Chapter III: Theological Science and Literature (1)

§ 47. THE THEOLOGICAL SCHOOLS AND THEIR MOST CELEBRATED
REPRESENTATIVES.

The Ancient Church reached its highest glory during the 4th and 5th centuries. The number of theological schools properly so-called (§ 45, 1) was indeed small, and so the most celebrated theologians were self-taught in theology. But all the greater must the intellectual resources of this age have been and all the more powerful the general striving after culture, when the outward means, helps and opportunities for obtaining scientific training were so few. The middle of the 5th century, marked by the Council of Chalcedon in A.D. 451, may be regarded as the turning point where the greatest height in theological science and in other ecclesiastical developments was reached, and from this point we may date the beginnings of decline. After this the spirit of independent research gradually disappeared from the Eastern as well as from the Western Church. Political oppression, hierarchical exclusiveness, narrowing monasticism and encroaching barbarism choked all free scientific effort, and the industry of compilers took the place of fresh youthful intellectual production. The authority of the older church teachers stood so high and was regarded as binding in so eminent a degree that at the Councils argument was carried on almost solely by means of quotations from the writings of those fathers who had been recognised as orthodox.

§ 47.1. =The Theological Schools and Tendencies:=

a. =In the 4th and 5th centuries.=--Since the time of the
two Dionysiuses (§ 33, 7) the Alexandrian theology had
been divided into two different directions which we may
distinguish as the old and the new Alexandrian. =The Old
Alexandrian School= held by the subordinationist view
of Origen and strove to keep open to scientific research
as wide a field as possible. Its representatives showed
deep reverence for Origen but avoided his more eccentric
speculations. Its latest offshoot was the _Semiarianism_
with which it came to an end in the middle of the 4th
century. This same free scientific tendency in theology
was yet more decidedly shown in =the Antiochean School=.
Although at first animated by the spirit which Origen had
introduced into theology, its further development was a
thoroughly independent one, departing from its original
in many particulars. To the allegorical method of
interpretation of the Origenist school it opposed
the natural grammatico-historical interpretation, to its
mystical speculation, clear positive thinking. Inquiry into
the simple literal sense of holy scripture and the founding
of a purely biblical theology were its tasks. Averse to all
mysteries, it strove after a positive, rational conception
of Christianity and after a construction of dogma by
means of clear logical thought. Hence its dogmatic aim was
pre-eminently the careful distinguishing of the divine and
human in Christ and in Christianity, forming a conception
of each by itself and securing especially in both due
recognition of the human. The theology of the national
=East-Syrian Church=, far more than that of the Antiochean
or Græco-Syrian, was essentially bound down by tradition.
It had its seminaries in the theological schools of Nisibis
and Edessa. The oriental spirit was here displayed in an
unrestricted manner; also a tendency to theosophy, mysticism
and asceticism, a special productiveness in developing forms
of worship and constitution, and withal doctrinal stability.
In their exegesis the members of this school co-operated
with the Antiocheans, though not so decidedly, in opposing
the arbitrary allegorizing of the Origenist school, but
their exegetical activity was not, as with the Antiocheans,
scientific and critical but rather practical and homiletical.
=The New Alexandrian School= was the prevailing one for the
4th century so far as Alexandrian culture was concerned.
Its older representatives, at least, continued devotedly
attached to Origen and favourable to the speculative
treatment of Christian doctrine introduced by him. But
they avoided his unscriptural extravagances and carried out
consistently the ecclesiastical elements of his doctrine. By
a firm acceptance of the doctrine of the eternal generation
of the Son they overcame the subordinationism of their
master, and in this broke away from the old Alexandrian
school and came into closer relations to the theology of the
Western church. To the Antiochean school, however, they were
directly opposed in respect of the delight they took in the
mysteries of Christianity, and their disinclination to allow
the reason to rule in theology. The union of the divine and
human in Christ and in Christianity seemed to them a sublime,
incomprehensible mystery, any attempt to resolve it being
regarded as alike useless and profane. But in this way
the human element became more and more lost to view and
became absorbed in the divine. They energetically affirmed
the inseparable union of the two, but thereby lost the
consciousness of their distinctness and fell into the
contrary error of Antiochean onesidedness. With Cyril of
Alexandria the New Alexandrian school properly began to
assume the form of a sect and to show symptoms of decay,
although he himself retained the reputation of an orthodox
teacher. =The Western Theology= of this period, as well as
its North-African precursor (§ 31, 10, 11), energetically
insisted upon the application of Christianity to the life,
the development of the doctrines affecting this matter
and the maintenance of the church system of doctrine as a
strong protection against all wilfulness in doctrine. In
it therefore the traditional theology finds its chief home.
Still the points of contact with the East were so many and
so vital that however much inclined to stability the West
might be, it could not altogether remain unmoved and without
enrichment from the theological movements of the age. Thus
we distinguish in the West four different but variously
inter-connected tendencies. First of all there is the
genuinely _Western_, which is separated on the one hand in
Tertullian and Cyprian, but on the other hand is variously
influenced by the talented teachers of the New Alexandrian
School, which continued to mould and dominate the cultured
theology of the West. Its chief representatives are
Hilary of Poitiers, Ambrose, and above all, Augustine,
who completely freed the Latin theology from its hitherto
prevailing dependence on the Greek, placing it now upon its
own feet. The representatives of this tendency were at first
in complete accord with the members of the New Alexandrian
school in their opposition to the semi-Arian Origenists
and the Nestorianizing Antiocheans, but then as that school
itself drifted into the position of a heretical sect, they
also decidedly contended for the other side of the truth
which the Antiochean school maintained. A second group of
Western theologians were inspired by the writings of Origen,
without, however, abandoning the characteristics of the
Western spirit. To this class belongs Jerome, who afterwards
repudiated his master and joined the previously named school,
and Rufinus. The third group of Pelagians represent the
practical but cool rationalistic tendency of the West. The
fourth is that of the semi-Pelagians who in the Western
theology intermingle synergistic elements of an Antiochean
complexion.

b. =Of the 6th and 7th Centuries.=--The brilliant period
of theological literature had now closed. There still
were scholars who wrought laboriously upon the original
contributions of the fathers, and reproduced the thoughts
of their predecessors in a new shape suited to the needs
of the time, but spirit and life, creative power and
original productivity had well nigh disappeared. After the
monophysite Johannes Philoponus of Alexandria had commented
on the works of Aristotle and applied their categories
to theology, the Platonic philosophy, hitherto on account
of its ideal contents the favourite of all philosophizing
church fathers, was more and more set aside by the
philosophy of the Stagirite so richly developed on the
formal side. The theology of the Greeks even at so early a
date assumed to some extent the character of Scholasticism.
Alongside of it, however, we have a theosophic mysticism
which reverting from the tendency that had lately come into
vogue to Neoplatonic ideas, drew its chief inspiration from
the Pseudo-Dionysian writings. In the West, in addition to
the general causes of decay, we have also the sufferings of
the times amid the tumult of the migration of the nations.
In Italy Boëthius and Cassiodorus won for themselves
imperishable renown as the fosterers of classical and
patristic studies in an age when these were in danger of
being utterly forgotten. The series of Latin church fathers
in the strict sense ends with Gregory the Great; that of
Greek church fathers with Johannes Damascenus.

