教會史 第 1 章 第 13/28 段

But when they entered into such discussions, it seemed good to some to do away entirely with the term "substance," putting forward the creed which Mark had composed not long before at Sirmium, in the camp, which those who happened to be present there had accepted, among whom was also Basil, bishop of Ancyra.

But the majority were eager for the creed set forth at the dedication of the church of the Antiochenes.

The chief proponents of the former opinion were Eudoxius, Acacius, Patrophilus, George of Alexandria, Uranius of Tyre, and thirty-two others; of the second opinion, George of Laodicea in Syria, Eleusius of Cyzicus, and Sophronius of Pompeiopolis in Paphlagonia, whom the majority followed.

It was suspected that Acacius and his party were purposely at variance with the others concerning the doctrine, so as, under this pretext, to escape the charges against themselves.

Because, whereas formerly, in what they had written to Macedonius, bishop of Constantinople, they had jointly professed that the Son was in all respects like the Father and of the same substance, they were now shamelessly fighting against this.

...against their former professions of faith.

And when many had been stirred up contentiously, Silvanus, bishop of Tarsus, cried out that it was not to be tolerated that a new document of another creed should be introduced besides the one approved at Antioch.

...and that this alone ought to prevail.

At this, Acacius and his party, taking it ill, rose up and withdrew.

They shut the doors of the church, and, remaining by themselves, passed a vote of condemnation against them.

But Acacius denounced what had thus taken place, and privately showed to Leonas and Lauricius the document which he himself was eager to promote.

On the third day, the others assembled again, together with Macedonius and Basil, who had previously been absent; but Acacius and his party did not think it right to take part in the assembly unless those who had been deposed and accused by them should first withdraw.

For those of the other party suspected this, supposing that Acacius was seeking this pretext in order to dissolve the council, so that both the sect of Aetius might escape the present examination, and they themselves might escape the charges brought against them.

But when all were present, Leonas said that he had a document which had been handed to him by Acacius and his party.

It was a statement of faith with a certain preamble, and it had escaped the notice of the others.

For Leonas himself, being of the same mind as Acacius, had also deliberately concealed this.

But when it was read out, the assembly became full of uproar.

For it declared that, although the emperor had ordered that nothing should be introduced into the faith beyond the sacred Scriptures, certain persons, bringing in those who had been deposed from various nations and those who had been unlawfully appointed as bishops, had thrown the council into confusion, insulting some of them and not permitting others to speak.

And that they themselves were not rejecting the creed set forth at Antioch, even though those who had assembled there had introduced this document in response to the controversy that had arisen at that time.

But since the terms "consubstantial" and "of like substance" still even now trouble many, and since certain persons have recently attempted to introduce as an innovation the notion of the Son's "unlikeness" to the Father, for this reason it is necessary to reject both "consubstantial" and "of like substance" as foreign to the Scriptures, and to proscribe "unlike," but to confess clearly that the Son is "like" the Father.

For he is, as the Apostle Paul somewhere says, "the image of the invisible God."

Having prefaced these things, they next appended a document of faith that agreed neither with the decisions made at Nicaea nor with those made at Antioch, but was composed so loosely that even those who held the opinions of Arius and Aetius would seem to be committing no error, even though they believed thus.

For passing over the terms by which those assembled at Nicaea rejected the opinion of Arius, and remaining silent also as to how the Son is unchangeable in Godhead, an unaltered image of the Father in essence, will, power, and glory, as had been stated at the council of Antioch, they confessed to believe in the Father, and to believe also in the Son and in the Holy Spirit.

For each person of the Trinity they employed certain common descriptive terms that conflicted neither with their own opinions nor with those who held the opposite view, and they decreed that those who believed otherwise were aliens to the universal Church.

Such, then, was the content of the document produced by Leonas, subscribed by Acacius himself and by those who followed him.

After this had been read, Sophronius the Paphlagonian cried out, saying, "If it is a statement of the faith for each man to set forth his own private opinion every day, we shall lose the..."

