Church History 7.14–7.20

Meanwhile, as Theodosius was preparing for the war against Maximus, a son, Honorius, was born to him. When his army was ready, he left his son Arcadius ruling in Constantinople and joined Valentinian at Thessalonica. The envoys sent by Maximus he neither openly sent away nor received; but taking his soldiers he advanced into Italy. About this time Agelius, bishop of the Novatians in Constantinople, being about to die, designated in his place Sisinnius, a presbyter of those under him. When the people complained that he had not chosen Marcian, renowned for piety, he, seeming to grow better, ordained Marcian, and addressed the people in the church: “After me you have Marcian; after him, Sisinnius.” Having said this he died not long after, having presided over his own heresy with distinction for forty years. Some maintain that this man was also a confessor in pagan times. Not long after, when Timothy and Cyril had departed this life, Theophilus succeeded to the throne of the Alexandrians and John to that of Jerusalem. In Constantinople Demophilus, the leader of the Arian heresy, also died; a certain Marinus, summoned from Thrace, was entrusted with his succession, but Dorotheus, coming from Antioch in Syria as more suitable, presided over the heresy. Meanwhile, when Theodosius had arrived in Italy, rumours about the war prevailed according to each one’s wish; and among the Arians it was said that many had fallen in the battle and the emperor had come under the usurper. And, as though what they invented had already happened, they took courage; and running together they set fire to the house of Nectarius the bishop, angry because he held the churches. But the war turned out as the emperor wished. For Maximus’s soldiers, either from fear of the force prepared against them or by treachery, seized the usurper and killed him. Andragathius, who had killed Gratian, when he learned this, leapt into a river flowing by, arms and all, and perished. The war having been ended in this way, having fittingly avenged Gratian, he came to Rome and celebrated a triumphal procession with Valentinian, and set the affairs of the church in Italy in good order. For Justina too had happened to die,

At that time, when Paulinus died at Antioch, those who held assemblies under him remained apart, turning away from Flavian as one who had broken the oaths given in the time of Meletius, though they differed in nothing concerning doctrine. Evagrius was appointed their bishop; and when he had lived only a short time, no one else filled this succession, since Flavian worked against it. Those who refused communion with him held assemblies by themselves. About this time the bishop of the Alexandrians was converting the temple of Dionysus there into a church; for he had asked for it and received it as a gift from the emperor. When the images there were being removed and the inner shrines uncovered, deliberately seeking to insult the pagan mysteries, he paraded these things: the phalluses, and whatever else hidden in the shrines was or seemed ridiculous, he brought out publicly for display. The pagans, astounded at the truth and at the unexpectedness of what had happened, would not keep quiet; having made preparations among themselves, they fell upon the Christians. Killing some and wounding others, they seized the Serapeum. This was a temple most conspicuous for its beauty and size, lying on a hill. Coming suddenly from there as from a citadel, they seized many of the Christians and, torturing them, tried to force them to sacrifice. Those who refused they crucified, or broke their legs, or killed in other ways. When the riot had prevailed for a long time, the magistrates came to them, reminded them of the laws, and urged them to cease from war and to leave the Serapeum. At that time Romanus commanded the military units in Egypt, and Evagrius governed Alexandria as prefect. When they accomplished nothing, they reported what had happened to the emperor. Those in the Serapeum were made more determined by their consciousness of what they had dared; and also by a certain Olympius, who was with them in a philosopher’s dress and persuaded them that they must not neglect their ancestral rites, but, if need be, die for them. And when he saw them disheartened as the images were being destroyed, he advised them not to abandon their religion, saying that the statues were perishable matter and images, and therefore underwent destruction; but that certain powers had dwelt in them and had flown away to heaven. Teaching such things and having a crowd of pagans about him, he stayed in the Serapeum. When what had happened was reported, the emperor called the Christians who had been killed blessed, as having shared in the honours of martyrdom by facing danger for the doctrine; but he ordered that those who had killed them should be pardoned, so that, respecting the kindness, they might most easily change over to Christianity; and that the temples in Alexandria should be destroyed, as having been the cause of the people’s riot. It is said that when the emperor’s letter about these things was read publicly, the Christians shouted loudly, because right from the opening it blamed the pagans. Upon this those guarding the Serapeum fell into fear and turned to flight; and the Christians, seizing the place, held it from then on. Olympius, as I have learned, a little before, at an untimely hour of the night preceding the day on which this happened, heard someone in the Serapeum singing “Alleluia.” Since the doors were shut and all was quiet, and he saw no one but heard only a voice singing the same psalm, he understood the sign; and escaping everyone’s notice, he left the Serapeum, found a ship and sailed to Italy. They