1. THE MOST IMPORTANT TEACHERS OF THE EASTERN CHURCH.

§ 47.2. =The Most Celebrated Representative of the Old
Alexandrian School= is the father of Church History =Eusebius
Pamphili=, _i.e._, the friend of Pamphilus (§ 31, 6), bishop
of Cæsarea from A.D. 314 to A.D. 340. The favour of the emperor
Constantine laid the imperial archives open to him for his
historical studies. By his unwearied diligence as an investigator
and collector he far excels all the church teachers of his age
in comprehensive learning, to which we owe a great multitude of
precious extracts from long lost writings of pagan and Christian
antiquity. His style is jejune, dry and clumsy, sometimes
bombastic. His =Historical Writings= supported on all sides by
diligent research, want system and regularity, and suffer from
disproportionate treatment and distribution of the material. To
his Ἐκκλησιαστικὴ ἱστορία in 10 bks., reaching down to A.D. 324,
he adds a highly-coloured biography of Constantine in 4 bks.,
which is in some respects a continuation of his history; and
to it, again, he adds a fawning panegyric on the emperor.--At
a later date he wrote an account of the Martyrs of Palestine
during the Diocletian persecution which was afterwards added
as an appendix to the 8th bk. of the History. A collection of
old martyrologies, three bks. on the life of Pamphilus, and a
treatise on the origin, celebration and history of the Easter
festival, have all been lost. Of great value, especially for the
synchronizing of biblical and profane history, was his diligently
compiled Chronicle, Παντοδαπὴ ἱστορία, similar to that of Julius
Africanus (§ 31, 3), an abstract of universal history reaching
down to A.D. 352, to which chronological and synchronistic tables
were added as a second part. The Greek original has been lost,
but Jerome translated it into Latin, with arbitrary alterations,
and carried it down to A.D. 378.--The =Apologetical Writings=
take the second place in importance. Still extant are the two
closely-connected works: _Præparatio Evangelica_, Εὐαγγελικὴ
προπαρασκευή, in 15 bks., and the _Demonstratio Evangelica_,
Εὐαγγελικὴ ἀπόδειξις, in 8 out of an original of 20 bks. The
former proves the absurdity of heathenism; the latter, the truth
and excellence of Christianity. A condensed reproduction of
the contents and text of the Θεοφανεία in 5 bks. is found only
in a Syriac translation. The Ἐκλογαὶ προφητικαί in 4 bks., of
which only a portion is extant, expounds the Old Testament in an
allegorizing fashion for apologetic purposes; and the treatise
against Hierocles (§ 23, 3) contests his comparison of Christ
with Apollonius of Tyana. A treatise in 30 bks. against Porphyry,
and some other apologetical works are lost.--His =Dogmatic
Writings= are of far less value. These treatises--Κατὰ Μαρκέλλου,
in 2 bks., the one already named against Hierocles, and Περὶ τῆς
ἐκκλησιαστικῆς θεολογίας, also against Marcellus (§ 50, 2)--are
given as an Appendix in the editions of the _Demonstratio
Evangelica_. On his share in Pamphilus’ Apology for Origen, see
§ 31, 6; and on his Ep. to the Princess Constantia, see § 57, 4.
The weakness of his dogmatic productions was caused by his
vacillating and mediating position in the Arian controversy,
where he was the mouthpiece of the moderate semi-Arians
(§ 50, 1, 3), and this again was due to his want of speculative
capacity and dogmatic culture.--Of his =Exegetical Writings=
the Commentaries on Isaiah and the Psalms are the most complete,
but of the others we have only fragments. We have, however, his
Τοπικά in the Latin translation of Jerome: _De Situ et Nominibus
Locorum Hebraeorum_.[133]

§ 47.3. =Church Fathers of the New Alexandrian School.=

a. The most conspicuous figure in the church history of the
4th century is =Athanasius=, styled by an admiring posterity
_Pater orthodoxiæ_. He was indeed every inch of him a church
father, and the history of his life is the history of the
church of his times. His life was full of heroic conflict.
Unswervingly faithful, he was powerful and wise in building
up the church; great in defeat, great in victory. His was a
life in which insight, will and action, earnestness, force
and gentleness, science and faith, blended in most perfect
harmony. In A.D. 319 he was a deacon in Alexandria. His
bishop Alexander soon discovered the eminent gifts of the
young man and took him with him to the Council of Nicæa
in A.D. 325, where he began the battle of his life. Soon
thereafter, in A.D. 328, Alexander died and Athanasius
became his successor. He was bishop for forty-five years,
but was five times driven into exile. He spent about
twenty years in banishment, mostly in the West, and died
in A.D. 373. His writings are for the most part devoted
to controversy against the Arians (§ 50, 6); but he
also contested Apollinarianism (§ 52, 1), and vindicated
Christianity against the attacks of the heathens in the
pre-Arian treatise in two bks. _Contra Gentes_, Κατὰ Ἑλλήνων,
the first bk. of which argues against heathenism, while the
second expounds the necessity of the incarnation of God in
Christ. For a knowledge of his life and pastoral activity
the _Librî paschales_, Festal letters (§ 56, 3), are of
great value.[134] Of less importance are his exegetical,
allegorical writings on the Psalms. His dogmatic,
apologetical and polemical works are all characterized
by sharp dialectic and profound speculation, and afford
a great abundance of brilliant thoughts, skilful arguments
and discussions on fundamental points in a style as clear
as it is eloquent; but we often miss systematic arrangement
of the material, and they suffer from frequent repetition
of the same fundamental thoughts, defects which, from the
circumstances of their composition, amid the hot combats of
his much agitated life, may very easily be understood and
excused.[135]

