Life of Saint Athanasius the Great, Archbishop of Alexandria

Saint Gregory the Theologian, glorifying the exploits of St. Athanasius of Alexandria, in a commendatory speech, expressed the desire to “depict his valor with special writing, just as he described the life of the divine Anthony.” The importance of the merits of the Saint of Alexandria for the Church of Christ - his unshakable firmness in defending the truth, his strength in exposing the false wisdom of heretics, patience in repeated exiles for the pure confession of the teachings of Christ, concern for the pacification of the Church - all this could have pleased St. Gregory to a more complete outline of the great exploits of the hierarch, who worked tirelessly for half a century in a difficult field; at times abandoned by almost all of his brothers. And who better to depict these exploits than a contemporary, albeit a younger one, who took an equally active part in the affairs of the Church, who fought against the same enemies against whom St. fought. Afanasy? “But we don’t see the desire of St. Gregory fulfilled. Fortunately, the writings of St. Athanasius, in which, due to the circumstances of the time, he had the need to talk about his affairs, and this in some way compensates for us the lack of other modern legends. Even the closest church narrators, such as Socrates and Sozomen, often themselves did not find the best sources for this time, except for the writings of St. Afanasia. Using mainly this source and considering extraneous evidence, we will try, albeit in weak outlines, to imagine the life of St. Athanasius of Alexandria, for the proposed explanation of his creation. Before we begin to review the life and exploits of St. Athanasius, we consider it necessary to pay attention to: 1) the state of Christianity in his time in Egypt, and 2) the significance of the See of Alexandria, which he occupied. 1. The preaching of the Gospel, brought to the country adjacent to Judea even under the Apostles, quickly spread throughout Egypt and attracted many into the depths of the Church of Christ. The Christian population was more populous, and episcopal sees are more common in lower Egypt, or the Delta, where the influence of Greek education on the people was stronger. But even from the beginning of the 3rd century, “strong fighters” for the name of Christ appeared from Thebaid, or upper Egypt 1. And during the persecution of Diocletian and Maximian, for several years, every day this country represented courageous sufferers for the faith from ten to one hundred, as Eusebius writes, who was personally there at that time 2 . In the third century, the indigenous inhabitants of Egypt, the Copts, already had the Holy Scriptures in their language 3 . The fall of paganism in Egypt seems a particularly striking proof of the divine power of Christianity. A religion that was supported by numerous sacred monuments that survived several centuries, and a high opinion widespread throughout the pagan world about the wisdom of its priests - a religion that in ancient times had an influence on the beliefs of other peoples, and even in times of unbelief managed to attract the attention of educated Greeks and Romans to its sacraments, which fostered a direction in philosophy that sought to reconcile all beliefs against Christianity, and with its mystery favored some spiritualization of paganism - fell despite all the efforts of priests and philosophers to support it, with all the reverence of diverse fans for its institutions, which is still evidenced by buildings and inscriptions of Roman times. Behold, the Lord sits on a light cloud, and will come to Egypt, and the Egyptians, made with hands, will shake at His presence, and the Lord will be known by the Egyptians: and the Egyptians will bring the Lord away in that day, and will make sacrifices and gifts, and promise the vows of the Lord, and will repay (Is. 19:1, 21). With what consolation the Christian teachers of Alexandria repeated these words of the Prophet, looking at the wondrous change that had taken place within a few generations, in a country most immersed in superstition. Nowhere has the word of the Gospel teaching, over anyone, shown so much of its power, writes Eusebius 5, as over Egypt. However, one should not think that everything has changed decisively in Egypt. Paganism in this country was closely adapted to local circumstances. One of the main objects of adoration was r. Nile 6, on which all the prosperity of the region depended. This god had his own priests 7. And these adherents of false faith tried to support the idea among the people that if they stopped making the usual sacrifices and offerings to their deity, then the river would not give its waters to irrigate the fields, and all of Egypt should suffer from hunger 8 . Therefore, even until the time of Constantine the Great, the stubborn pagans continued to celebrate the usual festivals before the flood of the river; and the nilometer, or Nile flood meter, as a sacred thing, was kept in Alexandria - in the temple of Serapis, in other cities - in other pagan temples. By this they wanted to express that the whole country still recognizes itself under the protection of the deity it previously revered. Constantine the Great, having become the owner of the East, forbade pagan ceremonies on the banks of the Nile 9, the nilometer was transferred to the Christian temple 10, and instead of pagan sacrifices, Christian prayers began to be offered for the abundant flow of fruitful waters 11. However, even after that, the blind adherents of paganism, taking advantage of the unrest in the Alexandrian church caused by Arianism, continued to perform their superstitious rituals 12. While in other cities, by decrees of the Emperors, sacrifices in pagan temples had already been stopped, in Alexandria they were still performed in the temple of Serapis, and this magnificent temple attracted the gaze of pagans from everywhere 13. And far from Alexandria, the pagans performed their prayers and celebrations all the more freely. In the life of Abba Apollos of Hermopolis it is mentioned that not far from his cell there were up to ten villages in which pagans lived, and their priests solemnly carried their idols out of the temple and performed their mysterious rituals, begging for an abundance of waters 14. And the strong word and miraculous power of the hermits were needed to convict the wicked and admonish those who go astray. In addition to the stubborn pagans, in Egypt and especially in Alexandra, there were other enemies of the name of Christ - the Jews. Before the destruction of Jerusalem, there were about a million Jews in Egypt; in Alexandra they occupied two of the five parts of the city 15, which counted up to three hundred thousand citizens 16. The uprising of the Jews under Vespasian resulted in terrible disasters for the Jewish people and in their foreign settlements. So in Alexandria, up to fifty thousand Jews were then exterminated by the Greeks. – But on the other hand, the fall of Jerusalem, without a doubt, increased the number of Jewish migrants to Alexandra, so close to their native country, and hitherto favorable to their faith and civil well-being 17. The Christian Emperors allowed them, both everywhere and in Alexandria, to live according to their law 18. And during the Arian turmoil, Jews repeatedly, together with pagans, took part in the persecution of the Orthodox. The triumph of the Gospel over the beliefs and life of the pagan world and the elevation of the internal well-being of the Egyptian Church were especially promoted by two important institutions that originally arose in Egypt, and from here spread a beneficial influence over the entire Church of Christ. These were: in the field of Christian science - the Alexandrian Catechetical School, and in the field of Christian life - monasticism. Alexandria School, which Eusebius calls an ancient institution, and Bl. Jerome traces its beginnings to the times of the Evangelist Mark 19, over time, as circumstances required, expanding the range of his sciences, he offered more than just initial instructions to those converting to Christianity. Relations with the learned pagans, who had their famous school in Alexandria, disputes with the Jews, of whom there were many here, and whose attacks on Christianity had to be repelled, various false teachings of the Gnostics, who deceived with their imaginary knowledge of the hidden secrets of Christian teaching - all this forced the Alexandrian mentors to become more closely acquainted with the heterogeneous teachings of their opponents, and to enter deeper into the understanding of their own. The fruit of these studies were: scientific defense of Christianity against pagans 20, careful research on the Holy Scriptures and its explanation 21, and thorough refutations of emerging errors 22. Inquisitive people from different countries flocked to the Alexandrian school, and left here with an education that made them worthy of the highest church degrees in their homeland. The mentors themselves were often elevated to the cathedra of the Church of Alexandria 23 . The school began to flourish especially from the end of the 2nd century. In the 4th century, Didymus was famous among his mentors, despite his blindness from infancy, having extensive knowledge in various sciences. With his explanation of Scripture, his defense of Orthodoxy against the Arians, he attracted the attention of both the Egyptian desert dwellers and the Westerners who were looking for theological education in the East 24 . Another institution that also arose in the Egyptian Church, and from here quickly spread throughout the East and West - monasticism, had a predominant influence on the spiritual life of the Church. Proceeding from the spirit of zeal for piety, it gave a more strict and definite form to the ancient asceticism, and with the intensified striving of the pagans into the bowels of the Church of Christ, under the patronage of the Emperors, it assisted the Shepherds in transforming the pagan direction and way of life into converts, whose sincerity and firmness of disposition to the faith could not be tested, as before during persecution, by severe temptation. The same spirit of piety that removed the leading Christians from the pleasures of pagan society, and forced them to sacrifice all the comforts of life and life itself to the observance of the Christian law, and in subsequent times brought them out of the midst of worldly society into the desert to suffer all the hardships, so that in the freedom of the spirit they could more easily serve the one God. Visiting desert dwellers, raising their children, electing ascetics to the highest ranks of the Church, the constant example of monastic life, which carried out the Savior’s indication of the most perfect way of life (Matthew 19:19, 21) - all this had a beneficial effect on another part of Christian society, in which they did not deviate from the ordinary conditions of social life. At first, in Egypt, those who wanted to “pay attention to themselves” did not have the custom of moving away from their villages; but they chose their secluded place nearby 25. Anthony was the first, by his example, to introduce the zealots of piety to the deserts that surround the populated part of Egypt on both sides. Born of noble parents, near Heracleopolis the Great 26, he was left an orphan in his young years, and having heeded the voice of Christ to the rich young man (Matthew 19:21), he renounced the entire inheritance of his father, in favor of the inhabitants of the same village and the poor, and began to lead an ascetic life, first not far from his village, with one old man, then alone, then further from the village, imprisoned in the tomb like the living dead. After fifteen years of preparation with such exploits, he decided to completely move away from inhabited places, and imprisoned himself in a deserted fortification 27 on the eastern bank of the river. Nila. This was around 285 28. He spent twenty years here, not proceeding entirely from his conclusion, buying baked bread for himself twice a year, in the struggle against invisible enemies and against the flesh, and in feats of prayer and contemplation of God. Finally, at the strong demand of those who wanted to imitate his life, he opened access to himself and began to accept students, as a mentor already experienced in all the temptations and labors of spiritual life. From that time on, notes St. Athanasius, - monasteries began to multiply in the mountains, and the deserts were populated by monks. – Anthony opened the doors to himself at a time when the cruel persecution of Diocletian was raging in Egypt, as in other countries of the East. He was not afraid of the torment of his persecutors. He himself appeared in Alexandria to strengthen the confessors of the name of Christ, and if God had willed, then to shed his blood for the name of Christ. He was frightened by the crowds when, with the establishment of peace in the Church, people began to flock to him from everywhere, some for spiritual advice, some for instruction in the desert life, some for healing of their ailments - and he decided to leave the desert to seek a new desert. “Where do you want to run?” - a heavenly voice spoke to him when he was already waiting for the boat on the banks of the Nile to get away from the People. “To the upper Thebaid,” answered Anthony. But the same voice objected to him: “Whether you sail up to Thebaid, or down to Bucolia 29, you will have no peace either there or here. Go to the inner desert." This was the name of the desert that lay further to the East towards the Red Sea, where Anthony retired, following the passing Saracens. After a three-day journey, he found a wild high mountain, with a spring of water and a few palm trees in the valley, and there he stopped 30. From that time on, Anthony's life was divided between the new shelter of his solitude, which was separated from human habitation by an impassable desert, and between the monastery he left behind - Pispir, on the banks of the Nile 31. There, near the Red Sea, he found another lover of the desert - Paul, from the Thebaid region, who had already left human society for ninety years: and here, in Pispir, he appeared from time to time to help those who came to him from near and distant countries. Only not many were honored to see him in the place of his solitary contemplation of God. But the hermit life that Paul, Anthony and his disciples led was not convenient and safe for everyone 33 . Soon monasticism appeared in a different form - in the form of a hostel. Here, under the constant supervision of leaders experienced in spiritual life, those who took a vow of complete self-denial and perfect obedience to their abbot could more accurately move towards their goal - to cleanse the soul from passions and improve themselves in virtues; they could more likely find advice in temptation, encouragement in sorrow, help in need; provided for everything, having common rules for everything, each hour having its own business, in a close union of brotherhood they could more easily accomplish the difficult feat of self-mortification. Such an institution was given to monasticism by another Egyptian ascetic, Pachomius 34. When Pachomius was about twenty years old, he was taken into military service along with others. But, on the occasion of the imminent end of the war, he was released. At this time he managed to become acquainted with Christianity, and upon returning to his fatherland, he received St. baptism, and chose the monastic life, under the guidance of Elder Palemon. When, through labors, study of the Scriptures and prayer, he was sufficiently prepared to be a leader of others; Then, according to the instructions of the Angel, he began to build a monastery, where he decided to establish a hostel. The place chosen for this was the deserted village of Tavenna 35, on the banks of the Nile. This was already after the end of the persecution of Maximianov, and even before the beginning of Arianism; – therefore, between 312 and 320 36. The Pachomius Rule 37, which determined the entire way of monastic life, was accepted by the zealots of piety with such joy that the Tavennian monastery was soon filled with monks, and it was necessary to take care of establishing new monasteries. Ave. Pachomius himself founded six more monasteries, which received their name, for the most part, from the cities and villages near which they