say that when this temple was being demolished, some of the characters called hieroglyphic, resembling the sign of the cross, appeared engraved on the stones; and that those skilled in such things interpreted this writing to signify “life to come.” This became an occasion of Christianity for many of the pagans, because other writings declared that this temple would come to an end when this character appeared. So the Serapeum was taken, and not long after was converted into a church named after the emperor Arcadius. In some cities, however, the pagans still fought zealously for the temples: among the Arabians the people of Petra and Areopolis; among the Palestinians those of Raphia and Gaza; among the Phoenicians the inhabitants of Heliopolis; and among the Syrians especially those of the temple of Apamea on the river Axius. I have learned that for the guarding of their temples they often used the help of men from Galilee and of the villages about Lebanon; and at last they went so far in daring as to kill Marcellus, the bishop there. For he, reckoning that there was no other easy way for them to be turned from their former religion, overthrew the temples in the city and the villages. Learning that there was a very large temple at Aulon, a district of the territory of Apamea, he took some soldiers and gladiators and went against it. When he came near, he waited out of range of missiles; for he had gout and could neither fight nor pursue nor flee. While the soldiers and gladiators were busy taking the temple, some of the pagans, learning that he was alone, came out where the place was free of fighting, suddenly fell upon him, seized him, threw him on a pyre and killed him. For the present they escaped notice. But when in time they were discovered, Marcellus’s sons were eager to avenge their father; but the synod of the province prevented it, thinking it not right to take vengeance for such a death, for which the one who died so, and his family and friends, ought rather to give thanks, as one thought worthy to die for God. So these things happened.

At this time Nectarius, who governed the church of Constantinople, was the first to stop having a presbyter appointed over the penitents; and almost all the bishops everywhere followed. What this is, or whence it began, or for what reason it ceased, others perhaps tell otherwise; I will relate it as I think. Since never to sin at all requires a nature more divine than human, and God commanded that pardon be given to those who repent, even if they sin often; and since in asking pardon one must confess the sin, it seemed burdensome to the priests from the beginning, as was natural, that sins should be announced as in a theatre, with the multitude of the church as witness. So they appointed for this a presbyter of the best conduct, discreet and prudent. Sinners came to him and confessed what they had done; and he, setting for each one’s sin the penance to be done or paid, released them, to exact the penalty from themselves. For the Novatians, for whom there is no question of repentance, there was no need of this; but among the other heresies it still prevails to this day. It is carefully kept in the western churches, and especially in that of the Romans. For there the place of those in penance is in plain view; they stand downcast and as if mourning. When the divine liturgy has been completed, not having shared in what is lawful for the initiated, they throw themselves face down on the ground with wailing and lamentation. The bishop, weeping, runs to meet them and likewise falls on the ground; and with loud cries the whole multitude of the church too is filled with tears. After this the bishop rises first and raises those lying down; and having prayed as is fitting for repentant sinners, he dismisses them. Then each one, of his own will, afflicts himself privately with fasts, or abstinence from baths, or from foods, or other things he has been ordered, and waits for the time the bishop has fixed for him. At the appointed time, having paid the penalty like a debt, he is released from the sin and assembles with the people. The priests of the Romans have kept these things from the beginning even to our day. In the church of Constantinople the presbyter appointed over the penitents carried out his office, until a certain woman of noble family, who had been ordered by this presbyter, for the sins she had confessed, to fast and supplicate God, and who for this reason was staying in the church, disclosed that she had been led into sexual immorality by a man who was a deacon. When the people learned this, they were angry, as if the church had been insulted; and the greatest discredit fell upon the clergy. Nectarius, at a loss what to do about what had happened, deprived the offender of his diaconate. When some advised him to allow each person to share in the mysteries as he was conscious within himself and could have confidence, he abolished the presbyter over penance. And from that time this has prevailed — the ancient way, I think, with its dignity and strictness, having already begun little by little to slide into an indifferent and careless habit. For before, as I suppose, the sins were fewer, both from the shame of those who announced their own faults and from the strictness of the judges appointed for this. For this reason, I conjecture, the emperor Theodosius too, providing for the good fame and dignity of the churches, made a law that women should not be admitted to the ministry of God unless they had children and were over sixty years old, according to the express command of the apostle Paul; and that women who cut off their hair should be driven from the churches, and the bishops who admitted them deprived of their episcopate.