"...the precision of truth." When Acacius insisted that nothing prevented another document being dictated, seeing that the faith of Nicaea itself had been altered once and afterward many times, Eleusius took up the point and said, "But this council has been convened now not that it might learn what it has not already learned, nor that it might receive another faith in place of that already approved by those who assembled at Antioch,... and that they hold fast to it unto life and unto death."

As the debate proceeded thus, they moved on to another question.

And they inquired of the party of Acacius in what respect they confessed the Son to be like the Father.

When they replied that it was only in will, and not in essence, all the rest insisted that he was like also in essence.

And they refuted Acacius by means of a treatise which he himself had composed and published, showing that he had previously held the same opinion as they did.

Eleusius of Cyzicus said, "If Basil or Marcus have done certain things on their own, or if they and the party of Acacius bring private accusations against one another concerning certain matters, this makes no difference to the council, nor is it necessary to inquire minutely whether the faith set forth by them is right or otherwise."

"It is necessary, however, to follow the faith ratified at Antioch by the ninety-seven elder priests."

"And if anyone should propose anything contrary to this, he is an alien to piety and to the Church."

When all those with him acclaimed these words, the assembly was then dissolved.

On the following day, the party of Acacius and George would no longer consent to assemble together in the same place.

Nor indeed did Leonas, though summoned, appear.

For he now openly held their views.

Indeed, those who went to him found the party of Acacius in his house.

Though they begged and summoned him to the assembly, he did not comply, on the pretext that the council was divided in opinion, although he had been ordered by the emperor to be present, with everyone in agreement and gathered together in the same place.

But as time was being wasted, with the others repeatedly summoning the party of Acacius, while the latter at one time demanded that named men should come together at the house of Leonas, and at another insisted that they had been entrusted by the emperor with judging the others, and were unwilling either to confess the same faith or to answer for the charges against them, nor would they consent to appear at the inquiry concerning Cyril, whom they themselves had deposed, and there being no pressing reason for their refusal, the council deposed, among others, George bishop of Alexandria, Acacius of Caesarea, Uranius of Tyre, Patrophilus of Scythopolis, and Eudoxius of Antioch.

The majority of the rest they excommunicated until they should answer the charges brought against them, and they wrote of what had been done to each one's own diocese.

In place of Eudoxius, they ordained Adrian bishop of the Antiochenes, a man who was a presbyter of the clergy there.

But the party of Acacius seized him and handed him over to Leonas and Lauricius.

They kept him for a time under military guard, and afterward condemned him to exile.

This, in brief, was the outcome of the Council of Seleucia.

Whoever wishes to know the particulars accurately may learn them from the records of these proceedings, which shorthand-writers present at the time set down in writing.

When these things had happened thus, the party of Acacius hastened to the palace, while the others each withdrew to their own homes.

But the ten men who, as had been ordered, were entrusted by common consent to appear before the emperor, found on their arrival the ten envoys sent by those who had assembled at Ariminum, and found that the party of Acacius had already succeeded in winning over to their own views the men of influence at the palace, and through them had procured the favor of the sovereign.

For, as it was said, some of these courtiers held the same opinions as they did, others had been corrupted by ecclesiastical properties, and others had been deceived by flattering words and by the standing of the one who persuaded them.

For Acacius was no ordinary man, being by nature clever both at conceiving and expressing ideas and at putting his designs into effect; he presided over an eminent church, and boasted of Eusebius Pamphili, whom he succeeded in the episcopate, as his teacher, and claimed, by his own reputation and by his succession to Eusebius's books, to know more than others.

Being such a man, he easily arranged whatever he wished.

There being at Constantinople twenty men from each council, as well as others who happened to be residing there, first Honoratus was entrusted with judging the question concerning Aetius, in the presence of the leading men of the great senate — Honoratus, whom the emperor, not long before, upon returning from the western regions he had been governing, had appointed the first prefect of Constantinople.

