« ElőzőTovább »
Paul; and Jerom, besides, informs us that the large epistle written in the name of that council was composed by Malchion: what better evidence can be desired of this matter? Nor is this my thought only. Du Pin, speaking of Malchion, says; • he had a famous dispute with Paul of • Samosata in the second council of Antioch, held in 270; and, after having detected the
errors which that heretic endeavoured to conceal, he caused him to be condemned by the 6 council.'
5. I observe, in the fifth place, what was Malchion's opinion concerning the doctrine of the Trinity does not clearly appear. Eusebius speaks of Malchion as a man of uncommon soundness in the faith of Christ : but if Eusebius was an Arian, as some think, and if that character relates to the doctrine of the Trinity, this testimony, instead of assuring us of Malchion's orthodoxy upon that head, may rather occasion a suspicion that he Arianised. There is another thing, which may occasion a doubt whether Malchion held the Nicene faith. The council of Nice established the homousian, or consubstantial doctrine: but it is said that the council of Antioch (in which, as has been shewn, Malchion directed and governed) rejected the word consubstantial as improper. This has been taken notice of by several ancient writers of the fourth century; · Athanasius, “ Hilary of Poictiers, and · Basil. This therefore, if the council of Nice be the standard of orthodoxy, casts a suspicion upon that of Antioch; and 'there is no small difficulty in recon. ciling these councils : but I may not stay to inquire exactly into that matter : it is sufficient for me at present to give these hints, and refer to those ancient writers above-named, and some $ learned moderns of great note, who have endeavoured to reconcile this contradiction, real or apparent; and to shew that, notwithstanding the different sentiments and conduct of these two councils with regard to this word, yet they both held the same doctrine.
6. With regard to Malchion's canon of scripture: as we have nothing of him remaining besides the above-mentioned fragments in Eusebius, and I have formerly observed the notice taken of scripture in the synodical epistle of the council of Antioch, I have nothing farther to add here upon this head, but only to say, That it ought to be taken for granted that Malchion owned and respected those scriptures which were generally received at that time among Christians: but what was his opinion concerning the books of the New Testament, then doubted of by some, cannot be certainly known.
CHA P. LI.
ANATOLIUS, AND THREE OTHERS, BISHOPS OF LAODICEA.
I. Anatolius, bishop of Laodicea in Syria, his history and works. II. His testimony to the scrip:
tures.' III. Eusebius, likewise bishop of Laodicea. IV. Stephen. V. Theodotus, bishops of the same city.
1. Says Jerom : « Anatolius, ' a native of Alexandria, bishop of Laodicea in Syria, flourished under the emperors Probus and Carus. He was exceedingly well skilled in aríthmetic, geo
• Du Pin, as before, p. 193.
'De hac synodorum artidoyıą laborârunt theologi, qua b_- ille fit condamner par le Concile, ib.
veteres, qua neoterici. Bull. Def. Fid. Nic. p. 29. a. m. • Δια τοτ' εικότως ευλαξηθενlες το τοιοτον σοφισμα το Σα- 8 Petav. de Trin. l. iv. c. 5. num. ï. üi. 'Buil. Def. Fid. μοσατεως, ειρηκασι, μη ειναι τον Χριςον ομοεσιον. Αth. de Nic. Sect. ii. cap. 1. num. ix. x..xi. Basnag. Ann. 269. num.vi. Synod. p. 759. B.
