was a wise and learned man. When Alexander died leaving him as successor, his reputation grew still more, confirmed by his own virtues and by the testimony of Antony the great monk. For when Athanasius summoned him, Antony obeyed, came into the cities, attended the churches, and agreed with him in his views about God. He held him as a friend in all things and turned away from those who opposed or hated him.

What made him most renowned of all was that those who held the views of Arius and Melitius were always plotting against him and yet never seemed to convict him justly. At first Eusebius tried him by letter, asking him to receive Arius's party, and threatened, without putting it in writing, to do him harm if he disobeyed. When he would not yield, maintaining that those who had invented a heresy by innovating against the truth and had been anathematized by the synod at Nicaea were not to be received, Eusebius worked to have the emperor himself receive Arius and grant him a return. How this came about I shall tell shortly. At that time the bishops were again in strife among themselves, splitting hairs over the term “of the same essence.” Some held that those who accepted it blasphemed, as holding the Son to be without existence of his own, and as thinking the same as Montanus and Sabellius. Others again turned away from the first party as pagans and accused them of introducing many gods. Eusebius son of Pamphilus and Eustathius of Antioch wore themselves out most of all over such matters. Both confessed the Son of God as existing in his own subsistence; yet, as if they did not understand each other, they slandered each other. Eustathius accused Eusebius of innovating against what had been decided at Nicaea about the doctrine; Eusebius said that he approved those decisions, and reproached Eustathius with the opinion of Sabellius.

A synod was held at Antioch, and Eustathius was deprived of the church of Antioch: in truth, as is widely said, because he praised the faith of Nicaea, openly attacked Eusebius's party, and Paulinus, bishop of Tyre, and Patrophilus of Scythopolis, whose opinion the priests of the East followed, and turned away from them as holding the views of Arius; but the pretext was that he had been caught disgracing the priesthood by unholy deeds. Because of his deposition a very great disturbance was stirred up at Antioch, so that the people almost took up swords and the whole city was in danger. This itself did him no little harm with the emperor. For when he learned that this had happened and that the people of the church had been divided in two, he was very angry and suspected him of being the cause of the disturbance. Yet he sent one of the distinguished officers about him with orders to put the people in fear and to stop the disturbance without tumult or harm. Those who had deposed Eustathius, who had gathered at Antioch for this purpose, reckoned that if they set over the church there someone of their own opinion who was known to the emperor and esteemed for learning, they would easily have the others obedient; so they thought it good to entrust the see of Antioch to Eusebius son of Pamphilus. They wrote about this to the emperor, declaring that it was exceedingly pleasing to the people as well; for so all those of the clergy and people who were hostile to Eustathius had requested. But Eusebius wrote to the emperor declining. The emperor praised his refusal, since a law of the church forbade one who had once led a church to seek another episcopate, and wrote to Eusebius approving his judgment and calling him blessed, as worthy to be bishop not of one city but of the whole world. He also wrote to the people of the church of Antioch about concord, and that they should not covet one who was bishop of others, since it is not good to desire what belongs to others. Besides these, he sent another letter separately to the synod; and in his letter to Eusebius he likewise admired his refusal. Having learned that Euphronius, a presbyter from Cappadocia, and George of Arethusa were approved in the faith, he ordered them to ordain whichever of these they judged best, or another who should appear worthy, as head of the church of Antioch. When they had received the emperor's letters, they ordained Euphronius. Eustathius, as I have learned, bore the false accusation quietly, judging this the better course. He was a good and upright man in general, and justly admired for his eloquence, as can be seen from the speeches of his that are in circulation, which are esteemed for their old-fashioned diction, the soundness of their thoughts, the beauty of their words, and the grace of their style.