§ 47.4. =(The Three Great Cappadocians.)=--

b. =Basil the Great=, bishop of his native city of Cæsarea
in Cappadocia, is in very deed a “kingly” figure in church
history. His mother Emmelia and his grandmother Macrina
early instilled pious feelings into his youthful breast.
Studying at Athens, a friendship founded on love to the
church and science soon sprang up between him and his
likeminded countryman Gregory Nazianzen, and somewhat
later his own brother Gregory of Nyssa became an equally
attached member of the fraternity. After he had visited
the most celebrated ascetics in Syria, Palestine and
Egypt, he continued long to live in solitude as an ascetic,
distributed his property among the poor, and became
presbyter in A.D. 364, bishop in A.D. 370. He died in
A.D. 379. The whole rich life of the man breathed of the
faith that overcometh the world, of self-denying love and
noble purpose. He gave the whole powers of his mind to
the holding together of the Catholic church in the East
during the violent persecution of the Arian Valens. The
most beautiful testimony to his noble character was the
magnificent Basil institute, a hospital in Cæsarea, to which
he, while himself living in the humblest manner, devoted
all his rich revenues. His writings, too, entitle Basil
to a place among the most distinguished church fathers.
They afford evidence of rich classical culture as well as of
profound knowledge of Scripture and of human nature, and are
vigorous in expression, beautiful and pictorial in style.
In exegesis he follows the allegorical method. Among his
dogmatic writings the following are the most important:
Ll. 5 _Adv. Eunomium_ (§ 50, 3) and _De Spiritu s. ad
Amphilochium_ against the Pneumatomachians (§ 50, 5). The
other writings bearing his name comprise 365 Epistles,
moral and ascetic tractates, Homilies on the Hexæmeron and
13 Psalms, and Discourses (among them, Πρὸς τοὺς νέους,
ὁπως ἂν ἐξ ἑλληνικῶν ὠφελοῖντο λόγων), a larger and a
short Monastic rule, and a Liturgy.[136]

c. =Gregory Nazianzen= was born in the Cappadocian village
Arianz. His father Gregory, in his earlier days a
Hypsistarian (§ 42, 6), but converted by his pious wife
Nonna, became bishop of Nazianzum [Nazianzen]. The son, after
completing his studies in Cæsarea, Alexandria and Athens,
spent some years with Basil in his cloister in Pontus, but,
when his father allowed himself to be prevailed upon to sign
an Arianizing confession, he hasted to Nazianzum [Nazianzen],
induced him to retract, and was there and then suddenly and
against his will ordained by him a presbyter in A.D. 361.
From that time, always vacillating between the desire for
a quiet contemplative ascetic life and the impulse toward
ecclesiastical official activity, easily attracted and
repelled, not without ambition, and so sometimes irritable
and out of humour, he led a very changeful life, which
prevented him succeeding in one definite calling. Basil
transferred to him the little bishopric of Sasima; but
Gregory fled thence into the wilderness to escape the
ill-feelings stirred up against him. He was also for a long
time assistant to his father in the bishopric of Nazianzum
[Nazianzen]. He withdrew, however, in A.D. 375, when the
congregation in spite of his refusal appointed him successor
to his father. Then the small, forsaken company of Nicene
believers in Constantinople called him to be their pastor.
He accepted the call in A.D. 379, and delivered here in a
private chapel, which he designated by the significant name
of Anastasia, his celebrated five discourses on the divinity
of the Logos, which won for him the honourable title of
ὁ θεόλογος. He was called thence by Theodosius the Great in
A.D. 380 to be patriarch of the capital, and had assigned
to him the presidency of the Synod of Constantinople in
A.D. 381. But the malice of his enemies forced him to resign.
He returned now to Nazianzum [Nazianzen], administered for
several years the bishopric there, and died in A.D. 390 in
rural retirement, without having fully realised the motto
of his life: Πράξις ἐπίβασις θεωρίας. His writings consist
of 45 Discourses, 242 Epistles, and several poems (§ 48, 5).
After the 5 λόγοι θεολογικοί and the Λόγος περὶ φυγῆς (a
justification of his flight from Nazianzum [Nazianzen] by
a representation of the eminence and responsibility of the
priesthood), the most celebrated are two philippics, Λόγοι
στηλιτευτικοί (στηλίτευσις=the mark branded on one at
the public pillory), _Invectivæ in Julianum Imperatorem_,
occasioned by Julian’s attempt to deprive the Christians
of the means of classical culture.[137]

d. =Gregory of Nyssa= was the younger brother of Basil. In
philosophical gifts and scientific culture he excelled his
two elder friends. His theological views too were rooted
more deeply than theirs in those of Origen. But in zeal
in controverting Arianism he was not a whit behind them,
and his reputation among contemporaries and posterity is
scarcely less than theirs. Basil ordained him bishop of
Nyssa in A.D. 371, and thus, not without resistance, took
him away from the office of a teacher of eloquence. The
Arians, however, drove him from his bishopric, to which he
was restored only after the death of the Emperor Valens.
He died in A.D. 394. He took his share in the theological
controversies of his times and wrote against Eunomius and
Apollinaris. His dogmatic treatises are full of profound
and brilliant thoughts, and especially the Λόγος κατηχητικὸς
ὁ μέγας, an instruction how to win over Jews and Gentiles
to the truth of Christianity; Περὶ ψυχῆς καὶ ἀναστάσεως,
conversations between him and his sister Macrina after the
death of their brother Basil, one of his most brilliant
works; Κατὰ εἱμαρμένης, against the fatalistic theory of
the world of paganism; Πρὸς Ἕλληνας ἐκ τῶν κοινῶν ἐννοίων,
for the establishment of the doctrine of the Trinity on
principles of reason. In his numerous exegetical writings
he follows the allegorical method in the brilliant style of
Origen. We also have from him some ascetical tracts, several
sermons and 26 Epistles.