were located, and namely: Pabau 38 in which the Venerable later lived, governing all the others through local abbots - Hinovoski 39, Monkhozin 40, Tiveve, Pakhnum near Latopolis 41, and, at the request of the Bishop of Panopol, Tismene Monastery 42. Moreover, Pachomius founded, on the same rules of community life, one convent for women, in which his sister was the first abbess. But after the death of St. Pachomius (349), his successors Orsisius and Theodore, forced to divide among themselves the management of a vast brotherhood, founded more new monasteries: two near Hermopolis, Kai and Ovi, and one near Hermotinus, and also one for women 44. The Pachomiev Brotherhood soon multiplied so much that it numbered in the thousands. Even during the life of Pachomius, he had brethren of up to three thousand people 45, and in 404 bl. Jerome raises their number to an incredible number - fifty thousand people, believing in each monastery from thirty to forty separate buildings for cells, and in each house - about forty people 46. All the brethren were supported by the labors of their hands, and in due time, at the sound of the trumpet 47, they gathered for a common divine service. Most of the monks were Egyptians; There were few Greeks, or those who knew the Greek language, among them 48. Pachomius himself, like St. Anthony, did not know Greek 49 . But the Greeks also sought to imitate the models represented by monastic life in Egypt, such as. St. Basil the Great, founder of cenobitic monasticism in Cappadocia. The head of the hermit’s life himself, Anthony the Great, adequately appreciated the great merits of the founder of the hostel. We find precious evidence of this from the biography of St. Pachomius. After the death of Pachomius, two of his disciples were sent to Alexandria, and on the way they learned that the Great Anthony was in his monastery on the river. Nile, we considered it our duty to accept his blessing. “Hearing about the arrival of the brethren,” says the biography writer, “Antony, forcing himself, stood up (for he was already very old), and going out to them, greeted them, and began to ask: how does Abba Pachomius live? But realizing from the tears of his disciples that Pachomius had already died, Anthony said: “Don’t cry: you have all become like Abba Pachomius. I tell you: he rendered a great service by gathering such a multitude of brethren; he walked the apostolic path.” One of the disciples, Abba Zacchaeus, responded to this: “You, Father, are the light of the whole world. Your glory has reached the kings, and for you they glorify God.” “Don’t say that, Zacchaeus,” answered Anthony. “At the beginning, when I became a monk, there was not a single monk to educate others; but each of the former monks, after persecution, labored separately. After that, your father arranged this good deed, with the help of God. Even before him, another, named Aot, wanted to establish the same thing; but since I did not try with all my heart for this, I did not get what I wanted. I have heard many times about your father that he lives according to the Scriptures, and, truly, I often wanted to see him physically; but apparently he was not worthy of it. In the kingdom of heaven, but by the grace of God, we will see each other and all the saints. Fathers and, what is especially dear, our Lord and God Jesus Christ himself. Be bold, strengthen yourself and improve yourself” 50. The large number of the Pachomiev brotherhood is all the more amazing for us because at the same time there existed in Egypt, in deserts and even cities, other populous monasteries, which are spoken of by witnesses who personally visited them at the end of the 4th century. Thus, going down the Nile from Kinovia Pachomius, we find in the district of Arsenoia the presbyter Serapion with ten thousand monks, who, with the labor of their hands, not only supported themselves, but also delivered generous alms on ships to Alexandria 51; in the district of Hermopolis near Apollos there are about five hundred brethren 52; and the city of Oxyrhynchus was so rich in monks and nuns that it seemed to visitors that there were more monasteries in it than houses, and according to the testimony of the local bishop, within the walls and outside the walls of the city there were up to ten thousand monks, and twice as many nuns 53 . The surroundings of Memphis and Babylon were also filled with countless monks 54; near Alexandria, Palladius saw up to two thousand of them, living between them for about three years 55. Around the same time, when Anthony retired to the deserted shores of the Black Sea, and Pachomius founded the Tavennian hostel, St. Ammon opened a new refuge for desert-loving monks not far from Alexandria 56, in the mountain of Nitria. Having lived with his wife as a virgin for seventeen years, he finally decided, by mutual agreement, to separate from her and, in solitude, to devote himself completely to God. Soon this mountain began to be filled with monastic cells, so that by the end of the 15th century there were up to fifty monasteries here, and up to five thousand people lived - one by one, two by two, and many together 57. Behind the mountain began the vast Libyan desert; when the solitude of the Nitrian mountain did not seem sufficient for some, Ammon, with the blessing of Anthony, who visited the location of his friend, moved the cells to this desert 58, and from that time on the desert began to be called cells 59. Even further from the Nitrian mountain there was a monastery 60, where St. Macarius of Egypt laid the foundation for monastic residence 61. There was no paved road or path here; they found the way to the hermits by the stars; but this terrible place, as its visitors called it, more than other dwellings of monks, was rich in wise and perfect ascetics; for,” says one of these visitors, “only the most determined men settled in this place 62.” Macarius retired here long before the death of St. Anthony 63, and the young ascetic came to the many-year-old elder to learn the hermit’s virtues 64, and in turn he himself was a mentor for many who moved to him. Thus, the mountain of Nitria, cells, monasteries, deserts in different places of Egypt, deprived of all amenities for earthly life, were filled with those seeking the city of the future, raised many spirit-bearing men for the Church, whose miracles attracted the afflicted to them, and wise rules and scriptures remained forever a guide to spiritual life. “The sky with its many stars is not so bright,” says St. John Chrysostom, - how big is the Egyptian desert, showing us everywhere the tabernacles of monks 65.” “And it seems to me,” says one of the Egyptian ascetics, “that the word of the Apostle is being fulfilled over this country: where sin abounds, there grace abounds (Rom. 5:20). There once multiplied in Egypt, more than in other countries, varied and wicked idolatry: and where in the cities are there such a multitude of monks being saved, how many of them stand before God in the Egyptian desert? 66 2. To determine the significance of the throne of the Alexandrian Church, we must pay attention to a) its relations with the other Churches of East and West; b) for its immediate relations with the Egyptian Churches and c) for the diocesan region, which was directly in charge of the Bishop of Alexandria. a) In the hierarchy of the East, the Bishop of Alexandria occupied first place until the Second Ecumenical Council confirmed this primacy on the throne of the Church of Constantinople. In the history of the 3rd century we do not see a single significant church issue, in the East or in the West, in the resolution of which the bishops of Alexandria would not take part. In the dispute about the acceptance of the fallen into communion with the Church, both Pope Cornelius and Novatian, his opponent, tried to win over the Archbishop of Alexandria, Dionysius, to their side. Adherents of the Novatian opinion even invited him to the Council in Antioch. But the enlightened shepherd of Alexandria rejected the culprit of the schism, and with a letter to Rome tried to calm the church unrest 67 . Another dispute, about the baptism of heretics, that arose in the West, between the Roman and Carthaginian Churches, the same Archbishop of Alexandria, at the call of the Pope himself, Stephen, tried to stop with his conciliatory proposals 68. When in Antioch Paul of Samosata began to preach his heretical opinions about the Person of Jesus Christ, the same Dionysius was invited to participate in the council’s judgment about him, and only due to his advanced years refused to come to Antioch; but he did not leave a dying message to explain his opinion 69 . Let’s not even talk about the actions of the same Saint against the errors that appeared in his own district: against the heresy of Sabellius of Pentapolis 70 and the false teaching of Nepos of Arsenoes 71 . The Bishop of Alexandria, “according to ancient custom” 72, ruled, as Patriarch, all the Churches in Egypt, Libya and Pentapolis. There were about one hundred dioceses in his district 73. The Primate of the Church of Alexandria, honored by others with the title of “Pope,” but usually using the name bishop, common to the highest shepherds of the Church, stood in closer relations with the bishops subordinate to him than was the case in other patriarchal districts. In Egypt, the rights of metropolitans, mediating between the Patriarch and regional bishops, did not have such power as in other regions. Administration was concentrated primarily at the head of the Church of Alexandria 75. Even in Pentapolis, far from Alexandria, the authority of the Alexandrian bishop extended to all matters 76. This concentration of power gave greater strength to the church union. But even during the persecution of Diocletian and Maximian, a division opened up in the Egyptian hierarchy, aroused by disputes about the acceptance of the fallen into church communion, and strengthened by the lust for power. Whereas St. Peter, Bishop of Alexandria, in the spirit of love and condescension, allowed those who had fallen during the cruel persecution to be received as soon as they turned to the Church again, however, imposing on them, depending on the degree of their guilt, various church punishments 77 - Meletius Bishop. of Lycopolis, in Thebaid, insisted that until the end of the persecution none of the fallen should be accepted to repentance, and their fate would be decided after the restoration of peace in the Church 78 . And when St. Peter had to leave his Church and seek refuge in Mesopotamia and Syria 79 - Meletius, freed from prison in which he was imprisoned along with other confessors, began everywhere, in foreign dioceses, to install his own presbyters and deacons, and even bishops, and to call his society the Church of the Martyrs 80. In Alexandria itself, where St. Peter entrusted the supervision of the affairs of the Church to certain elders, and he caused discord. Bishops who suffered in prison for the name of Christ, and St. himself. Peter, tried to restrain evil with messages of exhortation 81; but the Meletievo society grew more and more. When, finally, St. Peter returned to Alexandria: he examined the actions of Meletius, and subjected them to condemnation, which they turned out to be all the more worthy because Meletius, as it was revealed, himself reprehensibly freed himself from the common suffering, along with other confessors, 82. But Meletius did not submit to the church court, and during the entire time of the subsequent bishops of Alexandria - Achilles and Alexander, he remained in separation from the Orthodox Church: the number of bishops appointed by him increased to 29 83. Things remained in this situation until the Council of Nicaea. c) The diocesan district of the Alexandrian bishop was not extensive. In addition to Alexandria, it also included the Mareotian region, or the western part of lower Egypt, outside the Delta. There were about twenty elders in this area 84. In Alexandra itself, the large population of believers and the vastness of the city 85, even before the time of the pacification of the Church, forced the Pastors of Alexandria to establish, in addition to the cathedral church 86, several parishes, to which all Christians living in the vicinity constantly turned with their spiritual needs, and in which appointed priests performed pastoral duties. This institution of St. Epiphanius noted a peculiarity in the structure of the Alexandrian Church, no doubt meaning that in other cities either there was not more than one cathedral church, at which there was a bishop with lower clergy, or in the existing parish churches they performed divine services, from time to time sent from the clergy of the cathedral church. Churches in Alexandria, according to St. Epiphanius, there were many, and he calls some by name. These were the churches of Dionysia, Theons, Pieria, Serapion, Perseus, Dizia, Mendidia, Aniana, Bavkali 87. Since some of these churches bear the names of former Alexandrian bishops and mentors (Dionysius, Theon, Pierius, Serapion, Anian), and about one of them, namely Theon, St. Athanasius mentions that it was built by St. Alexander of Alexandria 88: then one can think that the others were created in memory of the revered bishops and teachers by their pious successors 89. Judging by the number of elders who submitted their own reviews on the affairs of St. Athanasius, there were no more than 16 churches in Alexandria 90. But in the fourth century such a number was no longer enough for the multiplying flock of Alexandria 91. Even under the pagan emperors, the poor residents of Alexandria took advantage of the cashless distribution of grain from the government 92 . But then Christians could not expect help from the pagans. St. Constantine the Great entrusted this distribution to the Archbishop of Alexandria 93 For the charity of the poor, special dwellings were built at churches, where they were under the supervision and care of clergy appointed for this purpose 94 . There were also hospices for strangers and almshouses for the crippled 95 . All these charitable institutions, being under the direction of the bishop, more and more connected the shepherd with his flock. St. Athanasius was born in Alexandria, probably at the end of the 3rd century, not long before the persecution of Diocletian (beginning in 303). During the persecution, he was so old that he could not remember everything himself. In one of his writings, he refers to the words of his parents that at that time some pagans gave refuge to Christians, and were even subjected to deprivation of property and imprisonment because they did not want to hand over those being sheltered 96 . Information about the first years of St.'s life is scant. Athanasius, so rich in later great deeds. Undoubtedly, he received a scientific education; the needs of the age and the usual order of the then teaching forced him to become acquainted with the works of the pagan sages and poets of Greece, 97 but he did not spend much time on this, as St. Gregory the Theologian. The main attention was paid to the study of Holy Scripture, under the guidance of mentors; and St. Athanasius studied all the books of the Old and New Testaments in such a way that another did not study even one 98. Who his mentors were is unknown; but in one of his first works St. Athanasius gives them the title of witnesses (μ ά ρτυρες) of the Divinity of Christ 99, a high title, which at that time was bought with blood. Without a doubt, these were the teachers of the conciliation school in Alexandria, among whom was St. Peter, bishop of Alexandria, died a martyr in 312 100. Athanasius' mental education was completed in the company of ascetics. If it is impossible to say with certainty that he was a student of Rev. Anthony 101, at least it is known that he saw the great desert dweller many times, and he himself was one of the “ascetics.” An entire council of Egyptian bishops testified to this. Prepared by the Providence of God for a great and difficult service, St. Athanasius, from an early age, became known to Bishop Alexander of Alexandria, was appointed by him as a deacon of the Alexandrian Church, and enjoyed his favor so much that he lived with him and was his assistant in written communications, on church affairs 102, with other persons. His penetrating mind, power of reasoning, thorough knowledge of the truths of Christian teaching, steadfastness in his sound convictions, pure zeal for the truth, and then