Afterward, when Constantius himself also examined the matter together with the magistrates, Aetius was found to hold evil opinions concerning the faith, so that both the emperor and the others were angered at his words as blasphemous.

The party of Acacius, feigning ignorance of the origin of this heresy, had deliberately contrived to have the emperor and those about him judge the matter, supposing that Aetius would prove invincible in argument and capable of compelling his hearers by the force of persuasion, and that the heresy would prevail without a struggle.

But when this turned out contrary to their hopes, they produced the document brought from Ariminum, and demanded that the envoys sent by the council of Seleucia accept it.

When the envoys insisted that they would in no way omit the term "essence," the party of Acacius tried to persuade them by oaths that they did not hold the Son to be unlike the Father in essence, and that they were ready to renounce this heresy.

But since, unexpectedly, the Westerners had omitted the term "essence" at Ariminum, they insisted that such a document was extremely desirable to them.

"For if it should prevail," he said, "then, along with the term 'essence,' the term 'consubstantial' too would surely be passed over in silence — a term which the priests throughout the West, out of reverence for the council of Nicaea, held in the highest regard."

In addition to this, the emperor himself was persuaded to approve this document, considering the great number of those who had assembled at Ariminum, and reasoning that he would not err in saying that the Son is "like" the Father, holding that "like" is, in effect, the same as "like in essence" and "consubstantial," and that it made no difference to him in meaning, provided he did not employ terms unfamiliar to sacred Scripture, so long as, by an equally forceful and undisputed term — "like" — he confessed the same meaning.

Holding this opinion, then, he commanded the bishops to be of one mind concerning the document set forth by those who had assembled at Ariminum.

And though preparing on the next day for the consular procession, as is the Roman custom on the new moon of the month they call January, he spent the whole day and much of the following night deliberating among the bishops, until at last those who had come from Seleucia also subscribed to the document brought from Ariminum.

The party of Acacius, remaining in Constantinople for some time, summoned the bishops from Bithynia, among whom were also Maris of Chalcedon and Ulfilas, bishop of the Goths.

Being fifty in number, they assembled together and confirmed the document that had been read at Ariminum, adding that henceforth neither "essence" nor "hypostasis" should be named at all in reference to God, and that every other document, whether already made or yet to be made, apart from this one, should be renounced.

When they had done these things, they deposed Aetius from the diaconate, on the grounds that he wrote contentiously and for the display of a wisdom foreign to ecclesiastical purpose, conducted his disputations disreputably, and was a cause of disturbance and factions in the churches.

But it is said by some that they did not depose him out of genuine conviction, but merely to protect themselves and their own reputation before the emperor.

For they were being accused of holding his views.

He issued orders as seemed good to him, and wrote to Hermogenes the prefect and to the governor of Syria as to who should be exiled and to where; and when the emperor recalled these men from their exile, he would not permit it, opposing both the magistrates and the priests.

They added, moreover, that he had also incited the clergy of Sirmium against Germanius, and, being in communion with Valens and Ursacius, had slandered them by letter to the bishops of Africa; that when accused he denied it and perjured himself, and when found out attempted to sophisticate his perjury; that he had been the cause of discord and faction among the Illyrians, the Italians, and the Africans, and of the troubles concerning the Roman church; that, being eager to make a slave-girl a prisoner, he forced her to bear false testimony against her mistress; that he baptized and admitted to the diaconate a man convicted of sorcery, who had lived shamefully and was cohabiting with a woman contrary to the law of marriage; that he did not remove from the church a circuit-bishop who had been the cause of murders; and that he formed conspiracies at the holy table, invoking curses upon himself and compelling the clergy to swear oaths not to accuse one another.

And this was a device by which he, as leader of the clergy, might escape the accusations of his accusers.

These, then, briefly stated, were the causes of Basil's deposition.