§ 47.5.

e. =Apollinaris=, called the Younger, to distinguish him
from his father of the same name, was a contemporary of
Athanasius, and bishop of Laodicea. He died in A.D. 390.
A fine classical scholar and endowed with rich poetic gifts,
he distinguished himself as a defender of Christianity
against the attacks of the heathen philosopher Porphyry
(§ 23, 3) and also as a brilliant controversialist against
the Arians; but he too went astray when alongside of the
trinitarian question he introduced those Christological
speculations that are now known by his name (§ 52, 1).
That we have others of his writings besides the quotations
found in the treatises of his opponents, is owing to the
circumstance that several of them were put into circulation
by his adherents under good orthodox names in order to get
impressed upon the views developed therein the stamp of
orthodoxy. The chief of these is Ἡ κατὰ μέρος (_i.e._
developed bit by bit) πίστις, which has come down to us
under the name of Gregory Thaumaturgus (§ 31, 6). Theodoret
quotes passages from it and assigns them to Apollinaris,
and its contents too are in harmony with this view. So
too with the tract Περὶ τῆς σαρκώσεως τοῦ Θεοῦ Λόγου, _De
Incarnatione Verbi_, ascribed to Athanasius, which a scholar
of Apollinaris, named Polemon, with undoubted accuracy
ascribed to his teacher. That Cyril of Alexandria ascribes
this last-named tract to Athanasius may be taken as proof of
the readiness of the Monophysites and their precursor Cyril
to pass off the false as genuine (§ 52, 2). To Apollinaris
belong also an Epistle to Dionysius attributed to Julius,
bishop of Rome (§ 50, 2) and a tract, attributed to the
same, Περὶ τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ ἑνότητος τοῦ σώματος πρὸς τὴν
θεότητα, which were also assigned to Apollinaris by his own
scholars. Finally, the Pseudo-Justin Ἔκθεσις τῆς πίστεως
ἤτοι περὶ τριάδος seems to be a reproduction of a treatise
of Apollinaris’ Περὶ τριάδος, supposed to be lost, enlarged
with clumsy additions and palmed off in this form under the
venerated name of Justin Martyr.

f. =Didymus the Blind= lost his sight when four years of age,
but succeeded in making wonderful attainments in learning.
He was for fifty years Catechist in Alexandria, and as such
the last brilliant star in the catechetical school. He died
in A.D. 395. An enthusiastic admirer of Origen, he also
shared many of his eccentric views, _e.g._ Apocatastasis,
pre-existence of the soul, etc. But also in consequence of
the theological controversies of the times he gave to his
theology a decidedly ecclesiastical turn. His writings were
numerous; but only a few have been preserved. His book _De
Spiritu S._ is still extant in a Latin translation of Jerome;
his controversial tract against the Manichæans is known
only from fragments. His chief work _De S. Trinitate_, Περὶ
τριάδος, in 3 bks., in which he showed himself a vigorous
defender of the Nicene Creed, was brought to light in the
18th century. A commentary on the Περὶ ἀρχῶν of Origen
now lost, was condemned at the second Council of Nicæa in
A.D. 787.

§ 47.6.

g. =Macarius Magnes=, bishop of Magnesia in Asia Minor about
A.D. 403, under the title Μονογενὴς ἢ Ἀποκριτικός, etc.,
wrote an apology for Christianity in 5 bks., only recovered
in A.D. 1867, which takes the form of an account of a
disputation with a heathen philosopher. Doctrinally it has
a strong resemblance to the works of Gregory of Nyssa. The
material assigned to the opponent is probably taken from
the controversial tract of Porphyry (§ 23, 3).

h. =Cyril, Patriarch of Alexandria=, was the nephew, protegé
and, from A.D. 412, also the successor of Theophilus
(§ 51, 3). The zealous and violent temper of the uncle was
not without an injurious influence upon the character of the
nephew. At the _Synodus ad Quercum_ in A.D. 403, he voted
for the condemnation of Chrysostom, but subsequently, on
further consideration, he again of his own accord entered
upon the _diptyche_ (§ 59, 6) of the Alexandrian church
the name of the disgracefully persecuted man. In order to
revenge himself upon the Jews by whom in a popular tumult
Christian blood had been shed, he came down upon them at
the head of a mob, drove them out of the city and destroyed
their houses. He also bears no small share of the odium of
the horrible murder of the noble Hypatia (§ 42, 4). He shows
himself equally passionate and malevolent in the contest
with the Nestorians and the Antiocheans (§ 52, 3), and
to this controversy many of his treatises, as well as
87 epistles, are almost entirely devoted. The most important
of his writings is Πρὸς τὰ τοῦ ἐν ἀθέοις Ἰουλιανοῦ (§ 42, 5).
He systematically developed in almost scholastic fashion the
dogma of the Trinity in his _Thesaurus de S. Consubstantiali
Trinitate_; and in a briefer and more popular form, in two
short tracts. As a preacher he was held in so high esteem,
that, as Gennadius relates, Greek bishops learnt his homilies
by heart and gave them to their congregations instead of
compositions of their own. His 30 Λόγοι ἑορταστικοί, _Homiliæ
paschales_, delivered at the Easter festivals observed in
Alexandria (§ 56, 3), in unctuous language expatiate upon
the burning questions of the day, mostly polemical against
Jews, heathens, Arians and Nestorians. His commentaries
on the books of the Old and New Testaments illustrate the
extreme arbitrariness of the typical-allegorical method.[138]
The treatise Περὶ τῆς ἐν πνεύματι καὶ ἀληθείᾳ προσκυνήσεως
gives a typical exposition of the ceremonial law of Moses,
and his Γλαφυρά contain “ornate and elegant,” _i.e._
typical-allegorical, expositions of selected passages from
the Pentateuch.

i. =Isidore of Pelusium=, priest and abbot of a monastery
at Pelusium in Egypt, who died about A.D. 450, was one of
the noblest, most gifted and liberal representatives of
monasticism of his own and of all times. A warm supporter of
the new Alexandrian system of doctrine but also conciliatory
and moderate in his treatment of the persons of opponents,
while firm and decided in regard to the subject in debate,
he most urgently entreats Cyril to moderation. His writings
_Contra Gentiles_ and _Contra Fatum_ are lost; but his still
extant 2,012 Epistles in 5 bks. afford a striking evidence
of the richness of his intellect and of his culture, as
well as of the great esteem in which he was held and of
his far-reaching influence. His exegesis, too, which always
inclines to a simple literal sense, is of far greater
importance than that of the other Alexandrians.

