Historical Fragments

Contents

Reading pages: 1.1.1.1–1.4.1.19 · 1.4.1.20–1.7.5.2 · 1.4.2.2–1.4.2.4 · 1.5.1.1–1.5.1.3 · 1.8.1.1–2.2.5.4 · 2.2.1.4–2.2.1.7 · 2.2.6.1–2.6.1.6 · 2.6.2.1–2.8.2.3

1. 1.1.1.1The Gallic bishops thank God for the light of the true confession of faith.
2. 1.1.1.2From the Easterners' letter carried by Hilary, the Gauls learned how heretics had set East and West against each other.
3. 1.1.1.3Western bishops at Ariminum and Nicé were forced, in the Easterners' name, to keep silent about ousia.
4. 1.1.2.1The Gallic bishops explain that they hold homoousion to mean the Son's true birth, not a Sabellian union, and accept likeness as true God to true God.
5. 1.1.2.2Christ's words "I and the Father are one" express shared divinity, not only love.
6. 1.1.3.1The bishops condemn "he was not before he was born" without making the Son unbegotten.
7. 1.1.3.2The Son's obedience and the saying "the Father is greater" belong to his assumed humanity.
8. 1.1.4.1The Gauls withdraw from what was done at Ariminum through ignorance.
9. 1.1.4.2The Gauls excommunicate Auxentius, Ursacius, Valens, Gaius, Megasius, and Justinus.
10. 1.1.4.3The Gauls condemn the appended blasphemies and the intruded bishops, and decree deposition for any Gallic bishop who resists.
11. 1.1.4.4Saturninus of Arles is excommunicated by all the Gallic bishops; end of the letter of the council of Paris.
12. 1.2.1.1Eusebius of Vercelli praises Gregory of Elvira for resisting Ossius and the lapse at Ariminum.
13. 1.2.1.2Eusebius assures Gregory of communion and urges him to rebuke the transgressors.
14. 1.2.2.1Eusebius, in his third place of exile, says the Arians rely on imperial power, but the faithful on the Lord.
15. 1.2.2.2Eusebius asks for news and sends greetings; end of the letter.
16. 1.3.1Germinius of Sirmium confesses one true God the Father.
17. 1.3.2Germinius confesses the Son like the Father in all things.
18. 1.3.3Germinius confesses the incarnation, passion, resurrection, ascension, and return.
19. 1.3.4Germinius confesses the judgment and the Holy Spirit given through the Son.
20. 1.4.1.0Address of the synodal letter of the Eastern bishops at Serdica to bishops throughout the world.
21. 1.4.1.1The Eastern bishops pray for the church's unity and for the firm keeping of church rules, especially on bishops.
22. 1.4.1.2The Easterners denounce Marcellus of Ancyra for teaching that Christ's kingdom had a beginning and will end.
23. 1.4.1.3Marcellus was condemned at Constantinople (336), with Protogenes of Serdica and Cyriacus of Naissus among those who signed.
24. 1.4.1.4The Easterners complain that Western bishops received Marcellus without examining his book.
25. 1.4.1.5The Easterners ask all bishops to refuse communion to Marcellus and his followers.
26. 1.4.1.6The Easterners repeat the charges against Athanasius: the broken chalice of Ischyras, violence, and coercion.
27. 1.4.1.7The Easterners recount the councils of Caesarea and Tyre (335), the Mareotis commission, and Constantine's exile of Athanasius.
28. 1.4.1.8The Easterners accuse Athanasius of violence on his return to Alexandria (337) and before his flight (339).
29. 1.4.1.9The Easterners accuse Paul of Constantinople, Marcellus, Asclepas, and Lucius of violence and sacrilege on their return.
30. 1.4.1.10The Easterners say Athanasius won Julius of Rome's communion by deceptive letters from people who had not judged him.
31. 1.4.1.11The Easterners accuse the deposed bishops of seeking a retrial abroad after their judges had died.
32. 1.4.1.12The Easterners reject the Western claim to judge Eastern bishops.
33. 1.4.1.13The Easterners claim that Athanasius, Marcellus, Paul, and Asclepas had earlier condemned one another and now united in conspiracy.
34. 1.4.1.14The Easterners say that at Serdica they found Athanasius and Marcellus in communion with Ossius and Protogenes.