As for Eustathius: first, when he was a presbyter, his own father Eulalius, who was bishop of the church of Caesarea in Cappadocia, had already condemned him in advance and excluded him from prayers; after this, at Neocaesarea in Pontus, he was excommunicated by a council, and was deposed by Eusebius, bishop of Constantinople, having been condemned concerning certain administrative duties entrusted to him; then, since he taught, acted, and thought what was improper, he was deprived of his bishopric by those who assembled at Gangra; and at the council of Antioch he was convicted of perjury.

And that he attempted to overturn the decisions of those who had assembled at Melitene, and, though himself liable to a great many accusations, claimed the right to sit as judge and called the rest heterodox.

They deposed Eleusius on the ground that he had rashly admitted to the diaconate of God a certain Heraclius, a Tyrian by birth, who had been a priest of Heracles there, had been indicted for sorcery and was under investigation, and for this reason was living as a fugitive at Cyzicus while feigning Christianity; and that afterward, learning that he was no such thing, he separated him from the church; and also on the ground that he had, without proper examination, ordained men who had been condemned by Maris bishop of Chalcedon, who was in communion with this council, when they came to Cyzicus.

And they annulled the ordination in both cases as unlawful.

After this, assembling again, they deposed Silvanus bishop of Tarsus, Sophronius of Pompeiopolis in Paphlagonia, Elpidius of Satala, and Neon of Seleucia in Isauria.

On the ground that, while possessing private estates, they engaged in ministry, or held the episcopate apart from these requirements; and Elpidius, on the ground that he had joined with Basil in causing disturbance and had become a leader of disorder, and, contrary to the decisions of the council of Melitene, had restored to the presbyterate a man named Eusebius who had been deposed, and had admitted to the diaconate a certain Nectaria who had been excommunicated for breaking agreements and oaths, though she had no right to such honor according to the laws of the church.

Along with these, they also deposed Cyril of Jerusalem, on the ground that he had communed with Eustathius and Elpidius, who had striven against the decisions of those who assembled at Melitene, with whom he himself had also assembled, and on the ground that, after his deposition in Palestine, he had shared in communion with Basil and George bishop of Laodicea.

For since he had been entrusted with the bishopric of Jerusalem, he had a dispute with Acacius of Caesarea over metropolitan rights, on the ground that he presided over an apostolic see.

From this they fell into mutual enmity and slandered one another, each accusing the other of not thinking soundly concerning God.

For indeed, each had previously been under suspicion: the one for teaching the doctrines of Arius, while Cyril followed those who maintained that the Son is consubstantial with the Father.

Holding this disposition, Acacius, together with the bishops of the province who shared his views, forestalled him by deposing Cyril first, on the following pretext.

When a famine had overtaken the region of Jerusalem, since the multitude of those in need, lacking necessary food, looked to the bishop for relief, and since there were no funds with which he ought to give assistance, he sold sacred treasures and holy veils.

From this, it is reported, someone recognized his own votive offering being worn by a woman among those appearing on the stage, and made inquiry as to where she had gotten it, and found that a merchant had sold it to her, and that the bishop had sold it to the merchant.

Putting forward this charge, Acacius deposed him.

And this, as I have learned, is how matters stand.

The party of Acacius drove out from Constantinople those who, as has been said, had been declared deposed.

As for those with them who refused to subscribe to the depositions, being ten in number, they ordered them to remain apart by themselves for the time being, neither performing the liturgy nor administering their churches, until they should subscribe to them.

And if they should not repent within six months and consent to all that had been decided and done at this council, they too were to be deposed, and the bishops of each province, assembling together, were to ordain others in their place.

When these things had been decided by them and put into effect, they wrote to the bishops and clergy everywhere, instructing them to observe and carry out these decrees.

Not long after this, other men were installed in place of others by the party of Eudoxius: Eudoxius himself in place of Macedonius, Athanasius in place of Basil, and Eunomius in place of Eleusius — Eunomius who afterward became the founder of the heresy called by his name.

And in place of Eustathius, Meletius was entrusted with the church at Sebastia.