they could already distinguish him from other ministers of the altar. No sophisms could obscure before him the truth that the Word of God and the instructions of God-enlightened men revealed to him; no sights, no dangers could persuade him to decide to cheat on her. Deeply understanding the essence of Christian teaching, he easily recognized the connection of all its truths, and easily resolved all the tricks of lies. Treasuring the Divine truth as a heavenly treasure, he was ready to give everything for it, just to preserve it. Two essays written by St. Afanasy, in all likelihood, even in his young years 103, was already given the right to hope for much from him. This is “the word against the pagans” and the other is “about the incarnation of the Word.” In the first, having explained the beginning of paganism from the fall of man, he briefly but sharply shows the absurdity and immorality of the mythological traditions and religious institutions of the pagan world, and indicates the natural paths to the knowledge of the true God. In the second he sets forth the doctrine of the atonement in connection with other fundamental truths of Christian doctrine, and defends it against the attacks of unbelieving Jews and pagans. With what strength of conviction does he speak here about the necessity of the incarnation of the Son of God for the restoration of fallen man - and, conversely, by the action of His preaching, death and resurrection in the whole world he proves that the incarnate is the Son of God! Defending faith in the Divinity of the Son of God was Athanasius’s calling in earthly life. A new teaching appeared in Alexandria, seeking to undermine the very foundation of Christianity. One of the parish priests of Alexandria, Arius, educated in Antioch, famous for his dialectic, - contrary to the Gospel and the general Christian conviction, for which many thousands of believers shed their blood - began to preach that Christ, the Son of God, is not essentially God. Considering the idea of ​​birth incompatible with the concept of the self-essence of the Divine, he recognized Christ only as a deified man for His virtues, and thus relegated Christianity to the ranks of those false religions in which human nature is deified. When such wicked opinions began to spread among the people, - Alexander, bishop. Alexandrian, tried to reason with the false teacher with his instructions. But Arius, stubborn in his false wisdom, did not want to submit to the truth, and even attracted some of the Alexandrian and Mareotian priests to his side. Then Alexander summoned all the priests and deacons of his diocese to admonish their erring brethren. It was all in vain. Alexander invited all the bishops of his region to the council. Arius and his like-minded people did not hide their wicked opinions before the bishops, and were unanimously condemned as heretics and deposed. Only two bishops of Libya of Pentapolis: Secundus of Ptolemais and Theona of Marmaric, stuck to the side of Arius. Rejected in Egypt, he turned to his friends in Palestine and Syria and Asia Minor, where he had comrades from the School of Antioch, on episcopal thrones 104. Either accusing the defenders of the right teaching of distorting it, or covering up his wickedness with ambiguous expressions 105, he managed to win over people who did not agree to share his anti-Christ opinion. The most active part in the fate of Arius was taken by Eusebius, Bishop of Nicomedia - his comrade at the Antioch school. For power-hungry reasons, he moved to the then capital of the eastern emperors from Berit, and tried to use all his influence in favor of his friend, in Egypt and in other countries. He wrote to Alexander in defense of Arius, and persuaded other bishops in his favor 106, himself completely sharing the opinions of the false teacher 107. Others, although they did not think so impiously about the Son of God, and did not call Him a creature, did not recognize the consubstantiality of the Son of God with the Father (like Origen), and at the same time, carried away by the false assurances of Arius and the insistence of his friends, also took his side. Such was Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea, famous for his learned works, but not firm in his dogmatic concepts 108 . When, therefore, the destructive false teaching of Arius became known outside Egypt, and found more or less zealous patrons: St. Alexander, bishop Alexandrian, found it necessary to present in their true form the ungodly opinions of the Arian people before the entire Church of the Ecumenical. Having written a district message in which he explained the importance of the present circumstances, and denounced in the clear words of Scripture the false teachings of Arius and his like-minded people, he sent this message to all the bishops of the Universal Church, having previously invited all the clergy of his diocese to testify with their signatures their agreement with the stated condemnation. Here, among the signed presbyters and deacons of Alexandria, among the latter, two Athanasius are mentioned, one of whom, without a doubt, is the future bishop of Alexandria 109. Despite his young years, even then he took an active part in the orders of the Bishop of Alexandria to suppress heresy, and thereby aroused the hatred of like-minded people of Arius against himself. He himself, with all his modesty, wrote: “when Alexander, out of his right faith in Christ, did not agree to accept Arius into communion (at the requests of Eusebius of Nicomedia and others), then like-minded people of Arius were angry with Athanasius, who was a deacon at that time; because, while scouting, they learned that he mostly lives under Bishop Alexander, and is respected by him” 110. This was before the Council of Nicaea. Let us quote here also the words of St. Cyril of Alexandria about Athanasius’s relationship with Alexander, dating back to the same time: “although he did not care,” says St. Kirill, - the episcopal throne, and remained in the clergy; however, due to the sharpness of his mind, his meekness and very subtle and unparalleled prudence, he was accepted by Bishop Alexander of blessed memory as his own, and lived with the elder, like a son with his father, guiding him to everything useful, and in every matter showing him the best path” 111. The unrest caused by Arius lasted for about three years. At this time, Constantine the Great, having defeated the last persecutor of the Church of Christ, Licinius, became the owner of the eastern half of the empire. Filled with the most sincere desires - to see the triumph of Christianity everywhere and to grant peace to the Church, he arrived in Nicomedia 112, and here, to his regret, he heard about the grave unrest that was tearing apart the Church of Alexandria. On the one hand, Egypt suffered from the Meletian schism, in which many bishops who separated from the throne of Alexandria persisted, on the other hand, from disputes that arose with the teachings of Arius. The latter evil had a detrimental effect on other Churches. Here and there, Arius’s friends had already convened councils to discuss his acceptance into communion, and they did not refuse him communion 113 . Since the Bishop of Nicomedia was a friend of Arius, it is clear in what form Ariev’s case could have been presented to the Emperor. Believing that the whole dispute arose from the irritable pride of the bishop and presbyter of Alexandria, and from delving into subjects of no essential importance for a Christian, he sent with his message 114 Hosea, bishop of Cordoba, to put Alexandrian affairs in order. But the reasons for the dispute were by no means as unimportant as Arius’s defenders tried to convince. And Hosea had to return to the Emperor with the conviction that stronger measures were needed to pacify not only the Alexandrian Church, but also other Eastern Churches. Zealous for the peace of the world and the Church, the Sovereign, for the coming twentieth anniversary of his reign, decided to convene, not far from his eastern capital, bishops from all countries in which the name of Christ was confessed, so that in the general voice of the primates of the Church the truth would be revealed and established by itself. This is how the first Ecumenical Council was formed, in 325, in Nicaea, of 318 bishops. Without setting out the full history of this Council, we will only say about its actions, which have a close connection with the subject being presented. The Holy Council, calling Arius, listened with patience to his new teaching, examined it and rejected it as blasphemous. Bishops who favored Arius, or shared his wicked opinions, tried to support him 115. But the living consciousness of truth that animated St. The shepherds, many of whom had recently shed their blood for her, and the learned proofs of the enlightened Saints, based on the clear teaching of the Word of God and the writings of the most ancient Fathers and teachers of the Church, soon triumphed over the error of wickedness. The deacon of the Alexandrian Church, St. Athanasius, assisting his bishop in everything 116. The champions of unrighteousness, due to the lack of truth on their side, thought to help themselves with deceit, offering to the other members of the Council such a creed, in which the vagueness of some expressions about the Son of God gave room for reinterpretations of the Arians. But St. The Fathers, confessing the Son of God “from the essence of the Father” to be born and “of one essence with the Father,” included these expressions in their symbol, and thereby confirmed the ancient faith “in the true God of the true God.” This symbol was willingly accepted by Emperor Constantine, signed by all members of the Council, along with the condemnation of the wicked teaching of Ariev; even the bishops who adhered to the Aryan side signed, with the exception of only two Libyans: Theon of Marmarica and Secundus of Ptolemais 117: although the example of Eusebius of Caesarea 118 and subsequent actions in favor of Arianism, its former defenders, do not show the sincerity of their conviction. Arius, persistent in his wickedness, was cursed and, by order of the Emperor, exiled to prison, together “with two Libyan bishops; his blasphemous writings were ordered to be burned; his crowd was branded with the shameful name of Porfirians, as hated by God 119. Then, for communicating with the Arians, they were exiled to prison in Gaul, and those previously spared - Eusebius of Nicomedia and Theognius of Nicea, and Orthodox bishops were erected in their places 120. Having shown righteous severity in relation to stubborn heretics, St. The council showed leniency towards those who separated from the bishop of Alexandria and Meletius. The Council granted all the bishops and other clergy appointed by him the right to serve in the priesthood, but giving first place in everything to those who were constantly in union with the bishop of Alexandria; in the event of the death of these latter, to take their place, but not otherwise than at the request of the people and with the consent of the bishop of Alexandria. For Meletius himself, the Council retained only the name of episcopal dignity and residence in his city 121, presenting all power in Egypt to one bishop of Alexandria 122. So St. The council arranged the affairs of the Church of Alexandria. – The Alexandrian Church was also touched upon by the last question that occupied the Fathers of the Ecumenical Council: the one-time celebration of Easter everywhere 123. Since the celebration of Easter was established in Alexandria on the correct basis, and since here astronomical knowledge made it more convenient to determine this time exactly, the bishop of Alexandria was given the opportunity to annually announce by message when Easter should be celebrated that year 124. Despite the fact that the decisions of the Ecumenical Council were announced in Alexandria by a conciliar message, and reinforced by the command of Emperor Constantine 125; the unrest caused in the Alexandrian Church by Arius and Meletius did not subside, so Imp. Constantine was forced to demand the most significant adherents of Arius from Alexandria to Nicomedia 126. And to prevent new self-will on the part of Meletius, Alexander demanded from him a list of all the persons ordained by Meletius as bishops and appointed by him as priests and deacons in the diocese of Alexandria 127. Among these concerns about the pacification of the Church, St. Alexander died less than five months after returning from the Council 128. Athanasius was not in Alexandria at that time. Leaving his flock, the dying elder looked around him with a wandering gaze for someone to whom he would like to entrust it. “Athanasius, Afanasy! - Alexander cried, - you are thinking of running away. No! you won’t run away” 129. Indeed, Athanasius did not escape the lot destined for him from above. Pre-elected by the departed shepherd and the desire of his flock, as soon as he appeared in Alexandria, the people relentlessly began to demand from the assembled bishops that Athanasius be consecrated to him as bishop, and they did not calm down until they received what they wanted. “This is a Christian, a reverent man, one of the ascetics, a true bishop,” the people proclaim, expressing their desire to see Athanasius as their shepherd 130. A great feat lay before St. Athanasius in his pastoral ministry. The followers of Arius, seeing in the deacon a strong opponent to their teaching, and especially, at the Council of Nicaea, having experienced the irresistible power of his word, unshakable firmness in ancient piety, were ready to use all measures to take away the throne from him. The adherents of Meletius, although they soon lost their head, but having received in his place John Arkhaf, who was Meletius’ assistant, not only did not think about submitting to the decisions of the Council of Nicaea, but they themselves arrogated to themselves the right to participate in the election of the bishop of Alexandria. And when the election did not take place according to their wishes, they spread slander that Athanasius was appointed six or seven bishops, secretly from the others 131. There were also dissatisfied people among the Orthodox: comments were heard that Athanasius was still too young to occupy such a high throne 132 . And meanwhile, God’s Providence destined him not only to be the shepherd of the Church of Alexandria, but also to serve as the support of Orthodoxy for the entire Church, for almost half a century. The history of Orthodoxy in the 4th century is inseparable from the name of Athanasius. One of the first things St. Athanasius in his pastoral ministry was a personal review of his district. Then his external enemies, the Arians, did not yet prevent him from setting up his Church; because their leaders were sent away into captivity. He not only visited the Mareot region, hitherto free from the Meletians, but also undertook a journey to the remote limits of his patriarchal district, along the river. Neil is 133. The bishops offered him their needs; the monks greeted him with praise. Among them he recognized people whom he could use for the highest service of the Church 134. The monks were his faithful assistants in his great works. But the renewed troubles of the Arians soon forced St. Athanasius turned his attention from peaceful pursuits to matters of a different kind. Arius, through his friends at the Emperor's court, managed to return from captivity. Constantine's sister, Constance, who was married to Licinius, and who knew Eusebius of Nicomedia well, dying, entrusted to the favor of her brother one priest close to her, like-minded with Arius. He knew how to present the heretic to the Sovereign as an innocently persecuted one, assuring that Arius, in his way of thinking, completely agreed with the symbol of the Council of Nicaea. Constantine wanted to be sure of this, and demanded Arius to come to him, promising, if this news was true, to return him with honor to Alexandria. Appearing at the court at the second request, Arius asked the Emperor to return him to communion with the Church, presenting himself as always her faithful son, and in his confession explaining the doctrine of the Son of God in general terms, which at the Council of Nicaea were recognized as insufficient 135. The confession was accepted; however, Constantine did not give any order to accept Arius into the Church, leaving this matter, of course, to the bishops. When Arius was