About this time Julius held the see of Rome, after Mark, who had been bishop for a short time after Silvester; and Maximus held that of Jerusalem after Macarius. It is said that Maximus had been ordained by Macarius as bishop of the church of Diospolis, but was kept back by the inhabitants of Jerusalem. For being a confessor and good in other respects, he was the people's candidate, in their judgment, for the episcopate there after Macarius's death. When the people took it hard to be deprived of one whose virtue they had experienced, and a disturbance threatened, it seemed good that the people of Diospolis should choose another bishop, and that Maximus should remain in Jerusalem and share the priesthood with Macarius, and after his death lead the church. It should be known, however, that those who have looked into these matters closely maintain that this happened by Macarius's own wish and was urged on the people. For they say that he repented of the ordination of Maximus, reflecting that since Maximus held right views about God and was dear to the people because of his confession, he must necessarily be kept for his own succession. For he feared that after his death the party of Eusebius and Patrophilus, who held the views of Arius, would find an opportunity and entrust the see there to one of their own opinion. For even while Macarius was alive they had attempted innovations; but being excommunicated by him, they kept quiet for this reason.

Meanwhile the rivalry that had arisen among the Egyptians from the beginning had not yet come to an end. For when, at the synod of Nicaea, the Arian heresy had been entirely anathematized and the followers of Melitius had been received on the terms stated, Melitius, when Alexander returned to Egypt, handed over to him the churches he had unlawfully brought under himself, and lived in Lycus. But not long afterward, being about to depart this life, he appointed in his place one John, one of his intimates, contrary to the decree of the synod of Nicaea, and again became a cause of disorder to the churches. When the Arians saw the Melitians making innovations, they too threw the churches into confusion. As usually happens in such disturbances, some admired the opinion of Arius, others held that those ordained by Melitius ought to lead the churches, and attached themselves to them. Though the two parties had formerly been at variance with each other, when they saw the people following the priests of the catholic church they fell into envy, made a truce with one another, and took up a common enmity against the clergy of Alexandria. They mingled and conversed together, brought forward charges, and made defences, to such an extent that in course of time most people in Egypt called the Melitians adherents of Arius, although the Melitians differed only over the leadership of churches, while the Arians held the same views about God as Arius. Yet, though privately rejecting each other's positions, they endured feigning against their convictions and agreeing in the fellowship of their enmity, each thinking they would easily get what they wanted. In time, naturally, through their discussions on these matters they became familiar with the doctrines and held the same views about God. From then on the affair of Arius returned to its former turmoil, and peoples and clergy cut themselves off from communion with one another. Moreover, in other cities, especially among the Bithynians and the people of the Hellespont and in the city of Constantine, the question of Arius's doctrines was fanned up again. It is said, for instance, that Eusebius, bishop of Nicomedia, and Theognis of Nicaea persuaded the man whom the emperor had entrusted with keeping the document of the synod of Nicaea, erased their signatures, and set about teaching openly that one should not believe the Son to be of the same essence as the Father. When Eusebius was accused of this, he spoke openly to the emperor and, pointing to the robe he was wearing, said: “If this garment were cut in two before my eyes, I would never say that each part was of the same essence.” The emperor was greatly vexed at this. For he had thought that such inquiries had ended after the synod of Nicaea, and he saw them stirred up again beyond his expectation. Not least, Eusebius and Theognis grieved him by holding communion with certain Alexandrians whom the synod had reserved for repentance as not holding right views, and whom he himself had ordered to be sent away as causes of dissension, and who were for this reason living away from their country. Some say that it was angered for this reason that the emperor condemned Eusebius and Theognis to exile. But on this I have written above what I heard from those who knew exactly.