But let each consider these things as he pleases. The emperor condemned Eunomius to exile beyond the frontier. … at that time in Constantinople, holding the views of Eunomius, left a heresy named after himself. For when the question was raised whether the Son knows the last hour, and the saying in the Gospels that only the Father knows seemed to stand against it, he maintained that the Son was not without this knowledge either, since he had received all things from the Father without lack. When the leaders of the heresy at that time would not accept his argument, he separated himself from their communion and went to Eunomius, who was in exile. A deacon and others had already arrived, who had been sent from Constantinople to accuse him and, if necessary, to debate; but Eunomius, learning why they had come, approved the arguments of Eutychius and prayed with him, although it is not lawful among them to pray with those who come from elsewhere without letters showing that they are of the same belief — by signs written in the letters, unknown to others. Not long after this inquiry Eunomius died; and the head of the heresy in Constantinople would not receive Eutychius, hating him out of jealousy, because, though he was not even a cleric, he himself, eager to oppose his arguments, was unable to solve the problem. From this Eutychius, with those who thought as he did, separated into a heresy of his own. As for the dispute about divine baptism, the common account blames him and Theophronius. These things I have written from what I learned, for a brief knowledge of the causes from which the Eunomians were divided. To go through all the arguments raised on this account would be long, and not easy for me, since I am not experienced in such debates. About this time an inquiry arose among the Arians in Constantinople too, whether God could be called Father before the Son existed, since among them it is confessed that the Son is from things that are not. Dorotheus, who had been summoned from Antioch in place of Marinus and presided over this heresy, declared that God was not called Father before the Son existed, since the name is relative. But Marinus maintained the opposite, and held that the Father was always Father even when the Son did not exist — either because he thought so, or because he was at odds with Dorotheus, who had been preferred to preside over their church. For this reason the multitude was divided into two. Dorotheus with those who obeyed him remained in the houses of prayer they held; Marinus’s party built others and held assemblies by themselves. They were called Psathyrians, or “of the Goths”: the former because a certain Theoctistus, a seller of psathyria — this is a kind of cake — zealously supported this belief; and “of the Goths” because Selenas their bishop believed likewise. Almost all the barbarians followed him and held assemblies with them; for they were most obedient to Selenas, who had been the secretary and successor of Ulfilas, their former bishop, and was able to teach in church not only in their ancestral language but also in Greek. Not long after, when a dispute about precedence arose between Marinus and Agapius, whom he had ordained bishop of those of their belief at Ephesus, they separated from one another and all but made war on each other, the Goths helping Agapius. For this reason, it is said, many of the clergy there, blaming the ambition of their leaders, entered into communion with the catholic church. In this way the Arians were first divided, and still now in the cities where they are they hold assemblies apart. But those in Constantinople, after quarrelling among themselves for thirty-five years, were later brought to concord by Plinthas, who shared their belief, a man of consular rank and commander of horse and foot, who had become most powerful at the palace; and, meeting together, they decreed that this question should never again be brought to debate. So these things turned out later.