thus freed from captivity, the bishops of Nicomedia, Eusebius and Theognius of Nicea, began to seek the same mercy. They directly wrote: if someone who was convicted of wrongdoing is returned from exile; then we are all the less guilty of punishment; because we signed the creed 136 drawn up at the Council of Nicaea. Having received permission to return to their dioceses 137, they expelled those put in their place, and began to try to spread and establish their teaching, rejected by the Council of Nicaea. To achieve this, they used all measures to overthrow their opponents; in their places they appointed their like-minded people, and decided, no matter what the cost, to restore Arius. Their society at first consisted of the same people who stood on the side of Arius at the Council of Nicaea; then, little by little, it grew through scattered books in the Arian spirit, slander against the Orthodox and rewarding traitors to the truth with thrones taken from Orthodox bishops. The head of the society, as before, was Eusebius of Nicomedia; He was helped, although not unanimous with him in everything, by Eusebius of Caesarea, who was highly respected by the Emperor for her learning. They have already managed to depose St. Eustathius of Antioch (330) and some other bishops who defended the truth at the Council of Nicea, and subsequently did not stop denouncing false teachers 138. Celebrating his victory in Syria, Eusebius of Nicomedia made a request to the bishop of Alexandria to accept Arius and his friends into fellowship with him. “In the letter he asked,” says St. Afanasy, - and in words with the messenger he threatened” 139. St. Athanasius answered, as a faithful guardian of his flock, that he could not accept into communion the heretics condemned by the Ecumenical Council. Then Eusebius found an opportunity to slander Athanasius before the Emperor, saying that he did not accept into his Church those who wished to have communion with her. The accusation was deliberately presented in general terms so that it could apply equally to the Meletians as to the Arians. Constantine, of course, meaning the first who were allowed free admission into the Church by the Council, accepted such a denunciation with displeasure, and wrote in threatening terms to Athanasius so that he would not interfere with those wishing to return to the bowels of the Church 140. But St. Athanasius had only to explain who his slanderers were petitioning for, and Constantine no longer insisted on his demand. Seeing that all attempts to win over the bishop of Alexandria to his side would be in vain, Eusebius now sought to harm him by all possible means. His vengeance was inexhaustible in slander. He entered into close relations with the Meletians, who had not yet been reconciled with the Church, and through them, one after another, brought new accusations against Athanasius. Three Meletian bishops came to Nicomedia with a complaint against the Bishop of Alexandria, as if he had imposed a tax on the Egyptians, obliging them to deliver linen clothes for the benefit of the Church of Alexandria. This complaint was immediately brought to the attention of the Emperor. But two Alexandrian presbyters, who were in Nicomedia at that time, revealed its injustice. Constantine condemned the action of the Meletians, but wished to see Athanasius in person. - Before Athanasius had time to appear in Nicomedia, new accusations were already ready against him from the same Meletians, as if he had helped some rebel Philumenes with money. St. Athanasius, with a personal explanation, managed to destroy this slander, and had such a strong effect on the Emperor, who wanted nothing more than peace and harmony, that he sent with him a message to the Orthodox residents of Alexandria, in which he glorified Athanasius as “the man of God,” and worthily condemned the enmity and envy of his opponents 141 . But the slander has not yet been exhausted. The Meletians spread a rumor that the Archbishop of Alexandria, surveying the Mareotian region in his diocese, ordered to destroy, or himself destroyed, those found in the church of one Meletian priest, Ischira, St. vessels, burn sacred books, destroy St. throne. They also put together another fable: that St. Athanasius killed one Meletian bishop, Arsenius, of the city of Ipsela, and cut off his hand for sorcery. Athanasius had the opportunity to explain the first accusation to the Emperor during a meeting with him in Nicomedia 142. Iskhir was by no means a priest. True, he was ordained to this rank, even under bishop. Alexandra, the priest of Alexandria, Colluf, who arbitrarily seized his episcopal rights: but even at the Council of Alexandria, 324, under Hosea of ​​Cordoba, this Colluf was deposed as an impostor, and all those dedicated to him were not recognized as truly installed. In the village where Iskhir lived, and where an incident offensive to the shrine allegedly took place, there was no church of its own; and the day on which it supposedly happened,” notes St. Athanasius, - it was not Sunday, when the Divine service was usually performed. So, this whole incident was nothing more than a hostile invention. Ischir himself confessed in writing that he was forced to carry out such an unjust report against Athanasius by three Meletian bishops, whose names he also indicated. - Constantine ordered another accusation to be investigated by his brother Dalmatius, and considered by the council, which was to meet in Caesarea in Palestine 143 Having received a summons to answer from Dalmatius, St. Athanasius sent his deacon to look for Arseny in the monasteries. The messenger, although he did not find him, recognized the monastery where he was hiding, and brought with him to Alexandria the priest Pinna, who contributed to his removal from there, and the monk Elijah, with whom he traveled. Both announced that Arseny was not only alive, but also walking with both hands. In addition, it reached St. Athanasius's letter from Pinna to the leader of the Meletians after Meletius, John Arkhaf, to whom he wrote that since the matter had been explained and became known to everyone in Egypt, there was nothing more to accuse Athanasius of killing Arsenius. – Arseny himself retired to Tire, where he was recognized by the local bishop Paul and detained. - All these circumstances of St. Athanasius revealed it to the Emperor Constantine in a letter, and in return received from him a reassuring message, in which he spoke with indignation about the machinations of the Meletians, and ordered that this message be read publicly, to the shame of Athanasius’ enemies. At the same time, Constantine ordered Dalmatius and the bishops who had already gone to the council to return from the path. - It seemed that this was how the matter should have ended: Afanasy did not seek punishment for the slanderers. Arseny himself appeared to him with a guilty head and asked him to be accepted into communion with the Church. Even John Arfakh, the head of the schism, was now looking for an alliance with the Church, and this overly pleased the Emperor, who was most concerned about the establishment of peace, so that Constantine immediately summoned him to himself 144. But what an unexpected change! The next year, this John goes over to the side of Eusebius; accusations from Iskhir and Arseny are renewed; by order of Constantine, a new council is appointed to consider their denunciations; and the council ends with the condemnation of Athanasius. The culprits of this change are hidden: but the spirit of the current party is visible, the goal - the deposition of Afanasyev - is clear: as soon as the verdict on Afanasy is pronounced, Arius is allowed to communicate with the Church, and he goes to Alexandria. Appointing this council in Tire (335), as Constantine wrote, to stop the unrest caused by “dispute” and restore harmony in the provinces, destroyed by the “arrogance of a few people,” he notified the members of the council: “I have done everything that you wrote about: I sent letters to those bishops to whom you wanted, and demanded that they come and participate in your concerns; He also sent the former consul Dionysius, with the order to remind those who should come to your council, and to monitor the progress of the matter, and especially the deanery. If anyone, which I do not expect, dares now to ignore our command and does not appear at the council; then a person will be sent from us who, by royal decree, having expelled the culprit, will teach him that the decisions of the Autocrat, aimed at protecting the truth, should not be resisted 145. At the same time, the bishop of Alexandria received an order to go to Tyre unquestioningly, even if it was against his will 146. From the quoted words of Konstantinov’s message to the council, it is clearly evident that Athanasius’ enemies managed to sow strong prejudices against him in the soul of the peace-loving Sovereign. Until now, Eusebius and his friends had secretly patronized the Meletians: now they decided to openly defend them, representing the culprits of their ongoing separation from the Church - Athanasius. They also charged him with the fact that, with a preliminary explanation, he eliminated the need for a new consideration of the complaints brought against him by the Meletians at the council in Caesarea - and this was presented as disdain for the will of the Sovereign. From what follows it is clear that they took advantage of the opportunity to present to Constantine in a more favorable light the case of Arius, who had long since been returned from captivity, but was not allowed into Alexandria. – Having thus predisposed Constantine against St. Athanasius, his enemies themselves indicated to the Emperor who they considered necessary at the proposed council; the recently installed bishops Ursatius and Valens came there, as if they were necessary, even from Mysia and Pannonia. Who were they? Disciples of Arius 147. – A conspiracy is visible in everything: the Meletians took upon themselves to be informers, the Arians - judges 148. Up to sixty bishops gathered for the council 149. Moreover, 48 bishops 150 arrived from Egypt with their archpastor. Bishops of eminent thrones were present here: Antioch - Flakyll, Jerusalem - Maxim, Thessalonica - Alexander; - but the main actor was Eusebius of Nicomedia with his accomplices. The learned bishop of Caesarea, Eusebius, was not ashamed to pester them, calling his co-name of Nicomedia “great” 151. St. Athanasius, appearing at the council with his bishops, first of all demanded that his people, who harbor enmity towards him, as well as towards all Orthodox, due to their unrighteousness, be removed from among the judges. He pointed to Eusebius of Nicomedia, Theognius of Nicea, I Maris of Chalcedon, Narcissus of Neronopolis, Theodore of Herakleia and Patrophilus of Scythopolis 152. But Athanasius’ demand was not respected by the official Dionysius 153 sent to the council. – Interrogations have begun against the charges presented by the Meletians 154. The Meletians tried to convince them that Athanasius was elected bishop by a few, as they had previously announced. – There was a common voice against this slander of the Egyptian bishops present at the council 155. “They repeated the denunciation of the death of Arseny, and even brought a severed hand, which Athanasius allegedly used for sorcery. But Arseny was presented to the Cathedral of St. Athanasius on his face and with both hands, to the shame of the slanderers. - Iskhir appeared; seduced by money and the promise of episcopal dignity, he again testified to the contrition of St. vessels by the presbyter of Alexandria Macarius, as if by order of Athanasius. St. Athanasius presented a refutation of this too; but they did not want to believe his words, and decided to investigate this matter on the spot. Anticipating the general decision of the council on who to send to Egypt for research, 156 Eusebius and his accomplices secretly equipped a commission of six bishops already mentioned above: Theognius, Maris, Theodora, and with them Macedonia of Mopsuestia, Ursatius and Valens, and sent them to Alexandria at night. Meanwhile, accused of the crime, Presbyter Macarius, as he was presented to the council in chains, now remained in prison in Tire. How soon did St. learn about this? Athanasius, then brought a complaint to Dionysius, who was sent to supervise order, that, contrary to all justice, the very people whom he excluded from his trial were appointed as investigators 157; and the Egyptian bishops submitted an announcement about the same thing to the council and to the same official Dionysius 158, and, not seeing any satisfaction in their complaint, for the second time they asked both the bishops and Dionysius to stop the matter, leaving further investigations to the will of the Sovereign 159. It was all in vain. The meetings of the council were filled with indescribable confusion. And before, prosecutors and biased judges did not allow defendants to freely explain themselves; Now the irritation of the judges exposed in obvious injustice, the cries of the shamed slanderers, the senseless cries of the mob, who saw the cut off hand and believed the slander, despite the evidence, reached the point that one could fear for the life of Athanasius. And one time the guardian of the deanery had to force him out of the meeting of the raging 160. Then St. Athanasius, with five of his bishops, decided to secretly leave the cathedral and the city, and ask for justice personally from the Emperor himself. Meanwhile, those sent to Egypt, in the absence of the bishop, who was concerned with the research entrusted to them, without witnesses from the defendant, without entering into communication with the clergy, who usually accompanied the bishop during his review of his diocese, with one Egyptian prefect and a military command, they selected information about subjects related to Divine services and sacraments from catechumens and pagans, and they themselves confused themselves with their testimony in insoluble contradictions. The catechumens claimed that they were inside the house at the time when the vessels were broken by Macarius; but according to the rules, the liturgy could not be held in the church when the vessels with the Holy Gifts were offered. Others said that Iskhir, at the time of Macarius’s arrival there, was lying sick in his cell: this means that he did not perform Divine Services at that time, as the Meletians claimed. All the Mareotian clergy, having learned about the research being carried out, submitted an announcement on their own to the investigators, the council and the prefect of Egypt, with which, confirming the words of their bishop, they assured that the imaginary ruin of the church was just slander, that Ischir had never been a priest of the Orthodox Church, and so on. 161; but this testimony was not accepted. And in Alexandria, probably noticing the special love of Christians for their archpastor, the council deputies even allowed themselves various violence and abuse 162 . Be that as it may, after the return of those sent from Egypt, the council was ordered: for evading the council appointed in Caesarea, and for the turmoil at the council of Tire, allegedly caused by the bishop of Alexandria and other Egyptian bishops, whom he brought in large numbers; finally, for the crushing of St. vessels, as if undoubtedly inquired by the deputies of the council - to deprive Athanasius of his episcopal dignity and expel him from Alexandria, blaming him for his very removal from the council before the end of the case, and for those crimes that, due to his removal, remained uninvestigated. - Many, however, of those present did not agree to sign such a lawless verdict. Others left the cathedral even earlier. They write about Bishop Paphnutius, who suffered during the Diocletian persecution, that he took the hand of the Bishop of Jerusalem, Maximus, also a confessor, and took him out of the meeting, saying: “It is not proper for us, confessors, to take part in such a council,” - Despite the fact, the council’s verdict was reported to the Emperor, and announced in letters to all bishops; so that they stop all communication with Athanasius. Α John of Meletian with his entire company was accepted into church communion 163. And after such deeds, the bishops of the cathedral did not hesitate to proceed with the consecration of the magnificent church newly created by Constantine in Jerusalem, over the Holy Sepulcher! Eusebius of Caesarea thought to close such matters with red words, combining in his narrative the deeds of Tyre with those committed in Jerusalem. “It is not permissible,” he writes, “to begin the Divine service without agreeing with each other in opinions. The divine law prescribes that those who are in a quarrel should not bring gifts to God until they are united in love and reconciled with each other.” 