Tillem. ut Supr. Paul de Samos. art. 5. p. 631, 632. Male homousion Samosatenus confessus est: sed num- n See vol. i. p. 625. quid melius Arii negaverunt? Octoginta episcopi olim respue
i Anatolius Alexandrinus, Laodiceæ Syriæ episcopus, sub runt; sed trecenti et decem octo nuper receperunt, &c. Hil. Probo et Caro imperatoribus floruit. Miræ doctrinæ vir fuit de Syn. n. lxxxvi. p. 1200. Conf. Facund. l. x.ç. 6.
in arithmeticâ, geometriâ, astronomia, grammatica, rhetorica, Και γαρ τω οντι, οι επι Παυλώ τω Σαμοσατει συνελθοντες, dialectica. Cujus ingenii magnitudinem de volumine, quod decanoy TV dečiv, WS 8i evoquor. Basil. Ep. 52. [al. 300.] super Pascha composuit, et decem libr de arithmeticæ instip. 145. B.
tutionibus, intelligere possumus. Hier. de V. I. c. 73.
metry, astronomy, grammar, rhetoric, logic. The greatness of his capacity may be perceived from his work concerning Easter, and from his ten books of institutions of arithmetic.'
Probus reigned from 276 to August 282; Carus the remainder of that year, and all 283. Nevertheless, Cave has placed Anatolius as flourishing about the year 270, and not much amiss; Eusebius, whom he succeeded, having died, as is supposed, 'in 269 or 270; though some think not before 272.
Anatolius is placed in Jerom’s Chronicle at the third year of Probus, the year of Christ 278, after this manner : · Anatolius, bishop of Laodicea, well acquainted with all the principles of • the philosophers, is now much celebrated.'
Nor did Jerom forget Anatolius in his letter to Magnus.
Jerom undoubtedly was indebted to Eusebius for what he knew of this person. Now there. fore we will see what Eusebius himself writes of him in his Ecclesiastical history. He says
* that ' Anatolius was an Alexandrian, and bishop of Laodicea after Eusebius ; and • that for eloquence, and for skill in philosophy and the Greek literature, he was the most eminent
person in his time; being a complete master of arithmetic, geometry, and likewise of logic, • natural philosophy, and rhetoric: for the sake of which qualifications, as is said, he was desired by the people of Alexandria to set up a school for the Aristotelian philosophy:
When that request was made we cannot say exactly; but, if ever, undoubtedly before he left Alexandria, and was advanced to the episcopal office. Nor is there any certain information given us of his complying with that request : though Fabricius in & one place scruples not to say, without hesitation, that he set up such a school at Alexandria.
Anatolius and his friend Eusebius performed signal services for the people of Alexandria, , both Christians and others; when Bruchium, or Pyruchium, one of the quarters of that city, in which too was the citadel, suffered under the extremities of a siege. Anatolius was shut up in Bruchium ; Eusebius was without among the Romans, the besiegers. One of those services is particularly related by - our ecclesiastical historian, to whom I refer. Anatolius had the better opportunity to be useful to the public by means of the high esteem he was in: for Eusebius says, that with universal consent he had pre-eminence above all the magistrates or senators of Alex andria, that were in Bruchium.
Learned men * find no small difficulty in settling the time of this siege. Tillemont thought it 'to be in the reign of Gallienus in 263 or 264 ; Basnage “ in 262 or 263; whose opinions seem to me more probable than their's who place it later.
Soon after that siege was over Anatolius - leftAlexandria.
Our historian tells us • that ° Theotecnus, bishop of Cæsarea in Palestine, ordained Anatolius • bishop, intending that he should succeed him: and it is certain that for a short time they both : • presided together in that church : but Anatolius, ' going to Antioch to be present at the council • called upon the occasion of Paul of Samosata, as he was passing through Laodicea, was detained • there by the brethren, Eusebius being dead.'
It is reasonable to think that our historian must mean the last synod in the affair of Paul, which was held in 269. After this he says nothing farther of Anatolius. But here he died ; for, as the historian adds, he ? was succeeded by Stephen, the last bishop of Laodicea, before the persecution of Diocletian began.
• They who desire to see what learned moderns say of & Anatolius - Alexandriæ scholam Aristotelicam constituit, , Anatolius may consult Cav. H. Lit. T. i. Tillem. Mem. Ec. factus deinde episcopus in Syriâ Laodicenus circa A. Chr. 270, . T. iv. P. ii. p. 637_-643. Fabr. Bib. Gr. T. ii. p. 274, Bib. Gr. T. ii. p. 274. &c. T. v. p. 277.
h 1. vii. c. 32. p. 285. et 286. A. b See Tillem. Mem. Ec. T. iv. P. ii. p. 641. Basnag. Μυριας μεν εν ταδε και αλλας αριςειας εν τη κατ’ Αληξαν-. Ann. 269. n. ix. © Pagi. Ann. 269. n. ix.