§ 47.7. (=Mystics and Philosophers.=)

k. =Macarius the Great or the Elder=, monk and priest in
the Scetic desert, was exiled by the Arian Emperor Valens
on account of his zeal for Nicene orthodoxy. He died in
A.D. 391. From his writings, consisting of 50 Homilies, a
number of Apophthegms, some epistles and prayers, there is
breathed forth a deep warm mysticism with various approaches
to Augustine’s soteriological views, while other passages
seem to convey quite a Pelagian type of doctrine.

l. =Marcus Eremita=, a like-minded younger contemporary of
the preceding, lived about A.D. 400 as an inhabitant of
the Scetic desert. We possess of his writings only nine
tracts of an ascetic mystical kind, the second of which,
bearing the title Περὶ τῶν οἰομένων ἐξ ἔργων δικαιοῦσθαι,
has secured for them a place in the Roman Index with the
note “_Caute legenda_.” However even in his mysticism
contradictory views, Augustinian and Pelagian, in regard
to human freedom and divine grace, on predestination and
sanctification, etc., find a place alongside one another,
and have prominence given them according to the writer’s
humour and the requirement of his meditation or exhortation.

m. =Synesius of Cyrene=,[139] subsequently bishop of Ptolemais
in Egypt, was a disciple of the celebrated Hypatia (§ 42, 4)
and an enthusiastic admirer of Plato. He died about A.D. 420.
A happy husband and father, in comfortable circumstances
and devoted to the study of philosophy, he could not for a
long time be prevailed upon to accept a bishopric. He openly
confessed his Origenistic heterodoxy in reference to the
resurrection doctrine, the eternity of the world, as well
as the pre-existence of the soul. He also publicly declared
that as bishop he would continue the marriage relation with
his wife, and no one took offence thereat. In the episcopal
office he distinguished himself by noble zeal and courage
which knew no fear of man. His 10 Hymns contain echoes of
Valentinian views (§ 27, 4), and his philosophical tracts
are only to a small extent dominated by Christian ideas. His
155 Epistles are more valuable as illustrating on every hand
his noble character.

n. =Nemesius, Bishop of Emesa= in Phœnicia, lived in the
first half of the 5th century. He left behind a brilliant
treatise on religious philosophy, Περὶ φύσεως ἀνθρώπου. The
traditional doctrine of the Eastern church is unswervingly
set forth by him; still he too finds therein a place for
the eternity of the world, the pre-existence of the soul, a
migration of souls (excluding, however, the brute creation),
the unconditional freedom of the will, etc.

o. =Æneas of Gaza=, a disciple of the Neo-Platonist Hierocles
and a rhetorician in Alexandria, about A.D. 437 wrote a
dialogue directed against the Origenistic doctrines of the
eternity of the world and the pre-existence of the soul; as
also against the Neo-Platonic denial of the resurrection of
the body. It bore the title: Θεόφραστος.

§ 47.8. =The Antiocheans.=

a. =Eusebius of Emesa= was born at Edessa and studied in
Cæsarea and Antioch. A quiet, peaceful scholar, and one who
detested all theological wrangling, he declined the call to
the Alexandrian bishopric in place of the deposed Athanasius
in A.D. 341, but accepted the obscure bishopric of Emesa. He
was not, however, to be left here. When, on account of his
mathematical and astronomical attainments, the people there
suspected him of sorcery, he quitted Emesa and from that date
till his death in A.D. 360 taught in Antioch. Of his numerous
exegetical, dogmatical and polemical writings only a few
fragments are extant.

b. =Diodorus of Tarsus=, a scholar of the preceding, monk and
presbyter at Antioch, was afterwards bishop of Tarsus in
Cilicia, and died in A.D. 394. Only a few fragments of his
numerous writings survive. As an exegete he concerned himself
with the plain grammatico-historical sense and contested
the Alexandrian mode of interpretation in the treatise: Τίς
διαφορὰ θεωρίας καὶ ἀλληγορίας. By θεωρία he understands
insight into the relations transcending the bare literal
sense but yet essentially present in it as the ideal. By his
polemic against Apollinaris (§ 52, 1), he imprinted upon the
Antiochean school its specific dogmatic character (§ 52, 2),
in consequence of which he was at a later period regarded as
the original founder of the Nestorian party.

c. His scholar again was =John of Antioch=, whose proper name
afterwards almost disappeared before the honourable title of
=Chrysostom=. Educated by his early widowed mother Arethusa
with the greatest care, he attended the rhetoric school
of Libanius and started with great success as an advocate
in Antioch. But after receiving baptism he abandoned his
practice and became a monk. He was made deacon in A.D. 380
and presbyter in A.D. 386 in his native city. His brilliant
eloquence raised him at last in A.D. 398 to the patriarchal
chair at Constantinople (§ 51, 3). He died in exile in
A.D. 407. Next to Athanasius and the three Cappadocians
he is one of the most talented of the Eastern fathers, the
only one of the Antiochean school whose orthodoxy has never
been questioned. In his exegesis he follows the fundamental
principles of the Antiochean school. He wrote commentaries
on Isaiah (down to chap. viii. 10) and on Galatians. Besides
these his 650 Expository Homilies on all the Biblical books
and particular sections cover almost the whole of the Old
and New Testaments. Among his other dogmatical, polemical
and hortatory church addresses the most celebrated are the
21 _De Statuis ad populum Antiochen_, delivered in A.D. 387.
(The people of Antioch, roused on account of the exorbitant
tax demanded of them, had broken down the statues of
Theodosius I.) The _Demonstratio c. Julianum et Gentiles
quod Christus sit Deus_ and the _Liber in S. Babylam
c. Judæos et Gentiles_ are apologetical treatises. Of
his ethico-ascetic writings, in which he eagerly commends
virginity and asceticism, by far the most celebrated is
Περὶ ἱερωσύνης, _De Sacerdotis_, in 4 bks., in the form of
a dialogue with his Cappadocian friend Basil (the Great)
who in A.D. 370 had felt compelled to accept the bishopric
of Cæsarea after Chrysostom had escaped this honour by
flight.[140]

§ 47.9.

d. =Theodore, bishop of Mopsuestia= in Cilicia, was the
son of respectable parents in Antioch, the friend and
fellow-student of Chrysostom, first under Libanius, then
under Diodorus. He died in A.D. 429. It was he who gave
full development and consistent expression to the essential
dogmatic and hermeneutical principles of the Antiochean
theology. For this reason he was far more suspected of
heresy by his Alexandrian opponents than even his teacher
Diodorus, and they finally obtained their desire by the
formal condemnation of his person and writings at the fifth
œcumenical Synod in A.D. 553 (§ 52, 6). Leontius Byzantinus
formulated his exegetical offence by saying that in his
exposition he treated the Holy Scriptures precisely as
ordinary human writings, especially that he interpreted the
Song of Songs as a love poem, _libidinose pro sua et mente
et lingua meretricia_, explained the Psalms after the
manner of the Jews till he emptied them dry of all Messianic
contents, _Judaice ad Zorobabelem et Ezechiam retulit_,
denied the genuineness of the titles of the Psalms, rejected
the canonical authority of Job, the Chronicles and Ezra
as well as James and other Catholic Epistles, etc. In
every respect Theodore was one of the ablest exegetes of the
ancient church and the Syrian church has rightly celebrated
him as the _“Interpres” par excellence_. He set forth his
hermeneutical principles in the treatise: _De Allegoria
et Historia_. Of his exegetical writings we have still his
Comm. on the Minor Prophets, on Romans, fragments of those
on other parts of the New Testament. Latin translations of
his Comm. on the Minor Epp. of Paul, with the corresponding
Greek fragments, are edited by Swete, 2 vols., Cambr.,
1880, 1882. An introduction to Biblical Theology collected
from Theodore’s writings and reproduced in a Latin form by
Junilius Africanus (§ 48, 1) is still extant. His dogmatic,
polemical and apologetical works on the Incarnation
and Original Sin (§ 53, 4), against Eunomius (§ 50, 3),
Apollinaris (§ 52, 1) and the Emperor Julian (§ 42, 5),
are now known only from a few fragmentary quotations.

