Click to View

Early Church Fathers
Click to ViewMaster Index
Click to ViewPower Search

 Click to View

155 In like manner the Council of Chalcedon was confirmed by as many as 470 subscriptions, according to Ephrem (Phot. Bibl. p. 801) by 1600 according to Eulogius (ibid. p. 877), i.e. of Bishops, Archimandrites. &c.

156 Hosius is called by Athan, the father and the president of the Council. Hist. Arian. 15. 16. Roman controversialists here explain why Hosius does not sign himself as the Pope's legate. De Marc. Concord. v. 4. Alber. Dissert. ix. and Protestants why his legates rank before all the other Bishops, even before Protogenes. Bishop of the place. Basnage, Ann. 347. 5. Febronius considers that Hosius signed here and at Nicaea, as a sort of representative of the civil, and the Legates of ecclesiastical supremacy. de Stat. Eccl. vi. 4. And so Thomassin, "Imperator velut exterior Episcopus: praefuit autem summus Pontifex, ut Episcopus interior." Dissert. in Conc. x. 14. The popes never attended in person the Eastern Councils. St. Leo excuses himself on the plea of its being against usage. Epp. 37. and 93. [Silvester's absence from Nic`a was due solely to extreme old age. But Sardica was a Western council.]

157 [The above names, with a few exceptions, comprise those present at the Council. See additional Note at the end of this Apology, where a list is given in alphabetical order of all bishops present, with their Sees.]

158 Of Treveri.

159 Of Lyons.

160 Of Arles.

161 Of Rheims.

162 Of Sens.

163 Of Worms.

164 Of Strassburg.

165 Of Paris.

166 Of Carthage.

167 §§33, note 3a, and 78.

168 oi en tw kanaliw thj 'Italiaj. "Canalis est, non via regia aut militaris, verum via tranversa, quae in regiam seu basilicam influit, quasi aquae canalis in alveum." Gothofred. in Cod. Theod. vi. de Curiosis, p. 196. who illustrates the word at length. Du Cange on the contrary, in voc. explains it of "the high road." Tillemont professes himself unable to give a satisfactory sense to it. vol. viii. p. 685. [The word occurs in the XIth. Sardican canon, where the Greek version (Can. XX. in Bruns) glosses it kanaliw htoi parodw.]

169 Cf. §36.

170 Athan. says, supr. §1. that the Letter of the Council was signed in all by more than 300. It will be observed, that Athan.'s numbers in the text do not accurately agree with each other. The subscriptions enumerated are 284, to which 63 being added, made a total of 347, not 344. [The enumeration of Ath. includes many who signed long afterwards. Those `from Palestine' are simply the signatories of the synodal letter of 346, below §57. The number, 170 mentioned by Ath. Hist. Ar. 15 gives an orthodox majority of 20. See additional Note at end of this Apology, and Gwatkin, Studies, p. 121, note.]

171 Written a.d. 345.

172 Gothof. in Cod. Theod. viii. 5. p. 507.

173 Apol. Const. 3, 15.

174 "They acquainted Julius the Bishop of Rome with their case; and he, according to the prerogative (pronomia) of the Church in Rome, fortified them with letters in which he spoke his mind, and sent them back to the East, restoring each to his own place, and remarking on those who had violently deposed them. They then set out from Rome, and on the strength (qarrountej) of the letters of Bishop Julius, take possession of their Churches." Socr. ii. 15. It must be observed, that in the foregoing sentences Socrates has spoken of "(imperial) Rome." Sozomen says, "Whereas the care of all (khdemoniaj) pertained to him on account of the dignity of his see, he restored each to his own Church." iii. 8. "I answer," says Barrow, "the Pope did not restore them judicially but declaratively, that is, declaring his approbation of their right and innocence, did admit them to communion. ...Besides, the Pope's proceeding was taxed, and protested against, as irregular;. ...and, lastly, the restitution of Athanasius and the other Bishops had no complete effect. till it was confirmed by the synod of Sardica, backe by the imperial authority." Suprem. p. 360. ed. 1836.

175 Written early in 346 a.d.

176 Athan. here omits a paragraph in his own praise. vid. Socr. ii. 23.

177 §35, note 3.

178 1 Cor. ii. 9.

179 [At Antioch September (?) 346. See Prolegg. ch. ii. §6 (3).]

180 Vid. Bingh. Antiqu. I v. 10.

181 Member of the Curia or Council.

182 Prefect of Egypt, vid. Vita Ant. 86, Fest. Ind. xvii.-xxiv.

183 Hist. Arian. 25.

184 Matt. ix. 36.

185 §50.

186 Theodosius, supr.

187 Not supr.

188 Cf. §20, note 4.

189 Triberwn, Paul infr. Hist. Ar. 26.

190 Hist. Arian. 25. 26.

191 [Gibbon, ch. xxi. note 108, doubts the fact of this recantation on the ground of the dissimilar tone of the two letters that follow. Newman explains that they treat Julius as `a superior,' Athanasius as `an equal;' but surely he was something more than an equal. Fear of Constans, and the desire to secure themselves from attack, would make it importer for them at any price to obtain the favour of the first bishop of the West. In order to do this they had to make their peace with Athanasius; but in doing so, they went no further than they could help.]

192 a.d. 347.

1 Cf. Orat. i. 2 and notes.

2 Ad. Ep. Aeg. §22. supr. §11.

3 [Prolegg. ch. ii. §3 (1) ad fin.] Athan. speaks more openly against this arrangement. infr. §71.

4 [According to the tenses in the original the five months mark the date not of Alexander's death (April 17, 328), but of the renewed Meletian troubles. The settlement did not keep them quiet for five months. The terminus a quo of the five months is somewhat doubtful; but it certainly is not the Council of Nicaea, see §71, &c. Montf. Monit. in Vit. S. Athanasii, also Prolegg. ch. ii. §3 (1) and ch. v. §3 a.]

5 Ad. Ep Aeg. 23.

6 Supr. §7, and de Decr. 27.

7 palatinoi, vid. Apol. ad Const. §19.

8 Infr. §71 fin. Sozom. ii. 25.

Click Your Choice