δρειαν τα Πυροχεια πολιορκια μνημονευρσιν' ατε των εν τελει : Anatolius, Laodicenus episcopus, philosophorum discipli- Apovoulas EçaipsT8 ços a martwy ni čuwfisngib. p. 285. A. nis eruditus, plurimo sermone celebratur. Chr. p. 177.
k Vid. Pagi in Baron, Ann. 269. n. ix. x. xi. • Ep. 83. [al. 84.]
See his Hist. des Emp. in Gallien, art. 12. T. iii. P. ii. 1 Γενος μεν και αυλος Αλεξανδρεύς: λογων δ' ένεκα, και παι- p. 974, 975, et p. 1175. δειας της Ελληνων, φιλοσοφιας τε, τα πρωτα των μαλισα καθ' m Basn. Ann. 262. n. üi.
n Eus. ib.
p. 286. B. ήμας δοκιμωτατων απενεγκαμενος, ατε αριθμητικης,-εληλα- Τετω πρωτος-Θεοτεκτος χειρας εις επισκοπην επιτεθεικε, , κως εις ακρον. ων ένεκα και της επ' Αλεξανδρειας Αριστοτελές p.
Eus. ib. A. B. διαδοχης την διατριζην, λογος εχει προς των τηδε πολιτων 4 Και το Ανατολιε δε τον βιον μεταλλαξανθος, της εκεισε συσησασθαι αυτον αξιωθήναι. Εus. Η. Ε. 1, vii, c. 32. p. 284. παροικιας υπατος των προ διωγμό καθιςαται Στεφανός. ib. D. 285. A.
p. 288. B.
• Anatolius,' says · Eusebius, did not write many books: however, from those which have come down to us may be perceived both his eloquence and
his extensive knowledge and learn. • ing, particularly from his work concerning Easter.'--The same Anatolius left also the
Principles of arithmetic in ten books, and likewise some other works, monuments of his dili' gence in studying the divine scriptures, and of his understanding therein.'
Eusebius has inserted in his Ecclesiastical history a long passage of Anatolius's book upon Easter, or his Paschal canons, as he there calls it: and Ægidius Bucherius has published the same work in an ancient Latin version said to be Rufinus's; which is generally allowed to be, for the main at least, the genuine work of Anatolius. It is thought by some, that there are remaining fragments of his other work, the Institutions of arithmetic. Fabricius " has published some fragments in Greek, which he supposed to be of Anatolius.
There were others of this name, which ought to be distinguished from our Anatolius. Fabri. cius has mentioned several. Cave' also well argues, that our Anatolius is different from him whom ® Eunapius speaks of as master of Jamblichus: though - Valesius confounded them; and · Basnage is pleased to signify his approbation of Valesius's opinion.
Anatolius, in the passage k cited by Eusebius from his Paschal canons, mentions several Jewish writers ; Philo, Josephus, Musæus, and others more ancient; two of the name Agathobulus, called rabbins, or masters; and Aristobulus, one of the seventy translators of the Old Testament, or part of it. He likewise ' mentions some book of Enoch : and in that part of his work, which we have in Latin only, very honourable mention is made of " Origen.
II. As there remains but a small part of the work of Anatolius, except what is the Latin translation, a brief account of his testimony to the scriptures will suffice.
1. He quotes as from the gospel " these words: Now the first day of the feast of unleavened • bread, the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him ; “ Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover ?"!. Matth. xxvi. 17. And see Mark xiv. 12; Luke xxii. 7.
2. He quotes also those words of the Lord; My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death.” Matth. xxvi. 38. And in the same manner and in the same place, the words of Luke xv. 6.