164 – A worthy conclusion to the affairs of Tyre was that the judges of Athanasius in Jerusalem accepted into church communion Arius, whose faith the Emperor ordered them to test, without taking upon himself to pronounce judgment on his orthodoxy, and who, without renouncing his evil faith, learned only to hide it in vague expressions 165. Here it was explained what all the previous efforts of the council aimed at - to depose Athanasius. But Athanasius found himself a defender in the Emperor. True, Konstantin, due to the unfavorable ideas about the Bishop of Alexandria instilled in him from the Evseev’s adherents, at first did not want to accept him; but, having learned what was happening at the council in Tire, he personally listened to the request of the persecuted man and willingly agreed to it. Athanasius asked, as at the Council of Tire in the last announcement submitted by the Egyptian bishops, that the Emperor give him the opportunity to justify himself in all his guilt, in his presence and before the accusers themselves. Constantine, in strong terms condemning the actions of the council, immediately ordered all the members who composed it to appear in the capital - “so that you,” wrote the Emperor, “should show by your very deed the purity and justice of your court before me, who, which you yourself will not deny, is a sincere servant of God” 166. But of the required bishops, only the avowed enemies of Athanasius came to Constantinople: two Eusebius 167, Theognius, Patrophilus, Ursacius and Valens; they dismissed the rest to their dioceses, and, presenting themselves to the Emperor, did not dare repeat the accusations in the cases of Ischir and Arseny, but launched a new slander against Athanasius: that he threatened to prevent the supply of grain to the new capital from Alexandria 168 . “How can I do this,” objected Afanasy, “I am a private and poor man?” “No,” answered Eusebius of Nicomedia, “Athanasius is a strong, rich man, and he can do anything.” 169 – To understand the full importance of the new slander leveled against Athanasius, one must take into account that Constantine the Great, having founded a new capital in the East, and taking care of strengthening its population and the means for its maintenance, changed the purpose of the fleet, which had previously delivered grain from Egypt to Rome for distribution to the needy people, and henceforth allowed Constantinople to use this favor 170. Up to eighty thousand measures of bread were distributed to the people daily 171. So, the detention of grain flowing from the Egyptian granaries, if only it were possible due to the character and means of Athanasius, even one disclosure among the people about such an intention could threaten the indignation of the capital. The accusers thought, as the Egyptian bishops write, to subject Athanasius to death with this slander 172. But Constantine ordered him into exile in Gaul. – What about the promised consideration of Afanasyeva’s complaint in the presence of prosecutors? Did Konstantin really believe the unfounded accusation of the enemies of the Afanasyevs, who were forced by extremity to do anything? To resolve these issues, nothing better can be cited than the words of Konstantinov’s son, Konstantin, who returned Athanasius from exile. He writes that his father Constantine only sent him to Gaul for a while to remove him from the enemies who threatened his life; that he intended to restore Athanasius to his throne, and only a quick death prevented the fulfillment of this intention 173. St. himself Afanasy believed the sincerity of these words 174, although he considered his conclusion a sign of Konstantinov’s anger 175. - In fact, no matter how hard the Arians, celebrating their victory, tried to take the throne of Alexandria with one of their like-minded people, but under St. Constantine could not do that. Each time he stopped such an attempt with a threat 176. Desiring the peace of the Church, he soon expelled John, the Meletian bishop, despite the fact that he was accepted by the Council of Tire 177. So St. Athanasius went to distant Gaul, and Arius, according to the charter of the Jerusalem council, returned to Alexandria. It can be so tricky to decide which way the right one goes and which way the wrong one goes! “But the Lord will bring forth the righteousness of the righteous as the light, and his destiny as the midday.” – Arius was not accepted in Alexandria. His appearance here caused nothing but turmoil and unrest 178 . Here the purpose of all previous violent actions, which most of the Egyptian bishops had witnessed, was well understood. Here they saw how deputies of the Tyrian cathedral carried out research on the case of Ischir; and they understood well what insults they had inflicted on the Orthodox in Alexandria itself. Although the shepherd was not with them, their love for him preserved the purity of their faith. “The expulsion of Athanasius,” write the Egyptian bishops, “was our expulsion; with him we all considered ourselves exiled” 179. In prayer meetings, prayers were proclaimed for the return of Athanasius 180. The spirit of Athanasius lived here; His instructions are to maintain the faith established by St. Fathers of the Ecumenical Council, preserved in living memory. Not long before Afanasyev’s departure from Alexandria, at the invitation of the bishops, St. Anthony came here from his desert to dispel the slander spread by the Arians, as if he was of the same mind with them. Appearing in the midst of a crowded city, the eighty-year-old desert dweller, whom not only Christians, but also pagans revered, made a solemn confession of his faith, calling the Arian heresy the forerunner of the Antichrist. “The Son of God,” said Anthony, “is not a creature, nor one of those that exist, but the inherent Word and Wisdom of the Being of the Father. Have no fellowship with the wicked Arians. If you observe piety, then you are Christians: and those who call the Son of God and the Word, which is from the Father, creation, do not differ in any way from the pagans, because they serve the creation more than God who created.” And when Anthony later intended to return to his desert, leaving a strong impression on the inhabitants of Alexandria with his words, miracles and even his appearance, Athanasius himself solemnly escorted him out of the city 181. - And now Anthony, from the depths of his desert, turned to Constantine in letters with a request for the return of Alexandria to the Saint of God, Athanasius, although he was not successful; because the Emperor, wanting nothing more than peace, did not want to change his decision, just as he did not respect the petition of the Alexandrian clergy, who interceded for his Archpastor 182 . Another famous Egyptian ascetic, St. Pachomius, spoke about St. Athanasius to his disciples: When Athanasius was installed as a bishop, unkind people did not approve of the decree of God that had taken place over him, pointing to his youth, and attempted to divide the Church of God. But the Holy Spirit said to me: I raised him up as a pillar and lamp of the Church. Many human sorrows and slander await him for his pious faith in Christ. But having conquered all temptations, strengthened by Him to the end, he will proclaim the truth of the Gospel to the Churches 183. Thus, bishops and clergy, monks and laity, united in respect and love for their archpastor, protected the pure faith from the attacks of wickedness. Rejected by the Alexandrian Church, Arius returned to Constantinople. His friends here decided to solemnly introduce him into the church and perform a sacred rite with him. St. Alexander, Bishop of Constantinople, no matter how much he opposed it, could not resist and turned to God with prayer. On the eve of the day when, according to the intention of the Arians, this desecration of Orthodoxy was to take place, he fell on his face before the Lord in the sanctuary and asked that it would be better to take him away from among the living than to leave him to see the reproach of God’s property. And the prayer of the zealot of pure faith was heard. Aria suddenly suffered a shameful death, already on the way to the church. This event, which clearly revealed the judgment of God on the wicked, had an influence on many who were previously disposed towards him 184. Constantine, sending St. Athanasius to Gaul, assigned him a residence in Trier, where he himself lived when he was the owner of only the western half of the Empire, and where his eldest son Constantine now lived, with the title of Caesar having recently received control of Gaul, Spain and Britain 185. This city, famous for its vastness and wealth, then had Maximin as its bishop, whose godly life was glorified in the Western Church by canonizing him, 186 and his pious zeal for the maintenance of Orthodoxy was more than once revealed at Western councils. St. Athanasius was received by the Bishop of Trier with love and respect 187, and he himself remained mutually attached to him 188. He could also be consoled by the piety of the city residents, who gathered for divine services even in unfinished churches 189. Constantine the Younger himself, having deep respect for the virtues of the Saint, tried to ease the grief of exile by providing him with everything he needed in abundance, although he saw that the great soul of Athanasius cared little about external comforts 190 . There is no doubt that the Alexandrian stranger, for his part, did not remain in debt for his loving hospitality, but shared spiritual treasures with his benefactors. The unshakable firmness in Orthodoxy of the bishops of Trier - Maximin and his successor Paulinus, who died in exile, and the early appearance of monastic life in Trier, of course, owe no little to the influence of St. Afanasia. His book is “about the life of St. Anthony,” as Bl. writes. Augustine, here inflamed the zealots of piety to imitate the exploits of the Egyptian desert dweller 191. It is also pleasant to remember that here, in Trier, several years later, Bl. sought enlightenment. Jerome 192; St. was born here. Ambrose. During his stay in the west, St. Athanasius also met another son of St. Constantine, Constantine, who ruled Italy, and equally gained the favor of this Sovereign, who expressed zeal for the Christian faith 193 and enriched the churches with generous offerings 194. At his request, St. Athanasius, after his return, sent him several copies of the Holy Scriptures 195, which, due to respect for the works of Alexandrian scholars in explaining the Holy Scriptures and in purifying its text, could be of particular importance. – Acquaintance with Constance, as we will see, repeatedly served, subsequently, to the benefit of St. Athanasius and the cause that he defended, but after the death of Constance was the cause of new grief for him. St. spent two years and four months. Athanasius in Trier 196, i.e. until the death of St. Constantine (22 May 337). The next year after his death, his three sons: Constantine and Constance, who ruled the western half of the Empire, and Constantius - the eastern, gathered in Viminatia (the Mosian city), and dividing the regions of the Empire among themselves, decided, in accordance with the last will of their father, to return all the imprisoned bishops to their dioceses. Thus, St. Athanasius, with the message of Caesar Constantine to the Orthodox inhabitants of Alexandria, was released from Trier to his throne. In Viminatia, he met for the first time with his Sovereign, Constantius, who received Thrace, all the Asian regions of the Empire and Egypt into his power 197. Unfortunately, this was not the attitude towards St. Athanasius of the Eastern Sovereign, as two Western ones. In the last years of Constantine, living in the east, Constantius submitted to the influence of the Arians, and upon his accession to the throne, he became their patron. The same priest who helped Arius return from exile 198 gained the favor of Constantius through some services under the will of succession to the throne, and through him the Arian party now hoped to completely suppress the Orthodox confessors of the “one essence” of the Son of God with the Father. Eusebius of Nicomedia, Theognius of Nicea and Theodore of Herakleia, having dioceses near the capital, often came to the court to personally influence the young Sovereign in favor of their party 199. Having ascended the throne for twenty years, with a lively, irritable character, weak will, suspicious, he presented many weaknesses for Arian attacks. His court was filled with eunuchs, and among them, Eusebius, also an Arian, enjoyed the sovereign's trust most of all. After this, it is clear what the saint should have expected. Afanasy. Returning to his throne by land, he once again saw Constantius in Caesarea in Cappadocia, and neither this nor the other time did not complain in a single word about his unjust persecutors 201; but they, for their part, were already preparing new schemes against him. Constantius released him without a letter from himself to the Church of Alexandria. The return of Athanasius 202 brought indescribable joy to his flock. Everyone seemed to come to life, everyone was triumphant, seeing their beloved shepherd among them again. The people, clergy, and bishops thanked God for the consolation given to them after severe sorrow 203. Since the deposition of Athanasius at the Council of Tire was not recognized by anyone as legal, and his imprisonment in Gaul did not in any way depend on the decision of the council, they did not consider it necessary to demand a new impartial consideration of the charges that were accepted in Tire against the bishop of Alexandria. The enemies of Athanasius took advantage of this. Sending messages everywhere, the Arian bishops announced that Athanasius, legally deposed by a conciliar decision, had again taken the throne of Alexandria without a conciliar decision. At the same time, they were talking about the violence that allegedly accompanied his return to Alexandria. A small society of Arians who lived in this city, and the Meletians scattered throughout Egypt, were ready to help them with slander. Finally, Athanasius was accused of withholding the bread appointed by Constantine V. for distribution to the people 204. The hostile actions of the Arians became all the more dangerous because Eusebius of Nicomedia, having expelled from Constantinople St., who had returned with Athanasius from captivity. Paul, himself took the throne of Constantinople. The throne of St. was not returned to Antioch. Eustathius, but was busy with a like-minded Arians, Flakill. Having other like-minded people, especially among the participants in the Council of Tyre, Eusebius at the Council in Antioch, as if regretting the long-term orphanhood of the Alexandrian Church, decided to appoint a bishop there, and Secundus of Ptolemais, condemned at the Council of Nicea, installed Pistus, who was ejected by the same Council, in Alexandria. In order to win other bishops over to his side, Eusebius sent a presbyter and two deacons from himself to the Pope of Rome, with an accusatory letter against Athanasius and some other bishops, and with a request to accept the newly installed bishop of Alexandria into communion 205 . The same messages were sent to the three Emperors 206. When the machinations of the Arians became known in Egypt, and a false shepherd, appointed by them, had already appeared in Alexandria, with whom the entire Arian party had relations, then the Egyptian bishops unanimously gathered in Alexandria to think about means to protect their Archpastor and to protect their Orthodoxy. They decided to appeal to all Orthodox pastors, and, having revealed to them the lawless deeds of the Arians and their misfortunes, to ask them for fraternal help. The election of Athanasius, the trial of him by the council of Tire, the return of the Archpastor from imprisonment, the machinations of the Arians - they presented all this to their brothers in its true form. Without repeating everything that has already been used in depicting previous events, we