35. 1.4.1.15The Easterners demanded that the Westerners exclude the condemned bishops, but they refused.
36. 1.4.1.16The eighty Eastern bishops refused communion with the Westerners who kept the condemned bishops.
37. 1.4.1.17The Westerners refused the Easterners' appeals and claimed to judge the judges of the deposed bishops.
38. 1.4.1.18The Easterners proposed a new joint inquiry into Athanasius, which they say the Westerners refused.
39. 1.4.1.19The Easterners claim that a mob of criminals supported the Westerners at Serdica and stirred up the city against them.
40. 1.4.1.20The Easterners accuse the Western council of receiving deposed and immoral bishops.
41. 1.4.1.21The Easterners say the Western council pardoned what cannot be pardoned.
42. 1.4.1.22The Easterners say Athanasius and Marcellus should withdraw for the sake of the church's peace.
43. 1.4.1.23The Easterners declare that they will not receive Athanasius and Marcellus and condemn those who do.
44. 1.4.1.24The Easterners forbid communion with Ossius, Protogenes, Athanasius, Marcellus, Asclepas, Paul, and Julius.
45. 1.4.1.25The Easterners complain that a few condemned men have thrown the whole empire into turmoil, and should, like Jonah, give themselves up.
46. 1.4.1.26The Easterners reject the Western review of Eastern decisions and appeal to the mutual acceptance of earlier councils.
47. 1.4.1.27The Eastern council condemns Julius of Rome, Ossius, Protogenes, Gaudentius, and Maximinus of Trier, with its reasons.
48. 1.4.1.28The Easterners condemn Julius and Ossius and set out their creed for all bishops to sign.
49. 1.4.2.1The Eastern creed of Serdica begins.
50. 1.4.2.2The creed of the Eastern bishops at Serdica confesses the Son, begotten before the ages, incarnate, crucified, risen, seated at the Father’s right hand and coming to judge.
51. 1.4.2.3The creed continues with the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete sent to the apostles, and the church, forgiveness, resurrection and eternal life.
52. 1.4.2.4The anathemas of the Eastern creed of Serdica condemn Arian formulas, tritheism, the denial of Christ’s Godhead or pre-existence, and the identification of Father, Son and Spirit.
53. 1.4.3.1The seventy-three signatures of the Eastern bishops at Serdica.
54. 1.5.1.1The Western bishops at Ariminum (359) tell Constantius that they resolved to keep the ancient faith of Nicaea unchanged, since any subtraction opens the way to heresy.
55. 1.5.1.2The bishops recall that Ursacius and Valens had once recanted Arianism, defend the Nicene creed drawn up under Constantine, and report that they rejected the new formula offered by Ursacius, Valens, Germinius and Gaius.
56. 1.5.1.3The council asks Constantius to hear its legates, keep the old faith unchanged, and let the bishops detained at Ariminum return to their churches.
57. 1.5.2.1Hilary's narrative: the catholic envoys of Ariminum, kept waiting and threatened, gave way and signed the heretical creed.
58. 1.5.3.1At Nicé in Thrace (360), Restutus of Carthage recalls that the Ariminum envoys had condemned Ursacius, Valens, Germinius, and Gaius.
59. 1.5.3.2The Western envoys annul the decisions of Ariminum and restore communion with Ursacius and the others.
60. 1.5.4.1Hilary's note introducing the creed the envoys signed.
61. 1.6.1.1Bishops detained at Ariminum thank Constantius for forbidding the words ousia and homoousion.
62. 1.6.1.2The bishops rejoice that the unscriptural terms are now silenced.
63. 1.6.2.1The bishops ask to be sent home from Ariminum.
64. 1.6.2.2The bishops renew their request to return, praising the removal of ousia and homoousion.
65. 1.6.3.1The bishops ask the emperor to order the prefect Taurus to release them.
66. 1.6.3.2The bishops affirm their agreement with the Easterners and close.
67. 1.7.1.1Liberius of Rome asks Constantius for a kind hearing.
68. 1.7.1.2Liberius is wounded by the emperor's anger and seeks a true peace based on the Gospels.
69. 1.7.1.3Liberius had asked for a council to treat the faith first and then the case of Athanasius.
70. 1.7.2.1Liberius is accused of suppressing letters against Athanasius.