And Macedonius, having been removed from the church of Constantinople, resided in a certain place called Pylae in Bithynia, where he also died.

And Eudoxius took possession of the church.

In the tenth consulship of Constantius and the third of Julian Caesar, when he first officiated in church at the dedication ceremony of the great church which they call Sophia, it is said that, having ascended the bishop's platform as though to instruct the people, he began his discourse by saying that "the father is impious, but the son is pious."

And when the crowd was thrown into an uproar, he said, "Be calm."

"The father is impious, because he worships no one;"

"but the son is pious, because he worships the father." And having spoken thus, he turned his hearers to laughter.

But jointly, he and Acacius made it their utmost concern to bring into oblivion all that had been decreed at Nicaea, and, as though to amend it, they sent out through every province under their sway the document that had been read at Ariminum, together with what they themselves had added, and by order of the emperor they commanded that those who would not subscribe to it be punished with exile.

This was the beginning of the greatest calamities; a disturbance like what has been described occurred throughout every province, and churches everywhere were gripped by what was virtually a persecution similar to those under the pagan emperors of former times.

For even if it seemed more moderate in its bodily punishments, it naturally appeared harsher to right-thinking people because of the disgrace involved.

For both the persecutor and the persecuted alike had their origin from the church.

And the evil was so shameful that, besides doing to their own kindred the deeds of enemies, they were doing toward foreigners what even the sacerdotal order forbade.

And this innovation, being praised, advanced still further and crept toward radical change, growing insolent, and, disdaining the paternal traditions, laying down its own laws.

It did not think it fitting to hold the same opinions about God as the older teachers, but, ever devising strange doctrines, it would not rest, always striving after novelties newer than the new, just as indeed happened now.

For after Macedonius was removed from the church of Constantinople, he no longer held the same opinions as those around Acacius and Eudoxius;

but he taught that the Son was God, and in all things, including substance, like the Father, while he declared the Holy Spirit to have no share in the same dignities, calling it a minister and servant, and applying to it whatever one might say concerning the divine angels without erring.

Sharing this opinion with him were Eleusius and Eustathius, and all who at that time had been deposed at Constantinople by those of the opposing sect; and no small portion of the people were persuaded to follow them throughout Constantinople, Bithynia, Thrace, the Hellespont, and the surrounding nations.

For indeed, as regards their manner of life, to which the multitude pays especial attention, they were not in bad repute.

For their bearing in public was dignified, and their manner of life resembled that of monks; their speech was not without elegance, and their character was persuasive enough.

Such, indeed, they say Marathonius was at that time;

who, having amassed great wealth as a public paymaster among the soldiers under the prefects, after he had left military service, took care of hospices for the sick and the poor; and afterward, when Eustathius, bishop of Sebastia, had persuaded him, he came to esteem the ascetic life and established a monastic community at Constantinople, which even to this day is preserved through successive generations.

And he assisted this sect to such a degree with zeal and his own money that the followers of Macedonius came to be called by some "Marathonians"—not unfittingly, it seems to me.

For he alone, together with his fellow residents, appears to have been responsible for this sect not being entirely extinguished in Constantinople.

For from the time Macedonius was deposed, they had neither churches nor bishops until the reign of Arcadius.

For the followers of Arius would not permit it, driving all who held the opposite opinion out of the churches and punishing them cruelly.

Now to enumerate all the priests who at that time were driven out of their own cities would indeed be a laborious task;

for I do not think any nation of the Roman world remained untouched by such a calamity.

At that time, while Eudoxius held the church of Constantinople, many were eager to secure the throne of Antioch for themselves, and, as is likely in such matters, various rivalries and factions arose among the clergy and the people.

For each group chose to have preside over the church the man expected to be like-minded with them concerning their own particular faith.

For they had not yet ceased their disagreement over doctrine, nor did they concur with one another even in their psalm-singing, but, as has been said before, they would alter what was sung to suit their own particular opinion.