3. He P expressly mentions John the evangelist, the same that leaned on the Lord's breast.
4. He quotes 9 very respectfully the direction of the apostle in Rom. xii. 15, intimating that it ought to be attended to as spoken by the Lord himself.
5. In the passage of the Paschal canons, preserved by Eusebius, there is a manifest reference to the latter part of the third chapter of St. Paul's second epistle to the Corinthians : · But, says 'he, all these proofs are not necessary for those from whom the veil of the law of Moses • is taken off; who may with “ open face” always “behold as in a glass Christ," and the things . of Christ, both his doctrine and his sufierings: see 2 Cor. iii. 14–18: and in the Latin translation of this work we find the words of: 2 Cor. vi. 14.
6. He speaks' with respect of the Old as well as the New Testament. • Ου μεν ον εσπεδασθη πλεισα τω Ανατολιω συγΓραμματα: secundum morem antiquitus sibi constitutum: Ubi vis pareτοσαύτα δ' εις ημας εληλυθε, δι' ων αυ78 καταμαθειν δυνατον ομα mus tibi comedere Pascha ? p. 443. sub. fin. το, τε λογιoν και πολυμαθες: εν οίς μαλισα τα περι τ8 πασχα
• Aliud enim est secundum quod ab apostolo, imo a Doδοξανθα παρισησιν. ib. p. 286. Β. C.
mino præceptum est, cum contristato contristari (Rom. xii, 15] 5 Και αριθμητικας δε καταλελοιπεν και αυτος εν ολοις δεκα συγ- et cum cruce passo compati, ipso dicente: Tristis est anima γραμμασιν εισαγωγας, και αλλα δειγματα της περι τα θεια mea usque ad mortem: aliud cum victore inimicum antiquum σχολης τε αυτό και πολυπειριας. ib. p. 287. D. 288. Α. triumphante, ac summo triumpho devicto adversario lætante
_Εκ των περι το πασχα Ανατολι8 κανόνων, κ. λ. p. 286. collætari, ipsomet præcipiente: congratulamini mihi, quia C. D. et p. 287.
inveni ovem quam perdideram. Anatol. ib. p. 445. d Bib. Gr. 1. ïi. c. xi. T. ii. p. 275-278.
p Quorum exemplum sequentes usque hodie omnes Asiæ • Bib. Gr. T. v. p. 277. Vid. et T. ii. p. 275.
episcopi (quippe qui et ipse ab auctore irreprehensibili, Joanne f Hist. Lit. T.i. 136. 8 Eunap. Vit. Jambl, init. scilicet evangelista, et pectoris Domini incubatore, doctrinarum h Ann. in Euseb.
i Ann. 269. n. ix. sine dubio spiritualium potatore,) regulam susceperunt. ib. k Eus. p. 287.
See before note o. Παρατατικα και τα εν τω Ενωχ μαθηματα. ib. p. 287. D. Παριημι δε τας τοιαυίας των αποδείξεων υλας απαιτων, ων m Sed et Origenes, omnium doctissimus, et calculi compo- περιηρήθαι μεν το επι το Μωύσεως νομω καλυμμα ανακεκαλυμnendi perspicacissimus (quippe qui et xarxeulns vocatus,) μενω δε τα προσωπω λοιπον ηδη Χριςον και τα Χριςο αει libellum de Paschate luculentissime edidit. Anatol. ap Bucher. xalotipiertar, jafquala Te xal wahru.ala. Eus. ib. p. 287, D. p. 439.
• Quia solemnitas Dominicæ resurrectionis lux est. Et non • Contra evangelii dictum, dicentis : Primâ autem die azy- est communicatio luci cum tenebris. Anat. ap. Bucher. p. 443. morum accesserunt discipuli ad Jesum. Quin dubium non est, Quod in veteri quidem testamento non potest probabiliter quin xiv. dies sit in quo discipuli Dominum interrogaverunt, inveniri, Domino per Möysen' præcipiente: Septem diebus
commedetis azyma, &c. ib. p. 443.