71. 1.7.2.2Liberius says he made the Eastern letter public, but eighty Egyptian bishops testified the other way.
72. 1.7.2.3Liberius explains that the Egyptian majority for Athanasius outweighed the Eastern charges, and the documents were sent to Arles.
73. 1.7.3.1Liberius protests his sincerity and his contempt for worldly things.
74. 1.7.3.2Liberius says he has upheld the apostolic and Roman tradition unchanged.
75. 1.7.4.1Liberius points out that Eastern bishops who refused to condemn Arius at Milan now seek peace.
76. 1.7.4.2Liberius recalls Alexander's expulsion of Arians and objects to forcing bishops to obey their judgments.
77. 1.7.5.1Liberius reports what his legates at Arles proposed.
78. 1.7.5.2Liberius reports the failure at Arles, asks for a council to confirm Nicaea, and sends Lucifer, Pancratius, and Hilary as envoys.
79. 1.8.1.1Constantius writes to the council of Ariminum, repeating his earlier instructions.
80. 1.8.1.2The emperor bids the council deal with faith and unity.
81. 1.8.2.1The emperor forbids the council to decide anything about the Eastern bishops and orders it to send ten envoys.
82. 1.8.2.2The emperor warns that any decree against the Easterners will be void; the letter is dated 27 May 359.
83. 1.9.1.1The catholic bishops at Ariminum resolve to keep the received creed of Nicaea without addition or subtraction, including the term “substance.”
84. 1.9.2Hilary's narrative: all catholics at Ariminum signed and condemned the opponents.
85. 1.9.3.1At Ariminum (21 July 359) Graecianus of Calles moves the condemnation of Ursacius, Valens, Germinius, and Gaius.
86. 1.9.3.2The bishops of Ariminum unanimously condemn the four as heretics.
87. 2.1.1.1Hilary opens his work with Paul's faith, hope, and love, which alone remain when other gifts pass away.
88. 2.1.1.2Faith, hope, and love alone continue into eternity, while prophecy, tongues, and knowledge pass.
89. 2.1.1.3Paul ranks the gifts so that faith, hope, and love stand out as lasting.
90. 2.1.2.1Faith justifies Abraham, saves the Canaanite woman's daughter, and gives birth from God.
91. 2.1.2.2Hope gives up present goods for the hundredfold reward and eternal life.
92. 2.1.2.3Love is the greatest, binding us inseparably to God.
93. 2.1.3.1Hilary adds his own witness to Paul's teaching on love.
94. 2.1.3.2Hilary refused worldly comfort and favor at the price of corrupting the gospel truth.
95. 2.1.3.3Moved by Scripture, Hilary chose suffering for confessing God over guilty silence.
96. 2.1.4.1Hilary introduces his account of a complex affair that has stirred the whole court and church.
97. 2.1.4.2Many wrongly think the bishops were exiled merely for refusing to condemn Athanasius.
98. 2.1.5.1Hilary passes over the emperor's interference and the condemnation of the absent, to come to graver matters.
99. 2.1.5.2Hilary will set out the affair more carefully than he could at the time.
100. 2.1.5.3At the time, Hilary could speak only hastily, because his opponents prevented a hearing.
101. 2.1.6.1Hilary begins with Paulinus of Trier's refusal at Arles (353).
102. 2.1.6.2Paulinus was exiled for confessing the faith, not for favoring Athanasius.
103. 2.1.7.1Hilary asks readers to read the documents carefully, by date, judgment, person, and wording.
104. 2.1.7.2The documents concern the knowledge of God and eternal hope, so each must study them and judge for himself.
105. 2.2.1.1The opening and address of the Western synodal letter of Serdica.
106. 2.2.1.2The Western council recalls the earlier letters of Eusebius's party against Athanasius and Marcellus, and contrary testimony.
107. 2.2.1.3The Easterners fled Serdica because accusers and victims had come to confront them.
108. 2.2.1.4The Western council of Serdica reports that the Eastern bishops came to the city but, fearing to face Athanasius, Marcellus and Asclepas and their accusers, fled and so exposed their falsehood.
109. 2.2.1.5The council refutes the charges against Athanasius: Arsenius, supposedly murdered, is alive; the story of the broken chalice is false, as the records themselves show; and the accuser Scyrus was rewarded with a bishopric though never a presbyter.