present here the response of the Egyptian bishops to the new accusations of the Arians. “There was no violence, no murders, imprisonment, imprisonment - there was no such thing as the return of Athanasius,” wrote the bishops faithful to their Archpastor: our sanctuaries are clean of blood. The persecution of certain persons indicated in the Arian epistle does not at all relate to Athanasius; they depended on the Eparch of Egypt, and, as can be seen from the very judicial acts, they date back to the time when Athanasius was not yet in Alexandria, and do not belong to church affairs. – Defending their Archpastor from the effects of the Tyrian sentence on him, the bishops paid attention to the composition of the council and the manner in which it acted. Among the members of the council were adherents of Arius and people, by their behavior, unworthy to occupy a place at the council; objections to them were not accepted. The military dignitary sent to monitor order was on the side of the Arians. The accusations against Athanasius were pure slander; but the council did not pay due attention to this. Arseny is still alive and asks to be accepted into church communion. Ischir was not at all a priest, as the lists prove, and he himself confessed to the slander: and researchers found that he had broken St. vessels. Only now are they giving him permission and ways to set up a church in his home, as a reward for his service. Therefore, even before March 340, because at that time Constantine, the eldest of the Emperors, fell in war. As for the slander that Athanasius selfishly uses the bread assigned from the royal bounties to the people, the bishops answered: this distribution of Athanasius does not cause anything except trouble. Those who should receive do not complain. This slander only shows the intention to deprive the Church of the right of distribution and transfer it to the Arians 207 . The message was sent to all bishops, including Pope Julius. The presbyters who brought him to Rome met here the messengers from Eusebius, and entered into a dispute with them, proving the illegality of the installation of Pistus, so that one of these messengers considered it best to secretly flee from Rome, and the other two proposed to consider the dispute between Athanasius and the party of Eusebius at the council. Pope Julius willingly accepted this challenge and sent letters of invitation to St. Athanasius and Eusebius, inviting the former to choose any place for this 208. Meanwhile, as the agreements on this were going on, Afanasyev’s patron, Konstantin, died: he was killed in an internecine war with his brother Constance (in March 340). And Afanasy’s enemies began to act more decisively. Having abandoned Pistus, who had been appointed by the notorious Arians and rejected by everyone, they decided to elect another bishop for Alexandria. At the same time, wanting to free themselves from criticism of Arian wickedness - since not everyone was of the same mind with Arius - they came up with the idea of ​​composing their own creed. At this time, Emperor Constantius summoned up to ninety bishops to Antioch to consecrate the newly created, so-called golden church, which began to be built under Constantine V. They, having drawn up a council in Antioch, rejected the symbol of the Ecumenical Council, and at the same time, disagreeing with each other, published three of their symbols one after another, and then a fourth, and in none of them did they want to include the expression, clearly defining Orthodoxy: consubstantial 209. Having decided in their own way the matter of faith, they turned to the affairs of the Church of Alexandria. They offered the throne of this Church to Eusebius of Emesa, 210 who was famous for his education and studied in Alexandria, then - with Eusebius of Caesarea. But he himself refused this offer, knowing from his own experience the affection of the Alexandrians for Athanasius: instead of Eusebius, another was chosen, Gregory, a native of Cappadocia, who also received his education in Alexandria, and who had once enjoyed the favor of St. Afanasia 211. On Great Pentecost 340 212 a command was received in Alexandria, which announced the appointment of a new bishop there, and before Easter he himself appeared. The people did not leave their churches; on the contrary, hearing about the danger threatening his true Shepherd, he gathered in them in even greater numbers. Then the Egyptian Eparch, Philagry, who was entrusted with bringing Gregory into the church, having gathered the pagans and Jews (since the Orthodox did not want to be traitors), leads them with weapons to the church of Kirin, chosen for this, disperses the Orthodox, and forces the virgins and monks to come out of there with insults and wounds. The pagans invade the sanctuary and destroy St. throne, burn St. books, desecrate the baptismal sanctuary with their wickedness. To complete the disaster, the church caught fire and was left a prey to robbers. Then torture began on the elders, virgins and laity who showed the most zeal for the church: they were beaten, flogged, and imprisoned. Entering one church, Gregory noticed that the people were turning away from him: this was enough for the prefect to immediately capture thirty-four people, noble men and women, and subject them to various tortures. And this happened on Great Friday. The torture did not stop even on the bright days of Easter. Finally, the turn came to the church where St. Athanasius even in these days of horror: but he prevented the attack of the wicked, secretly leaving the city 213. In his secret refuge, St. Athanasius wrote a strong appeal to the bishops of all Churches, in which he depicted all the horrors of wickedness that had occurred before his eyes, and begged for help for the glorious Church of Alexandria, trampled underfoot by heretics. Comparing himself with that Levite who called on Israel to take revenge on Gibeon for the desecration and death of his wife, breaking her corpse into pieces and scattering it throughout all the tribes of Israel, he pointed to the members of the entire Church dissolved by wickedness and said: The insult was not only to me, but to all of you. The rules were broken, betrayed by the fathers; the faith preached by the Lord and His Apostles suffers. If the bishop of Alexandria is guilty of anything, he should be judged by his own, Orthodox bishops, and not by heretics. If he is found unworthy of the throne, he must be chosen in his place from the same Church, and not bring from outside, with military force, someone who is not pleasing to anyone. Gregory was sent from the Arian Eusebius and his community, and brought with him Arian wickedness. - So called St. Archpastor! But who could help him in the East, when the willfulness of the heretics enjoyed the patronage of Constantius? The Egyptian eparch even dared to accuse Athanasius himself before the Emperor of all the unrest that occurred in Alexandria during the installation of a new bishop 214. The pious shepherds could only cry, and in tears ask for help from the Head of the Church of Jesus Christ, like Anthony V., who foresaw this disaster for the Church of Alexandria in two years. One day, sitting with his brothers on his mountain doing needlework, he was suddenly overcome by the spirit and caught up in a vision. Then, having come to his senses, the elder groaned, trembled, knelt down and prayed, prayed for a long time. When he stood up, the frightened brothers asked him: what’s wrong with him? Anthony refused to answer for a long time; finally, with groaning and tears, he said: it would be better to die before what I saw came true. The wrath of God is coming on the Church, and it will be betrayed to people who are like the dumb. I heard a voice: My altar will be desecrated. “But do not be discouraged, children,” added the inspired old man; Just as the Lord was angry, He will heal again, and the Church will soon regain its former beauty. You will see those expelled restored: just do not defile yourself by communicating with the Arians 215. The confusion caused by the surging horde of Arians in Alexandria had not yet ended, when St. Athanasius received from Pope Julius the above-mentioned invitation to the council, and, taking advantage of the right granted to him to appoint a place for this, he went to Rome. Upon arrival here St. Athanasius, the pope did not hesitate to send his two presbyters, Elpidius and Philoxenus, to Eusebius and his accomplices, with notification of this and setting a time for the opening of the council. But Eusebius and his like-minded people considered it best not to present their cases to the court of the Orthodox bishops. It was enough for them that they managed to expel Athanasius from their Church and install their own bishop there. Having kept the messengers from Antioch, where they had gathered for a meeting, until the beginning of the next year, they sent a reproachful answer to the Pope. They considered it an insult to themselves that Julius should call them to him to answer for their actions; argued that what was decreed by one council (Tyrian) should not be reconsidered by another, pointing out that what had previously been decreed in the West about Novatus was accepted in the East without a new consideration; equal - the definition of the Council of Antioch about Paul of Samosata - in the West. They were angry that the pope was accepting into communion Athanasius and the other bishops they had expelled, and thus, instead of maintaining peace in the Churches, he was creating discord. In conclusion, they refused to appear at the council, under the pretext of the brevity of the appointed time and the unfavorable circumstances of the East: then Constantius was waging war with the Persians 216. Having received such an answer, the pope still hesitated for several months, waiting to see if any of the invitees from the East would appear. But only bishops and presbyters expelled by the Arians - from Thrace, Illyria, Phenicia, Palestine and Egypt - gathered in Rome. Julius decided to open a council to consider his case along with 50 other bishops 217. From the letter sent earlier, indicting Athanasius, and the documents attached to it, one could see what the bishop of Alexandria was actually accused of at the Council of Tire; and now everyone could hear the verbal defense of the slandered. His justifications were so convincing that the council had no difficulty in pronouncing its decision. “Eusebius and his accomplices,” writes St. Athanasius, as doubtful and afraid to appear at the council, was not accepted, and what they wrote was considered insignificant; but they accepted us and entered into fellowship with us with love” 218. Then Julius, on behalf of the council, gave an answer to the bishops of the Antioch Council to their reproaches, with strength and dignity. They wanted to protect their court with the inviolability of conciliar decrees: Julius, justifying his invitation to the council by his own summons from Eusebius, pointed out to the Antiochians: Why do they themselves, without respecting the definitions of the Council of the Three Hundred Fathers (Nicaea), accept Arians into communion, and even elevate them to the rank of bishop? Why do their bishops arbitrarily move from one place to another (Eusebius of Nicomedia), contrary to the rule of the same Council? – The justification for the pope’s imaginary partiality for Athanasius was the consideration of the lawless actions of the Council of Tyre. The previously received message from Athanasius, and another from the bishops of Egypt, in defense of their Archpastor, news of new bloody events in the Church of Alexandria, and the testimonies of other sufferers who arrived from Egypt, and finally, the personal explanations of Athanasius at the Roman Council - all this was a solid support for the defender Afanasyev. Julius could only repeat their words in his message. “Now judge for yourself,” added the pope, “who is acting against the rules: we, who accepted this man on the basis of so many proofs of his innocence, or you, who, at a distance of thirty-six marches, elected some foreigner as bishop in Antioch, and sent him to Alexandria with military force, which was not done even when Athanasius was sent to Gaul? But I heard that not many are the culprits of all these disorders. Try to correct what you have done contrary to the rules” 219. This was already the second cathedral defense of St. Afanasia. It seemed that it should have been all the more powerful because it came from outside bishops. But under the formidable influence of the dominant party, everything was silent in the East. It was necessary to persuade the Western Emperor Constance to stand up for the innocent persecuted before his brother. But this was all the more difficult because Constantius, busy with war, was constantly on the eastern borders of his Empire, surrounded by Arian bishops. And Athanasius was forced to live for a long time at a distance from his flock, lovingly received in Rome, but disturbed by news from Egypt. Apart from the above, there is almost no information about St. Athanasius, which would date back to the time of his stay in Rome. He accidentally mentions that here he enjoyed the favor of Constantine V.’s sister, Eutropia, whom he calls true Eutropia, that is, well-behaved, which was well accepted by some other significant persons in Rome 220. Here the curiosity of the pious was occupied not so much by questions about faith as by news of the new, wonderful way of life of the Egyptian ascetics. St. Athanasius, visiting the houses of those families who had already accepted Christianity or were disposed towards it, with his conversations and stories about the life of St. Anthony, about the institutions of Pachomius and about the virtues of other Egyptian elders, inflamed his listeners, helped them to renounce earthly attachments, and thus laid the first beginnings of monastic life in Rome. One of the noble Roman women, who in her youth benefited from his instructions, Marcella, after a short marriage, completely devoting herself to God, was the first to found a monastic society, in which the ascetics she gathered not only engaged in spiritual deeds, but also studied the Word of God with extraordinary diligence. And this was a great victory in a city where ancient families still stubbornly stood for paganism, and even among those converted to Christianity, the miserable life of a monk was considered despicable 221. Two presbyters - monks who were with St. Athanasius in Rome, Ammonius and Isidore, also attracted the attention of everyone with their strict piety and wisdom. In a crowded city filled with magnificent buildings, they wanted to know nothing except the Church of St. Apostles 222. But no matter how great the respect for St. Athanasius of the shepherds and Christians of the Roman Church - nothing could replace his flock, which was lawlessly taken from him and the Arians corrupted with false teaching. From time to time sad news reached him about new violence they were committing. Thus, soon after his departure from Alexandra, Gregory opened a persecution against the bishops who did not agree to have communion with him, sparing neither years nor merits. Among the pastors there were confessors who suffered during the last persecution from the pagans. One of them, Potammon of Herakleia, who was deprived of an eye for the name of Christ, and at the Council of Tire more zealously defended his Archpastor than others 223, was so beaten that he died a short time later. Another, also a confessor, Sarapammon, was sent to prison. Many priests, young men, and virgins were scourged and beaten. Church content was taken away from Orthodox widows and orphans. During these persecutions, the sister of Father Afanasyev died in Alexandria: Grigory forbade her to be buried, and only under a false name could she be taken out of the house and buried. The military commander, Valan, helped him in all violence, until the judgment of God befell him, as V. Anthony predicted to him 224. Hearing about such suffering of his flock, could St. not grieve? Afanasy? - Finally, after three years of his removal from Alexandria, some hope appeared to him of returning to his throne. In 342, Constantius returned to Constantinople, and Constance arrived from Gaul to Milan. Since Constance patronized Orthodoxy, some bishops, depicting to him the present state of the Church, and not seeing any other way to help the matter other