e. =Polychronius, bishop of Apamea=, was Theodore’s brother and
quite his equal in exegetical acuteness and productivity,
while he excelled him in his knowledge of the Hebrew and
Syriac. Tolerably complete scholia by him on Ezekiel, Daniel
and Job have been preserved in the Greek Catenæ (§ 48, 1).
In regard to Daniel he maintains firmly its historical
character and understands chap. vii. of Antiochus Epiphanes.

f. =Theodoret, bishop of Cyrus= in Syria, was Theodore’s ablest
disciple, the most versatile scholar and most productive
writer of his age, an original investigator and a diligent
pastor, an upright and noble character and a man who kept
the just mean amid the extreme tendencies of his times,--yet
even he could not escape the suspicion of heresy (§ 52, 3,
4, 6). He died in A.D. 457. As an exegete he followed the
course of grammatico-historical exposition marked out by
his Antiochean predecessors, but avoided the rationalistic
tendencies of his teacher. He commented on most of the
historical books of the Old Testament, on the Prophets, the
Song, which he understood allegorically of the church as
the bride of Christ, and on the Pauline Epistles. Among his
historical works the first place belongs to his continuation
of the history of Eusebius (§ 5, 1). His Φιλόθεος ἱστορία,
_Hist. religiosa_, gives a glowing description of the
lives of 33 celebrated ascetics of both sexes. Of higher
value is the Αἱρετικῆς κακομυθίας ἐπιτομή, _Hæreticarum
fabularum compendium_. His Ἑλληνικῶν θεραπευτικὴ παθημάτων,
_De Curandis Græcorum Affectionibus_, is an apologetical
treatise. His seven Dialogues _De s. Trinitate_ are polemics
against the Macedonians and Apollinarians. The _Reprehensio_
xii. _Anathematismorum_ is directed against Cyril of
Alexandria; and the Ἐρανιστὴς ἤτοι Πολύμορφος against
monophysitism as a heresy compounded of many heresies
(§ 52, 4). Besides these we have from him 179 Epistles.[141]

§ 47.10. =Other Teachers of the Greek Church during the 4th and
5th Centuries.=

a. =Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem=, from A.D. 351 to A.D. 386,
in the Arian controversy took the side of the conciliatory
semi-Arians and thus came into collision with his imperious
and decidedly Arian metropolitan Acacius of Cæsarea. During
a famine he sold the church furniture for distribution
among the needy, and was for this deposed by Acacius. Under
Julian he ventured to return, but under Valens he was again
driven out and found himself exposed to the persecution
of the Arians, which was all the more violent because in
the meantime he had assumed a more decided attitude toward
Nicene orthodoxy. At the death of Valens in A.D. 378 he
returned and became reconciled to the victorious maintainers
of the Homoousion by fully accepting the doctrine at the
Council of Constantinople in A.D. 381 (§ 50, 4). We still
have his 23 Catechetical Lectures delivered in A.D. 348 by
him as presbyter to the baptized at Jerusalem. The first
18 are entitled: Πρὸς τοὺς φωτιζομένους, _Ad Competentes_
(§ 35, 1); the last five: Πρὸς τοὺς νεοφωτίστους, _Catecheses
Mystagogicæ_, on Baptism, Anointing and the Lord’s Supper.
In their present form they afford but faint evidence of their
author having surmounted the semi-Arian standpoint.[142]

b. =Epiphanius, bishop of Salamis= or Constantia in Cyprus, was
born of Jewish parents in the Palestinian village Besanduce
and was baptized in his sixteenth year. His pious and
noble, but narrow and one-sided character was formed by his
education under the monks. He completed his ascetic training
by several years residence among the monks of the Scetic
desert, then founded a monastery in his native place over
which he presided for thirty years until in A.D. 367 he was
raised to the metropolitan’s chair at Salamis, where he died
in A.D. 403. In the discharge of his episcopal duties he
was a miracle of faithfulness and zeal, specially active and
self-denying in his care of the poor. But in the forefront
of all his thinking and acting there ever stood his glowing
zeal for ecclesiastical orthodoxy. The very soul of honour,
truth-loving and courageous, but credulous, positive, with
little knowledge of the world and human nature, and hence
not capable of penetrating to the bottom of complicated
affairs, he was all his days misused as a tool of the
intriguing Alexandrian Theophilus in the Origenistic
controversies (§ 51, 3). He was all the more easily won
to this from the fact that he had brought with him from
the Scetic desert the conviction that Origen was the prime
mover in the Arian and all other heresies. In spite of all
defects in form and contents his writings have proved most
serviceable for the history of the churches and heresies
of the first four centuries. The diligence and honourable
intention of his research in some measure compensate for
the bad taste and illogical character of his exposition and
for his narrow, one-sided and uncritical views. His Πανάριον
ἤτοι κιβώτιον κατὰ αἱρέσεων lxxx. is a full and learned
though confused and uncritical work, in which the idea
of heresy is so loosely defined that even the Samaritans,
Pharisees, Essenes, etc., find a place in it. He himself
composed an abridgment of it under the title: Ἀνακεφαλαίωσις.
His Ἀγκυρωτός is an exposition of the Catholic faith, which
during the tumults of the Arian controversy should serve
as an anchor of salvation to the Christians. The book Περὶ
μέτρων καὶ στάθμων, _De mensuris et ponderibus_, answers to
this title only in the last chapter, the 24th; the preceding
chapters treat of the Canon and translations of the Old
Testament. There are two old codices in the British Museum
which have in addition, in a Syriac translation, 37 chapters
on biblical weights and measures and 19 on the biblical
science of the heaven and the earth. The tract Περὶ τῶν
δώδεκα λίθων (on the high-priest’s breastplate) is of little
consequence.

