|
THE emperor was persuaded that it would not be desirable for the
public, on account of the expense, nor advantageous to the bishops,
on account of the length of the journey, to convene them all to the
same place for the purpose of holding a council. He therefore writes
to the bishops who were then at Ariminum, as well as to those who were
then at Seleucia, and directed them to enter upon an investigation of
contested points concerning the faith, and then to turn their attention
to the complaints of Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, and of other
bishops who had remonstrated against the injustice of the decrees of
deposition and banishment which had been issued against them, and to
examine the legality of various sentences which had been enacted against
other bishops. There were, in fact, several accusations pending
against different bishops. George was accused by the Egyptians of
rapine and violence. Finally, the emperor commanded that ten deputies
should be sent to him from each council, to inform him of their
respective proceedings.
In accordance with this edict, the bishops assembled at the appointed
cities. The Synod at Ariminum first commenced proceedings; it
consisted of about four hundred members. Those who regarded
Athanasius with the greatest enmity, were of opinion that there was
nothing further to be decreed against him. When they had entered upon
the investigation of doctrinal questions, Valens and Ursacius,
supported by Germenius, Auxentius, Caius, and Demophilus,
advanced into the middle of the assembly, and demanded that all the
formularies of the faith which had been previously compiled should be
suppressed, and that the formulary which they had but a short time
previously set forth in the Latin language at Sirmium should be alone
retained. In this formulary it was taught, according to Scripture,
that the Son is like unto the Father; but no mention was made of the
substance of God. They declared that this formulary had been approved
by the emperor, and that it was incumbent upon the council to adopt
it, instead of consulting too scrupulously the individual opinions of
every member of the council, so that disputes and divisions might not
spring up, were the terms to be delivered up to debate and accurate
proof. They added that it would better enable those who were more
ignorant of the art of discourse to have a right conception of God,
than were they to introduce novelties in terms, so akin to disputatious
jugglery. By these representations, they designed to denounce the use
of the term "consubstantial," because they said it was not found in
the Holy Scriptures, and was obscure to the multitude; and, instead
of this term, they wished to substitute the expression that "the Son
is like unto the Father in all things," which is borne out by the
Holy Scriptures. After they had read their formulary containing the
above representations, many of the bishops told them that no new
formulary of the faith ought to be set forth, that those which had been
previously compiled were quite sufficient for all purposes, and that
they were met together for the express purpose of preventing all
innovations. These bishops then urged those who had compiled and read
the formulary to declare publicly their condemnation of the Arian
doctrine, as the cause of all the troubles which had agitated the
churches of every region. Ursacius and Valens, Germenius and
Auxentius, Demophilus and Caius, having protested against this
protestation, the council commanded that the expositions of the other
heresies should be read, and likewise that set forth at Nicaea; so
that those formularies which favored divers heresies might be
condemned, and those which were in accordance with the Nicene
doctrines might be approved; in order that there might be no further
ground for dispute, and no future necessity for councils, but that an
efficient decision might be formed. They remarked that it was absurd
to compose so many formularies, as if they had but just commenced to
become acquainted with the faith, and as if they wished to slight the
ancient traditions of the Church, by which the churches had been
governed by themselves, and by their predecessors, many of whom had
witnessed a good! confession, and had received the crown of
martyrdom. Such were the arguments adduced by these bishops, to prove
that no innovations ought to be attempted. As Valens and Ursacius
and their partisans refused to be convinced by these arguments, but
persisted in advocating the adoption of their own formulary, they were
deposed, and it was decided that their formulary should be rejected.
It was remarked that the declaration at the commencement of this
formulary, of its having been compiled at Sirmium, in the presence of
Constantius, "the eternal Augustus," and during the consulate of
Eusebius and Hypatius, was an absurdity. Athanasius made the same
remark, in a letter addressed to one of his friends, and said that it
was ridiculous to term Constantius the eternal emperor, and yet to
shrink from acknowledging the Son of God to be eternal; he also
ridiculed the date affixed to the formulary, as though condemnation
were meant to be thrown on the faith of former ages, as well as on
those who had, before that period, been initiated into the faith.
After these events had transpired at Ariminum, Valens and
Ursacius, together with their adherents, irritated at their
deposition, repaired with all haste to the emperor.
|
|