Under the present rule the Novatians too, falling out among themselves about the feast of Pascha, formed another heresy, that of the so-called Sabbatians. For Sabbatius, a presbyter ordained by Marcian, together with Theoctistus and Macarius, his fellow presbyters, following those who had met at the village of Pazus in the reign of Valens, thought it right to celebrate the feast of Pascha with the Jews. Withdrawing from the church, he pretended at first that it was partly for the sake of ascetic discipline — for he lived excellently — and partly because he suspected some of being unworthy to share in the mysteries. When it became clear that he was innovating, Marcian regretted his ordination; and he often exclaimed, they say, that it would have been better to lay his hands on thorns than on him. Seeing his church being cut by him into another body, he called together bishops of his own belief at Sangarus, a place in Bithynia lying on the sea not far from Helenopolis. Having met there, they summoned Sabbatius. When he was asked to state the cause of his grievance and blamed the difference about the feast, they suspected that he was making these pretexts from love of precedence, and demanded an oath that he would never accept a bishopric. When he had confessed this on oath, they reckoned that this cause was not sufficient for separation of communion, and decreed that all should be of one mind and assemble together, but that each should celebrate this feast as seemed good to him. And they made a canon about this which they called “indifferent.” So it was decided by those who met at Sangarus. From that time Sabbatius, following the Jews, if it did not happen that all kept the feast at the same time, fasted beforehand as is customary and celebrated Pascha by himself with the customary rites. On the Saturday, from evening until the proper time, he continued in vigil and the fitting prayers, and on the next day he assembled with all in common and shared in the mysteries. At first this escaped the multitude; but when in time he became noted for it, he had many imitators, especially Phrygians and Galatians, for whom it was ancestral to celebrate this feast so. Later, withdrawing openly, he accepted the episcopate of those who obeyed him, as will be told in due course. I am amazed that this man and his followers made this innovation, since the ancient Hebrews, as Eusebius records on the testimony of Philo, Josephus, Aristobulus and very many others, sacrificed the passover after the spring equinox, when the sun is passing through the first twelfth part, which the Greeks call the Ram, and the moon on its fourteenth day is in the opposite position. And the Novatians themselves who care for exactness maintain that this was not formerly the custom either for them or for the founder of the heresy, but that it was introduced by those who met at Pazus; and that still now in elder Rome those of their belief celebrate with the other Romans, whom the past has proved never to have kept the feast otherwise, following the tradition of the apostles Peter and Paul. Moreover, the Samaritans, who are the most zealous for the law of Moses, do not consent to celebrate this feast before the new fruit has been brought to ripeness. For the law, they say, calls it the feast of new fruits; it is not lawful to celebrate before these appear; so that the spring equinox must necessarily come first. It is a wonder that those who imitate the Jews in this did not rather approve the antiquity among the Jews themselves. It appears that, apart from these and those in Asia called Quartodecimans, those of the other heresies too keep this feast like the Romans and the Egyptians. But the Quartodecimans celebrate on the fourteenth itself with the Jews, from which they have this name; while the Novatians celebrate the day of the resurrection. They too follow the Jews and coincide with the Quartodecimans, except when the first day of the week does not fall on the fourteenth of the moon; then they come after the Jews by as many days as the coming Sunday falls later than the fourteenth of the moon. The Montanists, whom they call Pepuzite Phrygians, have introduced a strange method and keep Pascha by it. They blame those who busy themselves with the course of the moon for this purpose, and say that those who reckon rightly must follow only the solar cycles. They define a month as thirty days, and say the first begins from the spring equinox, which according to the Romans would be the ninth day before the Kalends of April, since, they say, the two lights by which times and years are shown were made then. And this is shown by the fact that the moon comes together with the sun in an eight-year cycle, and the new moon of both falls at the same time; for the eight-year cycle of the moon’s course is completed in ninety-nine months and two thousand nine hundred and twenty-two days, in which the sun completes its eight courses, reckoning three hundred and sixty-five days and a quarter to each year. For from the ninth day before the Kalends of April, as being the beginning of the creation of the sun and of the first month, they reckon the fourteenth day spoken of in the sacred Scriptures; and they say this is the eighth day before the Ides of April, on which they always keep Pascha; if the day of the resurrection should happen to coincide with it, they celebrate on the following Sunday. For it is written, they say, “from the fourteenth to the twenty-first.”