than a joint consideration of disputes with the eastern bishops, asked the Emperor to persuade his brother Constantius to convene an Ecumenical Council. Having heeded this request, and having already referred to Constantinople on this subject, Constance summoned St. Athanasius to his place in Mediolan. Knowing about his suffering and the failure of the Roman Council, he wanted to please the grieving exile with unexpected news about the undertaken relations, and, in anticipation of favorable consequences, he begged him to go with Hosea of ​​Cordoba to Gaul, which was already familiar to him, probably to organize the affairs of the local Church 225. Constantius gave in to his brother's demand. Sardica, 226 a city lying on the borders of the possessions of both Emperors, was appointed as the meeting place for the bishops. Bishops gathered from the East and West up to 170 people 227. The accused and the accusers, the persecuted and the persecutors came here. Some of the victims of the Arians presented the iron chains with which they were bound to the cathedral. From others who had already died in the persecution, their friends and relatives appeared with complaints against the persecutors. Reports arrived from different Churches about the violence inflicted on them by the Arians: where they used military force, where they used popular indignation, where they used threats to force the Orthodox to communicate with them. The desecration of virgins, the burning of churches, the imprisonment of church ministers - everything now demanded judgment against the offenders of right faith and piety 228 . The main leaders of the Arianists 229 then were those who acted at the Council of Tyre: Theodore of Irakli, Narcissus of Neronopolis, Menophant of Ephesus, Ursatius of Singidup and Valens of Murzia, and those who joined them: Stephen of Antioch, elevated to the place of Flacilla, Acacius of Caesarea, successor of Eusebius Pamphilus, and George of Laodicea, of the priests of Alexandria. Stephen, as the ruler of all the Churches of Syria, Menophantus, the leader in the Asian district, Theodore in the Thracian, Acacius, who was in charge of the Palestinian Churches (except Jerusalem), taking advantage of their hierarchical significance and power, attracted with them many bishops from their districts, who did not dare not support their voices. The Arians were joined by several Meletian bishops from Egypt, and among others Ischir, whom the Council of Alexandria did not recognize as a priest, was now installed as a bishop 230. As soon as the Arian bishops noticed the danger threatening them from the many accusations against them, they decided to announce their arrival to the council, but not take any part in it, and bound their party with various threats to certainly adhere to such a decision. In the city itself they were all in one house, and no one was allowed to leave it 231. When the time came to open the cathedral sessions, Hosea of ​​Cordoba, who arrived here from Gaul along with St. Athanasius, and other Orthodox bishops invited those who came from the East to participate in the affairs of the council. But they refused, using the pretext that the council had communion with Athanasius and other bishops, whom they recognized as deposed, and demanded that the council excommunicate these bishops from its communion. Having not received satisfaction, since the deposition of Athanasius and the other bishops they indicated was declared illegal at the Roman Council, they again repeated their complaints about the Western bishops’ anticipation of the right to change the conciliar definitions of the Eastern ones: whereas here the issue was not at all about the superiority of the West over the East, but about justice, which should be equally observed at the Eastern and Western councils. They proposed to carry out a new study in the Mareot area, in the case of the crushing of St. vessels 232: but the accusation drawn up on the basis of the previous research, under circumstances favorable only to the accusers, turned out to be insignificant. - In all this, one desire was revealed - to somehow evade the fair judgment of the council. Wanting to overcome the stubbornness of his opponents, Hosea agreed to the most lenient conditions. “Present your actual accusations against Athanasius,” the peace-loving shepherd repeatedly told them, “before the whole council, or to me in private, and, rest assured, if this man is found guilty, we will reject him. If he turns out to be innocent and exposes you to slander, and you then do not want to accept him, I will persuade him to retire with me to Spain.” And St. Athanasius agreed to this without contradiction 233. But his enemies, avoiding the danger that threatened them, wanted one thing, to leave the cathedral under some pretext, and therefore, declaring that they needed to go back to their place to celebrate the victory of Emperor Constantius over the Persians, they left Sardica. “Meanwhile, on the way, stopping in the Thracian city of Philippolis, they formed their own cathedral. In Sardica there remained from the Greeks the bishops of the Illyrian district, and from the Latins the Italians, the Spanish and a few from Gaul and Africa, numbering about a hundred; nevertheless, in terms of their dioceses, they belonged to the western half of the Empire, ruled by Constance. They were joined from the East by those seeking justice at the cathedral, and by two who had crossed over from the Arian side: Macarius of Palestine and Asterius of Arabia 234 . The Bishop of Rome himself, Julius, was not present here, but sent locum tenens - two presbyters. Honored by all for his years and merits, Hosea of ​​Cordoba took precedence at the council. The council had to deal with three main matters: 1) the question of faith, 2) complaints about St. Athanasius and other bishops accused by the Arians, and 3) accusations brought against the Arian bishops. 1. Some of those present at the council proposed to compose a new statement of faith, considering the Nicene symbol as insufficient; but the council rejected this proposal and decided to be content with the symbol compiled in Nicaea, as complete enough to reflect the heretics of that time, so as not to give rise to the compilation of new expositions in the future 235. 2. Although the innocence of Athanasius was sufficiently revealed by the very flight of his opponents: however, the council with all attention again examined all the accusations brought against him by the heretics, and, on the basis of their own acts and the testimony of the Egyptian bishops, exposed the slanderers, and acquitted the holy Archpastor of Alexandria. The council also heard accusations against other bishops condemned by the Arians: Marcellus of Ancyra and Asclepius of Gaza, and, having accepted explanations from them, recognized them as right-thinking and innocent. Finally, 3. The leaders of the Arian congregation, as being exposed by undoubted evidence for many injustices in relation to the Orthodox, and especially for the fact that they not only accepted into communion, but also raised to the ranks of the church those condemned and expelled along with Arius in Nicaea for heretical teaching, the council declared deposed, forbidding the Orthodox to have communion with them, and subjected the condemned to anathema 236. At the end of its actions, the council announced its decisions to all Churches in a district message. And the bishops of Gaul, Africa, Egypt, Italy, Cyprus and Palestine, who were not at the council, confirmed with their signatures their agreement with its definitions 237. The Council reported its actions to both Emperors, Constance and Constantius. Two bishops were sent to the East: Vincent of Capua and Euphrates of Cologne. Constance reinforced their report with his petition for the return of those unjustly expelled from their thrones, threatening, otherwise, to personally go to Alexandria and restore Athanasius’s long-desired attitude there, and disperse his hordes of enemies by force 238 . Meanwhile, the bishops who separated from the Sardician council, having established their own council in Philippopolis under the chairmanship of Stephen of Antioch, issued from themselves, under the name of the Sardician council, an extensive letter in which, repeating their slander against Athanasius and other bishops they had condemned, they reproached them for indignant the Church with their efforts to retain the thrones, and complained that the Western bishops, despite the definitions of the councils that were in the East, maintain communication with them. In conclusion, having written their statement of faith, they declared condemned both those whom they had previously rejected - Athanasius, Marcellus, Asclepius and Paul, the bishop of Constantinople, and the Western bishops who most favored them: Julius of Rome, Hosius of Cordoba, Protogenes of Sardica, etc. 239 . And whoever dared to express their disagreement with these definitions, a bitter fate awaited them: the Bishop of Adrianople, Lucius, was sent to prison in chains; ten people from the citizens of Adrianople, for resistance to them, by order of the Emperor, were put to death. The bishop of Palestine and Arabia, who went over to the side of the Sardician Council, were also subjected to exile. A command was sent to Alexandria: if Athanasius or one of the exiled Orthodox presbyters appears there, the judge has the right to take his life. In Antioch itself, the bishop of the city, Stephen, whom the Sardician council declared deposed, attempted with dishonor and slander to deprive the Emperor of the power of attorney of the bishops sent from the council, introducing into their bedchamber, through his devoted servant, a shameful woman. But the slander was discovered, and the one who intended to harm the honor of others was himself deprived of the throne 240. Enlightened by the latest - extremely shameful deed of Stephen of Antioch, seeing the wicked readiness of the Arians to take all sorts of base measures to achieve their goals, and fearing the threats of his brother, Constantius finally sent to St. Athanasius is invited to return to Alexandria. St. Athanasius was then in Aquileia 241. But he did not suddenly decide to follow this invitation. Perhaps he was disturbed by rumors about formidable orders sent to Alexandria. And what was it like to go there when Gregory dominated there? Waiting for more favorable circumstances, at the call of Constance, he went again to Gaul. Disturbed by this close connection between St. Athanasius and the Western Emperor, Constantius wrote to the Saint of Alexandria for the second and third time, calling him to his see; He also wrote to Constance asking him to let him go to Alexandria. In his last letter, he informed that he had been waiting for Athanasius for a whole year, and that he would not allow any innovations in Alexandria, nor the ordination of a new bishop: Gregory had already died. At the same time they wrote to St. Athanasius and many close associates of Constantius, whom the Saint could trust more 242. Then, finally, St. Afanasy decided to leave his refuge in the West. Having said goodbye to his crowned patron, whom he had seen for the last time, he stopped in Rome to say goodbye to Julius. The Pope sent with him a message of welcome to the Church of Alexandria, in which, glorifying the exploits of Athanasius and the fidelity of love for him of the flock, tempted by many sufferings, he rejoiced at the solemn return of the Saint of Alexandria 243. Indeed, the return of St. Athanasius 244 was a triumph not only for him and his Church, but also for the universal Church. Like a conqueror, the humble shepherd now walked from the western borders of the empire to the eastern. Quietly, without violence, he subjugated his opponents, who brought fire and sword into his Church. His innocence was recognized by outside judges at two crowded councils: Rome and Sardicia. His holy life and patience tied both the crown bearer and the shepherds of the entire West to him. The Alexandrian Church perceived in him a protective Archpastor, who for about six years wandered away from her, driven out by violence, but never abandoned concern for her liberation from the false shepherds who were destroying the flock of Christ. The universal Church still needed his courage and fearlessness in the upcoming new struggle against the enemies of Orthodoxy - it needed his thunderous word against the preachers of lies; the faithful shepherds of Christ, the councils of the West and the East needed his name as a symbol of Orthodoxy. The present has already paved the way for future merits. Athanasius was now recognized by East and West as the invincible defender of that sacred truth on which the Lord created His Church. The enemies of Athanasius themselves were afraid of his triumph and began to seek an alliance with him. Ursacius and Valens, formerly zealous assistants of Eusebius of Nicomedia in his machinations against Athanasius, now submitted to the Bishop of Rome, Julius, an announcement that all the accusations that they had previously brought against Athanasius were mere slander, that they willingly wish to be in communion with him, and condemn the Arian teaching. Then they wrote to Athanasius that they had peace and church fellowship with him 245 . At the request of Constantius, St. Athanasius had to first appear in Antioch. The favorable reception at the court of the Sovereign, it seemed, was supposed to assure the Archpastor of Alexandria that from now on all previous misunderstandings between him and the Emperor were over, that the injustices that the defender of Orthodoxy suffered would no longer be repeated. The consciousness of the rightness of his cause and the desire to more firmly establish the peace of the Church inspired St. Athanasius thought of asking the Emperor for permission, personally, in the presence of the enemies themselves, to refute all the slander that they had leveled against him. Constantius assured that there was no need for this, and promised with an oath that from now on he would not listen to any ideas of the slanderers. St. Athanasius complained about the order issued on behalf of the Sovereign, which threatened the bishop of Alexandria with death and took away some rights from the clergy who were committed to him. Constantius tried to make amends for everything with new orders. He wrote to the bishops of Egypt and the clergy of Alexandria that Athanasius, by the command of God and by determination of the supreme authority, was returning again to his fatherland and to his Church; - everything that was decreed against those who had contact with him should be consigned to oblivion; the rights that the Orthodox clergy have enjoyed since ancient times are again asserted for them 246. And the government will henceforth consider the best proof of rightness for everyone - communication with Afanasy. – The Emperor wrote to the people of Alexandria so that, leaving aside their differences, everyone would accept their Archpastor with respect and submission, threatening, otherwise, punishment according to the laws. He let the ruler of Egypt know that all previous commands against Athanasius were canceled, and sent a special official to take them back 247. So Constantius, apparently enlightened by the strong ideas of his brother, wanted to compensate for the previous insults inflicted on the Church of Alexandria and its Archpastor. But he was not strong enough to completely free himself from the Arian party. Returning the throne to Athanasius, Constantius at the same time asked him to cede at least one church in Alexandria to the Arians. But the zealous guardian of his flock replied that he could accept this offer only on the condition that evenly, although one church was ceded to the Orthodox in Antioch, where the Arians then ruled. Such a mutual concession, however, could not be pleasant for the Arians: because they were more afraid of losing than hoping to gain. In Alexandria, under the watchful rule of St. Athanasius, they could not promise themselves great success, while in Antioch a significant number of adherents of Orthodoxy, taking advantage of tolerance, could increase even more and expel the Arians from themselves. Therefore, Constantius took back his proposal 248. Having parted with the Emperor, St. Athanasius directed his path to Alexandria, through Syria and Palestine. In Jerusalem, the words of the Bishop of Arabia, Asterius, were justified, who, even