7. He says of some, that they can by no means prove their point by the authority of the divine scripture.
8. Though this be little, here is sufficient to shew that this learned Alexandrian concurred with other Christians in a high respect for the scriptures of the Old and New Testament: and it is likely that his canon was much the same with that of Origen.
III. It may be proper to take notice here of Eusebius, not only because he was predecessor of Anatolius in the see of Laodicea, but also because he was of Alexandria, and they were intimate friends whilst they lived in their native city.
Though Eusebius was not an author, and therefore is wanting in Jerom's Catalogue, and in many
other histories or ecclesiastical writers, he was a man of no small consideration, and is mentioned as an eminent person in Eusebius's or Jerom's Chronicle.
It is likely my readers may remember that this Eusebius has been already mentioned with honour in this work, in our history of Dionysius of Alexandria. Eusebius was then a deacon in that church. The words of Dionysius speaking of the state of affairs there in the persecutions of Decius and Valerian, and which were formerly cited, are these: the deacons that survive after • those that have died of the plague are Faustus, Eusebius, Chæremon: Eusebius, I say, whom God
qualified from the beginning (referring here, it is likely, to his conduct in the Decian persecution], • and furnished with great resolution and ability for fulfilling the office of ministering to the con• fessors in prison, and for burying the bodies of the perfect and blessed martyrs, not without the • utmost peril.'
Our historian, having finished his quotation of that letter of Dionysius, adds: It ought to • be observed that Eusebius, whom Dionysius calls deacon, was afterwards bishop of the church of Laodicea in Syria.'
Eusebius, still deacon, accompanied Dionysius when he made his confession before Emilian the præfect of Egypt in 257, as formerly shewn.
His settlement in Laodicea is related by his namesake, the ecclesiastical historian, in this manner: Socrates' was succeeded in the care of the church of Laodicea by Eusebius a native of • the city of Alexandria. The occasion of his removal was the affair of Paul. Passing through
Syria upon that account he was seized by those who were concerned for the interest of religion • in those parts, who would by no means let him return home. He was succeeded by Anatolius; • one good man coming after another, as the saying is.
It may be well supposed that the time of Eusebius's going into Syria was the year 264, or thereabout, when the first council was held at Antioch upon the case of Paul of Samosata: then Eusebius entered upon this see, and was succeeded by Anatolius about the year 270.
IV. After the death of Anatolius,' as we are informed by our historian, Stephen was · advanced to the presidentship of that church, and was the last bishop there before the persecu• tion: he was admired by many for liis eloquence, and philosophy, and Greek learning. How• ever, when the persecution broke out he did not behave like a philosopher; but shewed himself • rather to be a dissembler, and mean spirited. What was his fault is not certainly known: we may be disposed to think that he apostatized, and renounced the Christian religion ; though Eusebius does not expressly say it: thereby, as I apprehend, shewing both his sincerity as an historian, and his tenderness for the reputation of a brother, and a fellow-creature, overcome by temptation.
V. Eusebius proceeds: · Nevertheless that church did not fall to ruin: it was restored to • its wonted splendour by Theodotus, who was designed bishop of that church by God himself, the Saviour of all men. He by his actions shewed himself to be what his name signified [a man given of God], and a true bishop. He was an excellent physician for the body; but for the cure of souls he had not his equal: such were his humanity, his integrity, his compassion for • the afflicted, and his diligence in relieving those who needed his assistance: with which was joined uncommon skill in the divine scriptures, or the things of religion.'
To this person Eusebius inscribed his Evangelical preparation; there * styling him beloved • of God, and an ornament to the episcopal office.'
What Eusebius says of his being an excellent physician for the body has induced Fabricius to put Theodotus into his Catalogue of ancient physicians.
This bishop of Laodicea, so much commended by our Eusebius is reputed an Arian by several learned moderns, to whom I shall refer in the margin; as · Vigerus, editor of Eusebius's Preparation, « Pagi, and · Tillemont.
