|
The bishops of Egypt, having sent a declaration in writing that these
allegations were false, and Julius having been apprised that
Athanasius was far from being in safety in Egypt, sent for him to his
own city. He replied at the same time to the letter of the bishops who
were convened at Antioch, for just then he happened to have received
their epistle, and accused them of having clandestinely introduced
innovations contrary to the dogmas of the Nicene council, and of
having violated the laws of the Church, by neglecting to invite him to
join their Synod; for he alleged that there is a sacerdotal canon
which declares that whatever is enacted contrary to the judgment of the
bishop of Rome is null. He also reproached them for having deviated
from justice in all their proceedings against Athanasius, both at
Tyre and Mareotis, and stated that the decrees enacted at the former
city had been annulled, on account of the calumny concerning the hand
of Arsenius, and at the latter city, on account of the absence of
Athanasius. Last of all he reprehended the arrogant style of their
epistle.
Julius was induced by all these reasons to undertake the defense of
Athanasius and of Paul the latter had arrived in Italy not long
previously, and had lamented bitterly these calamities. When Julius
perceived that what he had written to those who held the sacerdotal
dignity in the East was of no avail, he made the matter known to
Constans the emperor. Accordingly, Constans wrote to his brother
Constantius, requesting him to send some of the bishops of the East,
that they might assign a reason for the edicts of deposition which they
had passed. Three bishops were selected for this purpose; namely,
Narcissus, bishop of Irenopolis, in Cilicia; Theodore, bishop of
Heraclea, in Thrace; and Mark, bishop of Arethusa, in Syria.
On their arrival in Italy, they strove to justify their actions and
to persuade the emperor that the sentence passed by the Eastern Synod
was just. Being required to produce a statement of their belief, they
concealed the formulary they had drawn up at Antioch, and presented
another written confession which was equally at variance with the
doctrines approved at Nicaea. Constans perceived that they had
unjustly entrapped both Paul and Athanasius, and had ejected them
from communion, not for charges against his conduct, as the
depositions held, but simply on account of differences in doctrine;
and he accordingly dismissed the deputation without giving any credit to
the representations for which they had come.
|
|