c. =Palladius=, born in Galatia, retired at an early age into
the Nitrian desert, but lived afterwards in Palestine, where
he was accused of favouring the heresy of Origen (§ 51, 2).
Chrysostom consecrated him bishop of Hellenopolis in
Bithynia. Latterly he administered a small bishopric in
Galatia, where he died before A.D. 431. His chief writing
is the Πρὸς Λαῦσον ἱστορία, _Hist. Lausiaca_, a historical
romance on the hermit and monkish life of his times which is
dedicated to an eminent statesman called Lausus.

d. =Nilus=, sprung from a prominent family in Constantinople,
retired with his son Theodulus to the recluses of Mount
Sinai. By a murderous onslaught of the Saracens his beloved
son was snatched away from him, but an Arabian bishop bought
him and ordained both father and son as priests. He died
about A.D. 450. In his ascetical writings and specially
in the 4 books of his Epistles, about 1,000 in number,
he shows himself to be of like mind and character to his
companion Isidore, but with a deeper knowledge and more
sober conception of Holy Scripture. He himself describes
the capture of his son in _Narrationes de cæde monachorum
et captivitate Theoduli_.

§ 47.11. =Greek Church Fathers of the 6th and 7th Centuries.=

a. =Johannes Philoponus= was in the first half of the 6th
century teacher of grammar at Alexandria, and belonged to
the sect of tritheistic monophysites in that place (§ 52, 7).
Although trained in the Neo-Platonic school, he subsequently
applied himself enthusiastically to the Aristotelian
philosophy, composed many commentaries on Aristotle’s
writings, and was the first to apply the Aristotelian
categories to Christian theology. Notwithstanding many
heretical tendencies in his theology, among which is his
statement in a lost work, Περὶ ἀναστάσεως, that for the
saved at the last day entirely new bodies and an entirely
new world will be created, his philosophical writings
powerfully impelled the mediæval Greek Church to the study
of philosophy. His chief doctrinal treatise Διαιτητὴς ἢ περὶ
ἑνώσεως is known only from quotations in Leontius Byzantinus
and Johannes Damascenus. Of his other writings the most
important was the controversial treatise _Contra Procli
pro æternitate mundi argumenta_ in 18 bks. The 7 bks. Περὶ
κοσμοποίας treat of the six days’ work of creation with
great display of philosophical acuteness and acquaintance
with natural history.

b. =Dionysius the Areopagite.= Under this name (Acts xvii. 34)
an unknown writer, only a little earlier than the previously
named, published writings of a decidedly mystico-theosophical
kind. The first mention of them is at a conference of
the monophysite Severians (§ 52, 7) with the Catholics
at Constantinople in A.D. 533, where the former referred
to them, while the other side denied their authenticity.
Subsequently, however, they were universally received as
genuine, not only in the East but also in the West. They
comprise four tracts: 1. Περὶ τῆς ἱεραρχίας οὐρανίου;
2. Περὶ τῆς ἱεραρχίας ἐκκλησιαστικῆς; 3. Περὶ τῶν θείων
ὀνομάτων; 4. Περὶ τῆς μυστικῆς θεολογίας; and also 12 Epp.
to Apostolic men. Their author was a Monophysite-Christian
Neo-Platonist, who transferred the secret arts of the
Dionysian mysteries to Christian worship, monasticism,
hierarchy and church doctrines. He distinguished a θεολογία
καταφατική, which consisted in symbolic representations,
from a θεολογία ἀποφατική, which surmounted the symbolical
shell and rose to the perception of the pure idea by means
of ecstasy. Side by side with the revealed doctrine of Holy
Scripture he sets a secret doctrine, the knowledge of which
is reached only by initiation. The primal mystagogue, who
like the sun enlightens all spirits, is the divine hierarch
Christ, and the primitive type of all earthly order in the
heavenly hierarchy as represented in the courses of angels
and glorified spirits. There is constant intercourse between
the earthly and heavenly hierarchies by means of Christ the
highest hierarch incarnate. The purpose of this intercourse
is the drawing out of the θείωσις of man by means of
priestly consecration and the mysteries (_i.e._ the
Sacraments of which he reckons six, § 58). The θείωσις
has its foundation in baptism as consecration to the
divine birth, τελετὴ θεογενεσίας, and its completion in
consecration of the dead, the anointing of the body. The
historical Christ with His redeeming life, sufferings and
death is at no time the subject of the Areopagite mysticism.
It is always concerned with the heavenly Christ, not about
the reconciliation but only about the mystical living
fellowship of God and man, about the immediate vision and
enjoyment of God’s glory. The monophysite standpoint of the
author betrays itself in his tendency to think of the human
nature of Christ as absorbed by the divine. His Christian
Neo-Platonism appears in his fantastic speculations about
the nature of God, the orders of angels and spirits, etc.;
while his antagonism to the pagan Neo-Platonism is seen
in his regarding the θείωσις not as a natural power proper
to and dwelling in man, but as a supernatural power made
possible by the ἐνσάρκωσις of Christ, but still more
expressly by his emphatic assertion over against the
Neo-Platonic depreciation of the body, of the resurrection
of the flesh as the completion of the θείωσις. Hence also
the importance which he attaches to the sacrament of the
consecration of the dead.[143]

§ 47.12.

c. =Leontius Byzantinus=, at first an advocate at
Constantinople, subsequently a monk at Jerusalem, wrote
about the end of the 6th century controversial tracts against
Nestorians, Monophysites and Apollinarians, and in his
_Scholia s. Liber de sectis_ presented a historico-polemical
summary of all heresies up to that time.

d. =Maximus Confessor=, the scion of a well-known family of
Constantinople, was for a long time private secretary to
the Emperor Heraclius, but retired about A.D. 630 from love
of a contemplative life into a monastery at Chrysopolis
near Constantinople, where he was soon raised to the rank of
abbot. The further details of his story are given in § 52, 8.
He died in A.D. 662. In decision of character, fidelity
to his convictions and courage as a confessor during
the Monothelete controversy, he stands out among his
characterless countrymen and contemporaries as a rock in the
ocean. In scientific endowments and comprehensive learning,
in depth and wealth of thought there is none like him,
although even in him the weakness of the age, especially
slavish submission to authority, is quite apparent. His
scientific theology is built up mainly upon the three great
Cappadocians, among whom the speculative Nyssa has most
influence over him. His dialectic acuteness and subtlety he
derived from the study of Aristotle, while his imaginative
nature and the intensity of his emotional life which
predestined him to be a mystic, found abundant nourishment
and satisfaction in the writings of Dionysius. He was saved,
however, by the manysidedness of his mind and the soundness
of his whole life’s tendencies, from many eccentricities of
the Areopagite mysticism, so that in his humility he thought
that his soul was not pure enough to be able fully to
penetrate and comprehend these mysteries. His numerous
writings, of which more than fifty are extant, were in
great part occasioned by the struggle against Monophysitism
and Monotheletism. His mystico-ascetic writings are
also important, such as his Μυσταγωγία, treatises on the
symbolico-mystic meaning of the acts of church worship, his
epistles and several beautiful hymns. He also wrote scholia
and commentaries on the works of the Areopagite. He is
weakest in exegesis, where the most wilful allegorizing
prevails.