And there is more than a little ground for that supposition; for Arius in his letter to Eusebius of Nicomedia' names Theodotus among others his favourers; Theodoret & intimates that the same persons defended the Arian doctrine at the council of Nice. In another place he mentions Theodotus among those who had imbibed the Arian principle, and were its principal patrons: he likewise says that he came to Antioch with Eusebius of Nicomedia in 331, to depose Eustathius. Athanasius * affirms that Theodotus, and others whom he names, had written the like things with Arius before the council of Nice: not to insist upon the letter of Constantine' in Gelasius Cyzicenus, written to him after the council of Nice.
When Theodotus entered upon the episcopate is not certainly known: Vigerus, in the preface before cited, says he succeeded Stephen about the third year of Constantine, or the year of
Christ 308; which is not altogether improbable, it being evident from Eusebius that Stephen was bishop before the persecution, and for some time after it began: but the exact time of Stephen's death or removal, and of the accession of Theodotus, I think cannot be determined. However, Pagi “ well observes that Theodotus died before the council of Jerusalem in 336, because Sozomen mentions George, then bishop of Laodicea, as present at it.
Theodotus is wanting in Cave and Du Pin, not being generally reckoned an author : but perhaps he might be justly so esteemed, considering what is said of him by Athanasius. It is true, Athanasius does not quote Theodotus as he does some others; but the reason was, that the letters were not at hand, as he says; which he mentions by way of excuse for sending more out of them: for which cause he omitted to cite several, whom by name he charges with having written the like things with Arius.
This chapter began with Anatolius, whose history was the principal design of it: however, we have been led to take notice of several others mentioned by Eusebius; and I
may not be unacceptable to any, as it serves to represent the state of Christianity at that time.
1. His history. II. His testimony to the books of the New Testament.
THEOGNOSTUS, ° an ancient writer, no where mentioned by Eusebius or Jerom, flourished, as Cave thinks, about the year 282; and, though we have not now any certain proofs of his exact
-την δε σοι, θειον επισκοπων χρημα, Θεοδο7ε, φιλη θεα σερι Ευσεζιον, -xal 80d070v, %. 1. Ath. de Synodis, n. xvii. και ιερα κεφαλη, συν ευχαις επεφωνησα. Prep. Εν. cap. 1. init. T.i. p. 730. D. 'ap. Labb, Conc. T. ii. p. 283. b Vid. Bib. Gr. T. xiii. p. 433.
m Ann. 318, n. xviii. • Hunc ego non alium arbitror, quam Laodicenum episco- 2 Και τας μεν επιςολας αυτων εκ εσχον εν έτοιμω, αςε και pum, qui Stephano in episcopatu successit, Ariaņæ im- OTOSEIMAI. Athan. ib. p. 731. D. pietatis fautorem acerrimum. Viger. in Præf. ad fin.
Concerning this writer may be seen Cav. Hist. Lit. Du Ann. 318, n. xvii. et xviii.
Pin, Bib. des Aut. Ecc. Tom. i. Bull. Def, Fid. Nic. Sect. ii. e See his history of the Arians, art. 4, and note 2, and cap. 10, sect. vii. Dodwell. Diss. Iren. in Append. p. 511. elsewhere. Mem. T. vi.
Fabric. Bib. Gr. lib. v. cap. 1, p. 276. Tillemont, Origene, * Ap. Thdrt. 1. i. cap. 5, p. 21. A. et Epiph. H. 69, n. vi. art. 37. Mem. Ecc. T. iii. P. 3, p. 269, 270, and some other & Thdrt. 1. i. c. 7, p. 26. A. h Id. 1. 5. c. 7.
authors to be hereafter mentioned in this chapter. il. i. c. 21, p. 52. B.
p Vid. Cay. Hist. Lit. T. i. p. 146, 147. Oxon. * Προ δε το γεγεσθαι την εν Νικαια συνοδον, εγραψαν και οι