110. 2.2.1.7The Eastern bishops fled Serdica out of guilty conscience; they promoted Arians in the church, kept their own party from joining the council by threats, as two defectors, Arius of Palestine and Stephen of Arabia, reported.
111. 2.2.2.1The council of Serdica writes to Julius of Rome, excusing his absence and affirming reference to the see of Peter.
112. 2.2.2.2The council reports that the Easterners refused trial and that Athanasius and Marcellus were rightly kept in communion.
113. 2.2.2.3The council lists the three questions: the faith, the deposed bishops, and the Eastern party's violence against the churches.
114. 2.2.2.4The council condemns Ursacius and Valens, blaming Valens for the death of Viator in a riot at Aquileia.
115. 2.2.2.5The council asks Julius to inform the Western churches and confirms communion with Marcellus, Athanasius, and Asclepas.
116. 2.2.3The list of bishops condemned by the Western council of Serdica.
117. 2.2.4The list of bishops who signed the Western decisions of Serdica.
118. 2.2.5.1Hilary argues that the charge against Athanasius over Ischyras's altar was impossible: there was no church and no presbyter.
119. 2.2.5.2Hilary appeals to common sense: a judgment needs a crime, a place, and a victim, none of which existed.
120. 2.2.5.3Hilary rebukes the bishops who condemned Athanasius on charges proved false, without even being coerced.
121. 2.2.5.4Hilary relates how Ursacius and Valens, at the time of Photinus's condemnation, sought pardon from Julius of Rome.
122. 2.2.6.1Ursacius and Valens confess to Julius that their charges against Athanasius were false and embrace his communion.
123. 2.2.6.2Ursacius and Valens anathematize Arius and his teaching and promise not to act against Athanasius without Julius.
124. 2.2.7Hilary's note dating the letter of Ursacius and Valens.
125. 2.2.8Ursacius and Valens write to Athanasius from Aquileia declaring peace and communion with him.
126. 2.2.9.1Hilary explains that Athanasius broke communion with Marcellus for new teaching, not for his book, and that this was later misused.
127. 2.2.9.2No council condemned Marcellus after Serdica; the Easterners slipped his name into the case of Photinus to reopen the case of Athanasius.
128. 2.2.9.3Athanasius was right both in receiving Marcellus after Serdica and in later breaking with him.
129. 2.2.9.4Hilary turns to expose the deceptive creed with which the Easterners opened their letter about Photinus.
130. 2.2.9.5The apostles taught the unity of Father and Son; heretics, fallen into vice, seek to please by novel doctrine.
131. 2.2.9.6Hilary summarizes Arius's teaching that the Son was made from nothing, condemned at Nicaea.
132. 2.2.9.7The council of Nicaea condemns the Arians and sets out the faith.
133. 2.2.10.1The Nicene Creed begins.
134. 2.2.10.2The Nicene Creed on the Son.
135. 2.2.10.3The Nicene Creed's conclusion and anathemas.
136. 2.2.11.1Hilary contrasts the complete Nicene faith with the deceptive Eastern creed.
137. 2.2.11.2Hilary shows how "God from God" and "firstborn" in the Eastern creed are made to imply a created, temporal Son.
138. 2.2.11.3Hilary explains Col 1:15–17: the Son is "firstborn" because all creation was founded in him, not as the first creature.
139. 2.2.11.4The Eastern creed's naming of the Trinity in fact divides it.
140. 2.2.11.5Hilary expounds the Nicene Creed clause by clause, explaining "true God from true God", "born not made", and homoousion.
141. 2.2.11.6Athanasius championed the Nicene faith and was falsely accused but acquitted; Hilary introduces the Serdican letter to Constantius.
142. 2.3.1.1A letter in Liberius's name to the Eastern bishops: he summoned Athanasius to Rome.
143. 2.3.1.2Athanasius refused the summons to Rome.
144. 2.3.1.3The letter declares Athanasius excluded from the communion of the Roman church.
145. 2.3.2.1A comment on the letter: Potamius and Epictetus ignored it while condemning the bishop of Rome.
146. 2.3.2.2Fortunatianus circulated the letter in vain; letters from Egypt supported Athanasius.
147. 2.4.1.1A letter urges leniency toward those who erred at Ariminum through ignorance, but condemnation of its authors.