Such are the differences about this feast. Victor, then bishop of Rome, and Polycarp of Smyrna, with those about them, very wisely settled, I think, the contention that arose long ago about it. For since the priests of the West thought they should not dishonour the tradition of Paul and Peter, and those from Asia maintained that they followed John the evangelist, they agreed in common that each should celebrate as they were accustomed, and they did not separate from communion with one another. For they very rightly supposed it foolish to be separated from one another on account of customs while agreeing on the essentials of religion. For one cannot find the same traditions alike in everything in all the churches, even if they are of one belief. For example, the Scythians, though there are many cities, all have one bishop. In other nations there are places where bishops serve even in villages, as I know among the Arabians and Cypriots, and among the Novatians and Montanists in Phrygia. Deacons among the Romans are still no more than seven, after the likeness of those ordained by the apostles, of whom Stephen the first martyr was one; but among the others their number is indifferent. Again, in Rome they sing the Alleluia once each year, on the first day of the Paschal feast, so that for many Romans it is an oath, “So may I be thought worthy to hear and sing this hymn.” Neither the bishop nor anyone else teaches in church there; among the Alexandrians only the bishop of the city does. They say this was not formerly the custom, but became so from the time Arius, being a presbyter, innovated while discoursing about doctrine. This too is strange among these Alexandrians: when the Gospels are read, the bishop does not rise, which I have neither known nor heard of elsewhere. There only the archdeacon reads this sacred book; elsewhere deacons; in many churches the priests only; on notable days bishops, as in Constantinople on the first day of the feast of the resurrection. And the so-called Forty before this, in which the people fast, some reckon at six weeks of days, as the Illyrians and the westerners, all Libya and Egypt with the Palestinians; others at seven, as in Constantinople and the surrounding nations as far as the Phoenicians. Others fast three weeks scattered within the six or seven; others three joined together before the feast; others two, as those who hold the views of Montanus. Nor is the time or manner of assembling the same among all. For some assemble on the Sabbath as on the first day of the week, as in Constantinople and almost everywhere; but in Rome and Alexandria not so. Among the Egyptians, in many cities and villages, contrary to what is the common custom of all, they meet towards evening on the Sabbath and, having already eaten, share in the mysteries. Nor can one find all using the same prayers and psalms or readings at the same time. Thus the so-called Apocalypse of Peter, judged by the ancients to be altogether spurious, we know is still read once each year in some churches of Palestine, on the day of Preparation, which the people fast very devoutly in remembrance of the Saviour’s passion. And the one now circulating as the Apocalypse of Paul the apostle, which none of the ancients saw, most monks praise. Some maintain that this book was found in the present reign. For they say that by a divine manifestation a marble chest was found under the ground at Tarsus in Cilicia, at the house of Paul, and the book was in it. When I asked about this, a Cilician, a presbyter of the church in Tarsus, said it was false; he was of great age, as his grey hair showed. He said that he knew of no such thing having happened among them, and wondered whether this had not been fabricated by heretics. So much about this. One could find many customs in cities and villages which those brought up in them think it neither holy nor tolerable to transgress, out of respect for those who handed them down from the beginning or their successors. The same must be thought to have happened to people concerning this feast, on account of which I was led into these remarks.

While those of the other heresies were being torn apart, as has been said, the catholic church grew still more, very many being added to it through the dissension of those of other belief among themselves, and above all from the pagan multitude. For when the emperor saw that the habit of past time still drew his subjects to their ancestral worship and to the places venerated by them, at the beginning of his reign he forbade them to set foot in these; and at the end he destroyed many. They, for want of houses of prayer, grew accustomed in time to frequent the churches; for it was not safe even to sacrifice secretly in pagan fashion, but a law was in force against those who dared these things, fixing the penalty of loss of head and property. At that time, they say, the river of Egypt was late in its first rising; and the Egyptians were angry that they were not allowed to sacrifice to the river according to ancestral law. The governor of the province, suspecting that they were preparing for a riot, reported this. When the emperor learned it, he said that it was better to remain faithful to the Divine than to prefer the waters of the Nile and the plenty that comes from them to piety. “For may that river never flow,” he said, “if it really can be swayed by sorceries and delights in sacrifices, defiling with streams of blood the currents that flow from the divine paradise.” Not long after the Nile poured out abundantly and sent its streams even over the higher ground. When it reached the most complete measure, which is seldom attained, and the water rose no less, the Egyptians were brought round to the opposite fear, and there was alarm lest it flood the city of Alexander and part of Libya. Then, it is said, the pagans of Alexandria, vexed at what had happened against their expectation, mocked and shouted in the theatres that the river, like an old man and dotard, had wet himself. From this very many of the Egyptians condemned their ancestral superstition and changed over to Christianity. These things are as I have learned.