The church of Antioch being thus disposed, it seemed good to those around Eudoxius to transfer Meletius from Sebastia to that place, since he was capable in speech and persuasion, of good conduct in life, and had previously held the same opinion as themselves.

namely the inhabitants of Antioch and the surrounding cities, and especially those called Eustathians, who held their opinions about God in keeping with the tradition of the council of Nicaea.

But they were about to fail greatly of their expectation.

For when he arrived at Antioch, it is said that a great crowd gathered of those who held the opinions of Arius and communed with Paulinus—some to see the man for themselves, since his fame was great even before his arrival, others to learn what indeed he would say and to which side he would give his vote.

For a report was already circulating that he was a supporter of the doctrine of those who had assembled at Nicaea.

At first he publicly taught what are called moral discourses, but in the end he openly declared that the Son was of the same substance as the Father.

It is said that the archdeacon, who then belonged to the clergy of that place, ran up while he was still saying this and, laying his hand upon him, stopped up his mouth.

But he indicated his opinion more clearly by his hand than by his voice: stretching out three fingers openly before all, he then gathered them together again into one and held up the single finger, depicting by the shape of his hand for the multitudes what he held in his mind and was prevented from uttering.

But when the archdeacon, at a loss, seized hold of his hand, letting go of his mouth, his tongue now freed, he declared his opinion still more clearly in a loud voice, and exhorted them to hold fast to what had been decreed at Nicaea, and solemnly testified to his hearers that those who thought otherwise erred from the truth.

And since he would not give way, saying the same things or alternately showing them by his hand as opportunity allowed against the archdeacon's hindrance, and the contest between the two was virtually like a wrestling match, the Eustathians cried out loudly and

rejoiced and leapt up, while the followers of Arius were downcast.

But when those around Eudoxius heard of this, they were angry and were eager to have Meletius driven out of the city.

And again they summoned him back, as though he were repenting of what he had said and now correcting it, and holding the opposite opinion.

But since he did not change his opinion, the emperor ordered that he be expelled from the church and reside in exile.

When this had happened, the throne of Antioch was entrusted to Euzoius, who had previously already been deposed together with Arius;

but the admirers of Meletius, separating themselves from those who held the opinions of Arius, held church services on their own;

for those who from the beginning held the Son to be consubstantial with the Father declined to commune with them, on the ground that Meletius had been ordained by Arian bishops, and that those who followed him had been baptized by such priests.

And these, on this pretext, were divided, even though they held the same opinion.

But the emperor, hearing that the Persians were stirring up trouble, came to Antioch.

But those around Acacius, once again, could not bear to remain quiet;

having assembled at Antioch together with a few others, they found fault with what had already been decreed by themselves, and resolved to excise the word "like" from the document that had been read at Ariminum and Constantinople, and they proposed that the Son was in every respect—both in substance and in will—unlike the Father, and that he had come into being out of things that did not exist, just as Arius had held from the beginning.

And joining with them in support were also those who held the views of Aetius, who, after Arius, was the first to venture openly to use these terms.

For this reason he was even called "the atheist," and those who approved his teachings were called "Anomoeans" and "Exucontians."

But when those who followed the opinions decreed at Nicaea inquired of them how, while confessing the Son to be God from God, they yet dared to call him unlike the Father and out of things that did not exist—contrary even to their own exposition—they replied, "Because the apostle Paul too," they said, "has stated:"

"but all things are of God"; and the Son too is one of all things.

and that it is according to this that what they had set forth is to be understood, in keeping with the divine Scriptures.

And thus they twisted the sense and used their sophistries.

Having read it, they dispersed and departed to their own cities.

Meanwhile, while Athanasius was still in hiding, George returned to Alexandria and grievously mistreated the pagans and those Christians who held opinions different from his own;

for he tried to compel both groups to worship as he wished, and drove out those who refused.

He was hated by men of note as one who despised them and gave orders to the magistrates, and by the multitude as one who was tyrannical and more powerful than all.