They were the first causes of the troubles that befell Athanasius. Having very great freedom of speech and power with the emperor, they were eager to bring Arius back to Alexandria as one of their opinion and a friend, and to drive Athanasius from the church as their opponent. So they slandered him to Constantine as the cause of strife and tumult in the church, and as keeping out of the church those who wished to enter, when all could be of one mind if only this were allowed. Many of the bishops and clergy who were with John confirmed that the slanders against him were true; they came continually to the emperor, saying that they were orthodox and accusing him and the bishops under him of murders, imprisonments, unjust beatings and woundings, and burnings of churches. When Athanasius in turn informed the emperor, charging John's party with unlawful ordinations, innovation against the decisions of Nicaea, unsound faith, and acts of violence and insult against those who held right views about God, Constantine no longer knew whom to believe. As they were bringing such charges against each other, and many accusers on both sides were often troubling him, since he cared greatly for the concord of the peoples, he wrote to Athanasius not to keep anyone out of the church, and that if this were reported again later, he would send without delay someone to expel him from the city of Alexandria. If anyone wishes to read the emperor's letter itself, the part about this reads as follows: “Having, then, knowledge of my will, grant unhindered entry to all who wish to enter the church. For if I learn that you have hindered any of those who lay claim to the church, or have kept them from entering, I will at once send someone who will depose you by my command and remove you from your place.” When Athanasius wrote and persuaded the emperor that those of Arius's party should not be admitted to communion with the church, Eusebius, seeing that he would not attain his aim while Athanasius was working for the opposite, decided that the man must be put out of the way by every device. Having no pretext for so great a plot, he promised the Melitians to secure the help of the powerful men about the emperor if they would accuse Athanasius. From this Athanasius faced his first charge: that he had imposed a tax of linen tunics on the Egyptians and had exacted such a levy from his accusers. But Apis and Macarius, presbyters of the church of Alexandria, who happened to be there, were able to prove the accusation false. On this charge Athanasius was summoned, and they accused him again of having sent a chest of gold to one Philumenus, as plotting against the ruler. When the emperor had found the accusers guilty of false accusation, he allowed Athanasius to return home, and wrote to the people of Alexandria, bearing witness to his great reasonableness and right faith, saying that he had been glad to meet him and was persuaded that he was a godly man, and that he had endured the accusation because of envy and had proved superior to his accusers. Having learned that many Egyptians were still contending on the pretext of Melitius, he urged the people in his letter to look to God, to keep his own judgment in mind, to be well disposed to one another, and to drive away with all their strength those who plotted against their concord. Writing in this way to the public, the emperor called all to concord and was eager that the church should not be torn apart.

The Melitians, having failed in their first attempt, wove other charges against Athanasius: one, that he had broken a sacred chalice; the other, that he had killed a certain Arsenius, cut off his arm, and kept it with him for sorcery. This Arsenius, a cleric, was said to have fallen into some sin and gone into hiding, for he suspected that he would be punished when called to account by his bishop. Those plotting against Athanasius turned what had happened into the most extreme slander. They searched carefully for Arsenius, found him, treated him kindly, promised to give him every goodwill and safety, and secretly brought him to one of their intimates who shared their aims; his name was Prines, presbyter of a monastery. Having hidden Arsenius there, they went eagerly about the market-places and the gatherings of those in authority, spreading the story that he had been murdered by Athanasius. A certain monk John was also prepared to bring such an accusation. When this shameful rumour had spread among many, so far that it reached the ears of the emperor, Athanasius saw that if he happened to be charged on this count too, it would be hard to defend himself before judges already prejudiced by such rumours. So he countered the stratagems of his opponents, and, winning over everyone as far as he could, he took care that the truth should not be hidden by their slanders. But it was hard to persuade most people while Arsenius did not appear. Reckoning that he could not clear himself of suspicion in any other way than by proving that the man said to be dead was alive, he sent one of his most trusted deacons to search for him. The deacon came to the Thebaid and, when some monks told him, learned where he was living. When he came to Prines, with whom he was hidden, he did not find Arsenius himself; for learning beforehand of the deacon's arrival, they had moved him to Lower Egypt. But he took Prines, and also Elias, one of his companions, who was said to have moved Arsenius elsewhere, and brought them to Alexandria. Both, brought before the commander of the military forces in Egypt, confessed that Arsenius was alive, that he had earlier been hidden with them unnoticed, and that he was now living in Egypt. Athanasius took care that this should be made known to Constantine. The emperor wrote back to him to hold carefully to his priesthood and to care for the good order and piety of the people, and to make nothing of the plots of the Melitians, since he well knew that envy stirred them to such false and fabricated charges and to the disturbances against the church. He himself, he said, would not permit such things in future; but if they did not keep quiet, he would be their judge according to the civil laws and would punish them, as men who not only plotted unjustly against the innocent but also unjustly corrupted the good order and piety of the church. Having written thus to Athanasius, the emperor ordered the letter to be read in public, so that all might know his purpose. From then on the followers of Melitius were afraid and kept quiet for a time, fearing the ruler's threat. The church throughout Egypt, at peace and directed by the leadership of so great a priest, grew manifold daily, as many joined it from the pagan multitude and from the other heresies.