148. 2.4.1.2Those who repent and profess the Nicene faith are to be received; the obstinate are to be punished by the church.
149. 2.4.2.1The Italian bishops welcome Illyricum's return to Nicaea, annul Ariminum, and call for subscription to the Nicene faith.
150. 2.5.1.1The bishops at Singidunum write out of concern for the catholic faith.
151. 2.5.1.2The Singidunum bishops ask Germinius to confirm in writing that he holds the creed of Ariminum.
152. 2.5.1.3The homoean formula: the Son is like the Father "according to the Scriptures", not in substance or in all things.
153. 2.5.2.1Germinius is asked to deny that he teaches the Son like the Father in all things.
154. 2.5.2.2If Germinius affirms their creed, the complaint against his clerics will not touch him.
155. 2.5.2.3The letter is dated 18 December 366.
156. 2.6.1.1Germinius of Sirmium writes to explain his faith, objected to by Valens and his colleagues.
157. 2.6.1.2Germinius confesses the Son like the Father in all things except unbegottenness.
158. 2.6.1.3Germinius supports his confession from the sayings of Jesus in John.
159. 2.6.1.4Germinius argues from Gen 1:26, John 1:14, and Paul that the Son is like the Father in all things.
160. 2.6.1.5Germinius cites Col 1:15 and Phil 2:5–7: the Son's divinity is as true as his humanity.
161. 2.6.1.6Since all the fullness of God dwells in Christ, the Son cannot be partly like and partly unlike the Father.
162. 2.6.2.1Germinius answers that Scripture's many titles of Christ, like "creature", describe his works, not his nature.
163. 2.6.2.2The Son's titles describe his works; he himself was begotten from the Father, not made from nothing.
164. 2.6.3.1Germinius reminds Valens that the Dated Creed of 359, which they all signed, said "like the Father in all things".
165. 2.6.3.2Germinius challenges his opponents to show from Scripture how the Son is partly unlike.
166. 2.6.4.1Germinius sends his profession by the official Cyriacus.
167. 2.6.4.2Germinius asks for a reply and explains that others subscribed for him.
168. 2.7.1Hilary's note introducing Liberius's letter to the exiled confessors.
169. 2.7.2.1Liberius encourages the exiled bishops Eusebius, Dionysius, and Lucifer as martyrs of the faith.
170. 2.7.2.2Liberius asks the confessors' prayers and a full report of what happened at Milan.
171. 2.7.3Hilary introduces a fragment of Liberius's letter about Vincent of Capua.
172. 2.7.4A fragment: Liberius urges Caecilianus not to be discouraged by Vincent's lapse.
173. 2.7.5Hilary introduces Liberius's letter to Ossius about Vincent.
174. 2.7.6Liberius tells Ossius of Vincent's failure at Arles and his own resolve to die rather than consent.
175. 2.7.7The collection's note: in exile Liberius undid his earlier stand by writing to the Arians.
176. 2.7.8.1A letter of Liberius in exile to the Eastern bishops: he accepts Athanasius's condemnation and their communion.
177. 2.7.8.2Liberius accepts the Sirmian creed set out by Demophilus and asks to return from exile; interjected comments anathematize him.
178. 2.7.9The collection lists the authors of the Sirmian creed that Liberius accepted.
179. 2.7.10.1Liberius in exile tells the Eastern bishops that Athanasius is condemned and separated from Rome's communion.
180. 2.7.10.2Liberius asks the bishops to obtain his return to Rome and declares communion with Epictetus and Auxentius; a reader's note anathematizes him.
181. 2.7.11.1Liberius in exile writes to Vincent of Capua of his sufferings.
182. 2.7.11.2Liberius asks Vincent to rally the Campanian bishops to petition for his return, warning that God will judge them.
183. 2.8.1.1The homoiousian envoys of Seleucia warn the Western envoys at Constantinople that the anomoean heresy dominates and must be condemned as doctrine, not just in Aetius.
184. 2.8.2.1Hilary rebukes the Western envoys at Constantinople for joining the heretics instead of condemning their blasphemies.
185. 2.8.2.2Hilary exposes the evasions of the homoean Western envoys about "creature", "from God", eternity, and "like according to the Scriptures".
186. 2.8.2.3Hilary shames the Western envoys, who are less loyal to Christ than servants, soldiers, or watchdogs to their masters.