e. =Johannes Climacus=, abbot of the monastery at Sinai, died
at an extremely old age in A.D. 606. Under the title Κλίμαξ
τοῦ παραδείσου, _Heavenly Guide_, he composed a directory
toward perfection in the Christian life in thirty steps,
which became a favourite reading book of pious monks.

f. =Johannes Moschus= was a monk in a cloister at Jerusalem.
Accompanying his friend Sophronius, afterwards patriarch of
Jerusalem (§ 52, 8), he travelled through Egypt and the East,
visiting all the pious monks and clerics. At last he reached
Rome, where he wrote an account in his Λειμονάριον ἤτοι νέος
παραδείσος, _Pratum Spirituale_, of the edifying discourses
which he had had with famous monks during his travels, and
soon thereafter, in A.D. 619, he died.

g. =Anastasius Sinaita=, called the new Moses, because like
Moses he is said to have seen God, was priest and dweller
on Mount Sinai at the end of the 7th century. His chief work
Ὁδηγός, _Viæ duæ_, is directed against the _Acephalians_
(§ 52, 5) and his _Contemplationes_ preserved only in a
Latin translation give an allegorico-mystical exposition of
the Hexæmeron.

§ 47.13. =Syrian Church Fathers.=[144]

a. =Jacob of Nisibis=, as bishop of his native city and founder
of the theological school there, performed most important
services to the national Syrian Church. At the Council of
Nicæa in A.D. 325 he distinguished himself by vindicating
the homoüsion and also subsequently we find him sometimes in
the front rank of the champions of Nicene orthodoxy. Of his
writings none are known to us. He died in A.D. 338.

b. =Aphraates= was celebrated in his time as a Persian sage.
As bishop of St. Matthew near Mosul he adopted the Christian
name of =Mar Jacob=, and dedicated his 23 Homilies, which
are rather instructions or treatises, to a certain Gregory.
He wrote them between A.D. 336 and A.D. 345. The _Sermones_
ascribed even by Gennadius at the end of the 5th century
to Nisibis were composed by Aphraates. Although he lived
when the Arian controversy was at its height, there is no
reference to it in his treatises, which may be explained by
his geographical isolation. The polemic against the Jews to
which seven tracts are devoted _ex professo_, was one which
specially interested him.

c. =Ephraim the Syrian=,[145] called, on account of his
importance in the Syrian Church, _Propheta Syrorum_, was
born at Nisibis and was called by the bishop Jacob to
be teacher of the school founded there by him. When the
Persians under Sapor in A.D. 350 plundered the city and
destroyed the school, Ephraim retired to Edessa, founded a
school there, administered the office of deacon, and died
at a great age in A.D. 378. As an exegete he indulged to his
heart’s content in typology, but in other respects mostly
followed the grammatico-historical method with a constant
endeavour after what was edifying. Many of his writings have
been lost. Those remaining partly in the Syriac original,
partly in Greek and Latin translations, have been collected
by the brothers Assemani. They comprise Commentaries on
almost the whole Bible, Homilies and Discourses in metrical
form on a variety of themes, of these 56 are against
heretics (Gnostics, Manichæans, Eunomians, Audians, etc.),
and Hymns properly so called, especially funeral Odes.

d. =Ibas, bishop of Edessa=, at first teacher in the high
school there, translated the writings of Diodorus and
Theodore into Syriac, and thus brought down upon himself
the charge of being a Nestorian. Having been repeatedly
drawn into discussion, and being naturally outspoken, he was
excommunicated and deposed at the Robber Synod of Ephesus in
A.D. 449, but his orthodoxy was acknowledged by the Council
of Chalcedon in A.D. 451, after he had pronounced anathema
upon Nestorius. He died in A.D. 457. An epistle, in which
he gives an account of these proceedings to Bishop Meris of
Hardashir in Persia, led to a renewal of his condemnation
before the fifth œcumenical Council at Constantinople in
A.D. 553 (§ 52, 4, 6).

e. =Jacob, bishop of Edessa=, a monophysite, is the
most important and manysided among the later Syrians,
distinguished as theologian, historian, grammarian and
translator of the Greek fathers. He died in A.D. 708. Of his
works still extant in MS.--scholia on the Bible, liturgical
works and treatises on church law, revision of the Syrian
Old Testament according to the LXX., continuation of the
Eusebian Chronicle, etc.--only a few have been printed.

2. THE MOST IMPORTANT TEACHERS OF THE WESTERN CHURCH.

§ 47.14.

f. =During the Period of the Arian Controversy.=

a. =Jul. Firmicus Maternus.= Under this name we have a
treatise _De errore profanarum religionum_, addressed to
the sons of Constantine the Great, in which the writer
combats heathenism upon the Euhemerist theory (which
traces the worship of the heathen gods from the deifying
of famous ancestors), but besides reclaims many myths as
corruptions of the biblical history, and shows that the
violent overthrow of all idolatry is the sacred duty of
a Christian ruler from God’s command to Joshua to destroy
utterly the Canaanites.

b. =Lucifer of Calăris [Calaris]= in Sardinia, was a
violent, determined, and stubborn zealot for the Nicene
doctrine, whose excessive severity against the penitent
Arians and semi-Arians drove him into schism (§ 50, 8).
He died in A.D. 371. In his tract, _Ad Constantium
Augustum pro S. Athansio_, lb. ii., written in A.D. 360,
he upbraids the emperor with his faults so bitterly as
to describe him as a reckless apostate, antichrist, and
Satan. He boldly acknowledged the authorship and, in
prospect of a death sentence, wrote in A.D. 361 his
consolatory treatise, _Moriendum esse pro filio Dei_.
The early death of the emperor, however, permitted his
return from exile (§ 50, 2, 4), where he had written
_De regibus apostaticis_ and _De non conveniendo cum
hæreticis_.