About this time, we have received, the Indians of the interior, who had remained untouched by the preaching of Bartholomew, came to share in the doctrine through Frumentius, who became a priest and teacher of the sacred learning among them. So that we may know, from the wonder of what befell the Indians, that the doctrine of the Christians received its establishment not from men, as some think who tell marvels, it is necessary to relate the cause of Frumentius's ordination. It is as follows. The most esteemed philosophers among the Greeks made it a great concern to visit unknown cities and places. So Plato, the companion of Socrates, stayed among the Egyptians to learn what they knew. He also sailed to Sicily to see the craters there, in which fire bubbles up of itself continually as from a spring, and often overflows and runs like a river, devouring the neighbouring land, so that many fields still appear burned and receive neither seed nor planting of trees, as they report of the land of the Sodomites. Empedocles too, a man who practised philosophy brilliantly among the Greeks and treated his science in heroic verse, visited these craters. Being perplexed about the eruption of the fire, or having judged it better to die in this way, or, to put it more truly, perhaps not knowing himself why he devised such a departure from life before his time, he leaped into the fire and perished. Democritus of Cos too visited very many cities, climates, countries and nations, and he says somewhere of himself that he spent eighty years abroad. Besides these, countless others of the wise men among the Greeks, ancient and more recent, pursued this. Emulating them, a certain Meropius, a philosopher of Tyre in Phoenicia, went to the Indians. Two boys accompanied him, Frumentius and Aedesius, both related to him, whom he was leading through his studies and educating liberally. Having visited as much of India as he could, he set out on his return, finding a ship bound for Egypt. It happened that, for want of water or other necessities, the ship put in at a certain harbour, and the Indians there rushed down and killed everyone, including Meropius; for they had just then broken their treaty with the Romans. But taking pity on the boys because they were young, they took them alive and brought them to their king. He appointed the younger his cupbearer, and Frumentius steward of his household and manager of his property; for he saw that he was sensible and very capable at administration. When they had shown themselves useful and faithful for a long time, the king, dying and leaving a son and a wife, rewarded their goodwill with freedom and allowed them to live wherever they wished. They were eager to return to their families at Tyre. But since the king's son was still very young, his mother begged them both to stay a short time and govern the kingdom until the boy grew to manhood. Out of respect for the queen's entreaty they administered the palace and the government of the Indians. Frumentius, perhaps moved by divine manifestations, or God stirring him of his own accord, inquired whether there were any Christians among the Indians, or Romans among the merchants who sailed there. Seeking them out carefully, he called them to himself, welcomed and befriended them, and had them meet together for prayer and assemble as is the custom of the Romans; and in every way he encouraged them to honour the Divine, building houses of prayer. When the king's son was already reaching youth, they asked leave of him and of the queen, who thought it unbearable to be parted from them; having persuaded them, they departed as friends and came into the Roman dominions. Aedesius went to Tyre to see his family, and there was afterward made a presbyter. Frumentius, putting off for a time the journey to Phoenicia, came to Alexandria; for he thought it not right that zeal for divine things should take second place to country and family. Meeting Athanasius, who led the church of Alexandria, he told him about the Indians, and that they needed a bishop to care for the Christians there. Athanasius gathered the priests who were present, took counsel about this, and ordained Frumentius bishop of India, reckoning that he was most fit and able to make the religion great among those to whom he had first shown the name of Christian and given the seed of a share in the doctrine. Frumentius returned to the Indians and is said to have exercised the priesthood so gloriously that he was praised by all who had experience of him, and admired no less than the apostles. For God made him most renowned, working through him many wonderful healings, signs and wonders. Such was the beginning of the priesthood among the Indians.