at the Council of Sardicia, said that in the East many bishops were disposed to an alliance with the champion of Orthodoxy. The Bishop of Jerusalem, Maxim, although he did not then have hierarchical rights over the other Palestinian dioceses, gathered those of like minds in the faith with St. Athanasius the shepherds to testify to him their joy about the change in his fate - and together with them he greeted the Church of Alexandria with a message in which he glorified the return of the Archpastor to her as a miracle of God's goodness 249. Finally, the Archpastor, long awaited by everyone, again appeared among the flock (October 21, 346). We are not talking about a crowded meeting, about cries of popular joy: what is most remarkable is the moral effect that the victorious return of Athanasius to his throne had on the Christians of Alexandria. The Alexandrian Church was renewed in spirit; A special zeal for piety was visible everywhere. Church meetings were attended more diligently; many people appeared who wanted to devote their entire lives to monastic deeds; With extraordinary zeal, donations were made to support the poor. In a word, every house, by the piety of those living in it and the prayers sent to God in it, could be called a church, says St. Afanasy. Everything came to life, just as nature comes back to life after a cold winter. The flow of spiritual life, constrained by violence, now opened up more abundantly, the more it had been delayed before. Whoever was carried away by deceit or coercion to the side of the Arians, came to his Archpastor with repentance and condemnation of the heretical teaching. The slanderers fell silent. Enemies tried to seem like friends. Deep peace has settled in the Church 250. But for how long? While Constance was alive, no one dared to disturb the Archbishop of Alexandria. But the patron of Athanasius, in January 350, was killed by the indignant Magnentius. Affairs with Persia, which delayed Constantius in the East, and the remoteness favored the views of the power-hungry. For about three and a half years, he held the title of Caesar. Finally, Constantius managed to disperse his followers, and Magnentius ended his career with suicide. As soon as Constance died, the enemies of Athanasius, deposed at the Council of Sardicia, took courage and resumed their attacks on the Archbishop of Alexandria. But Constantius, not yet confident of the success of his enterprise against the rebel, restrained their insane jealousy until he had time to completely overthrow his enemy. The Arians resumed their previous slander against Athanasius, already refuted at the Council of Alexandria, Rome and Sardicia, rejected by Constantius himself, and invented new ones. In order to present with all clarity the correctness of his cause to the whole world, in refutation of previous slander, St. Athanasius decided to publish his Apology, in which each of the definitions of the councils and epistles of bishops, from the letters of the Emperors themselves to Athanasius and about Athanasius, could see his innocence and all the machinations of his enemies. He speaks little of himself in this apology; but in all points he justifies himself with the words of outside witnesses and judges. Thus, he clearly proved that his case did not require a new trial; because it has already been discussed not once, not twice, but many times 251, and that this trial was carried out without bias 252. - Constantius himself, fearing that new insults would not produce disastrous movements among the people committed to their Archpastor, soon after the death of his brother, hastened to assure St. Athanasius is disposed towards him so that he would not be embarrassed by any unfavorable rumors. “Our firm intention,” he wrote to Athanasius, is that you, in accordance with our will, always be a bishop in your place” 253. He repeated such assurances subsequently, up to three times, and even sent special officials to Alexandria with orders to the local authorities so that no one would dare to plot intrigues against Athanasius 254. While calming Athanasius with his letters, Constantius at the same time listened to all the suggestions of his enemies. Valens, one of those two bishops who renounced their accusations against Athanasius as slander, with his prediction of success in the battle against Magnentius at Murza 255, acquired a special power of attorney from the Emperor, as a godly husband 256. This bishop, together with his accomplice Ursatius, was now not ashamed to announce that his abdication was forced by circumstances, that, having the diocese in the possession of the Emperor Constance, he was afraid of the consequences of the verdict of the Council of Sardicia, which pronounced condemnation on the main champions of Arianism 257. Taking advantage of the gullibility of Constantius, with such accomplices, the Arians armed him against Athanasius with new slander. We saw that St. Athanasius enjoyed the favor of Constance, and with his assistance he returned to his throne. The enemies of Athanasius now tried to convince Constantius that Athanasius, in secret conversations with the Western Emperor, sowed enmity between the brothers - while Athanasius never visited Constance alone, but always with the bishop of the city where he lived - and could point to witnesses to all his relations with him, in which there was nothing unkind towards Constantius. Magnentius, having proclaimed himself emperor, sent an embassy to Constantius, consisting of two bishops of Gaul and two secular dignitaries, with a proposal to recognize him as emperor of the West. Those sent, traveling to the East, were in Alexandria with Athanasius. His enemies took advantage of this opportunity to slander him in relations with the rebel: while one crime of Magnentius - the murder of Constance, the patron of Afanasyev - already made any agreement between the Archbishop of Alexandria and the bloodthirsty rebel incredible, and Athanasius could testify, who were sent at the meeting with him, by the city leaders, that then, as a faithful subject of his Sovereign, performed a prayer with the people “for the salvation of the most pious Emperor Constantius.” In Alexandria, due to the crowded city churches, at the insistence of the people, Athanasius allowed, on Easter, to perform divine services in the newly built church at the expense of the Emperor, before it was solemnly consecrated. The enemies of Athanasius accused him of not having, out of disdain for the church builder, reported at the time the need to consecrate the newly built church with decent solemnity; and moreover, they accused him of allowing himself to serve in an unconsecrated building. Meanwhile, everyone knew that the building was not finished, and the demand of the people appeared suddenly; then there could be no solemn consecration. The very requirement, due to the large number of people gathering for prayer, especially on Easter, deserved respect; and it was much more decent to perform Christian worship in a fenced building than in an open place, in the desert, where the people wanted to rush, and where Christian and pagan sacraments could be seen 258. Thus, inventing the unprecedented, reinterpreting the past, the malicious Arians, with their political accusations, attempted to take away from Athanasius the last pillar of security that he could find in the repeated promises of Constantius to retain the throne of the Alexandrian Church for him until his death. Constantius remained silent for the time being. Meanwhile, Athanasius' enemies were looking for new accusations against him at the church court. Bishop of Rome, Julius, defender of St. Athanasius, died (May 22, 352). His successor Liverius received new complaints, new slander against Athanasius from the Arian bishops. What they consisted of is definitely not known. But to refute them, the Egyptian bishops also had to write a defense of their Archpastor. Liverius proposed both accusatory and defensive messages at the Council of Italian bishops, and the Council did not hesitate to prefer the testimony of the majority to the slander of a few, known ill-wishers of Athanasius 259. Unfortunately, St. Athanasius did not have such success in justifying himself before Constantius. Confused by rumors that the fate that recently befell St. Paul of Constantinople, who was again expelled by the Arians from Constantinople and imprisoned in Kukuz, he decided to send (May 17, 353) to Milan, where the Emperor was then, five of his bishops and three presbyters of Alexandria, to explain his actions. Among those sent was Serapion, Bishop of Tmuite, friend of Athanasius and the Great Anthony. But four days had not passed before the official Montanus arrived in Alexandria from the Emperor with a letter to Athanasius. Constantius wrote that he did not need any intermediaries for explanation, but allowed Athanasius, as if at his request, to appear at court himself. Athanasius was surprised by such a letter: he did not send any request for permission to be with the Emperor, and the state of affairs at that time did not allow him to leave Alexandria: because the Arians were waiting for this only to take his throne by one of their own. Rightly guessing that a forged letter was presented to the Emperor in his name, and seeing that there was no direct command to be with him, Afanasy decided to stay at home, explaining only in the letter his misunderstanding and his readiness to be where he commanded. And this very thing was presented by the enemies of Athanasius to Constantius as a new accusation against him, as if he persisted in fulfilling the will of the Sovereign 260. But the time finally approached when the feats of the Afanasyevs’ enemies could well be revealed. Magnesium died (Aug. 11, 353). Constantius, the sole ruler of East and West, could now do whatever he wanted or whatever they desired. And in the same year, or at the beginning of the next, a council was appointed in Arles, where the Emperor himself was, not to consider the charges brought against Athanasius, but to depose him. A direct command was given that the sentence pronounced about him by the Arian bishops in the East should be accepted by the Western bishops. Anyone who did not agree to fulfill this requirement was threatened with exile 261. Peacock, bishop Trier, was not afraid of the threat - and was exiled to prison 262. But the papal legates had the weakness to yield to the illegal demand, to the sincere regret of St. Liveria 263. Wanting to improve matters, the Bishop of Rome asked the Emperor to appoint a new council. Constantius, having in mind to attract even more bishops to his side, willingly agreed to this request. A council was appointed in Milan (355). To appear at this council meant dooming oneself in advance to the feat of confession, or shamefully agreeing to betray the truth. Not many chose the first venerable lot: Leontius of Antioch, Ursatius and Valens, who managed all the affairs of the council, managed to seduce most of them to their side with threats and promises. Among the first, Eusebius of Vercellus, Dionysius of Milan, and Lucifer of Calaria held their place. Eusebius of Vercelli, at the summons of Constantius, appeared at the council when, already there, under the influence of the Arian party, decisions were made that were contrary to truth and justice 264. To the demand that he sign the condemnation of Athanasius, he replied: “First you need to agree in faith. I know that some of those present here are infected with heresy.” Following this, presenting the Symbol of Nicea, he promised to fulfill everything that was not required of him, if only everyone agreed to sign this Symbol. Dionysius of Milan was the first to take the paper to testify his agreement with the Nicene confession, when Valens snatched the pen and paper from his hands, and the meeting ended in general confusion. The people present in the church where all this was happening began to express displeasure at the insult to their faith. Then the Arians decided to move the meetings from the church to the palace 265. Following this, from the palace, a new statement of faith was announced to the people in the name of Constantius, compiled by the Arian bishops, in the form of an edict, or message. It was filled with wicked opinions, meanwhile, the Arians presented it as inspired from above, and wanted to replace the Nicene confession with it 266. Setting the pretext for the pacification of the State and the Church 267, they sought by all means so that this presentation would be accepted by everyone, and Athanasius condemned by everyone, and rejected. At the resumed meetings, Constantius himself was present in the palace, secretly, behind a curtain. But nothing frightened the courageous defenders of the fatherly faith, nothing made them waver in their unwavering loyalty to its most zealous champion at the Council of Nicaea, and after the Council for thirty years, who continuously fought for it against enemies. Unable to bear the bold speeches that came especially from the lips of Lucifer, Constantius abandoned his modesty, and when the dishonesty of Athanasius’ accusers was pointed out to him, he directly declared to the council: “I myself am the accuser of Athanasius; for me, believe them.” “It is contrary to church rules to condemn someone who is absent and enter into communication with heretics,” objected the firm bishops. “My will,” answered Constantius, “this is the rule for you!” The Syrian bishops never contradict me on this. Either obey my demand or I will send you into exile.” Finally, irritated by the refusal to sign the condemnation of Athanasius, Constantius went so far as to draw his sword against the defenders of the truth 268 . Eusebius, Dionysius, Lucifer were indeed exiled to different cities of the East, in captivity. The same fate befell other bishops who did not want to renounce communion with Athanasius. Officials were sent to the cities demanding that the bishops sign the issued decree. Local civilian commanders were ordered to do the same under threat of punishment 269 . Constance wanted to take away all protection from Athanasius for the future. He did not leave Bishop alone. Roman, Liveria. First, he sent his eunuch to him with gifts to win over to his side, and when this measure was not successful, he summoned him to Milan. But even here he could not shake the archpastor, who pleased the lot of those expelled from their thrones. “Agree in favor of peace, sign, and you will return to Rome,” so Constantius told him, concluding his convictions. Liverius replied: “I have already said goodbye to my brothers in Rome.” “I give you three days to think,” added Constantius. - “Three days, or three months, will not change my decision. Send wherever you want 270,” said the bishop. Roman, and suffered a common fate along with the other defenders of Athanasius, although he did not survive the feat of confession to the end. – Centenarian Hosea in distant Spain did not escape persecution either. Constantius wrote to him repeatedly to distract him from communication with the Archbishop of Alexandria; twice summoned him to convince him: but the elder knew whom he was protecting, he saw what the plans of Athanasius’ enemies were aiming at. “Do not trust the accomplices of Ursacius and Valens,” he wrote to Constantius, “the issue here is not about Athanasius, but about their heresy. Not only do I not want to be in agreement with the Arians, but I also curse their heresy; - I do not sign the condemnation of Athanasius, whom we, the Roman Church and the entire council (of Sardicia) recognized as pure” 271. The undefeated elder was detained in Sirmium,” and here for about a year, kept at a distance from his flock, deceived by enemies and the ailments of old age, he was inclined to sign the non-Orthodox symbol, but even then he did not agree to condemn Athanasius. While a general retreat from Athanasius was being prepared in the West by threats, violence and deceit, the Imperial notary Diogenes appeared in Alexandria in the summer, demanding that the Bishop of Alexandria leave his Church 272 - without, however, presenting any command from Constantius. Although one could guess from whom such an order came; however, St. Athanasius, bearing in mind Constantius’s previous written assurances that he would retain the department until the end of his life, could not leave him at the official’s mere verbal demand, especially since Diogenes himself did not appear to him 273 . For their part, the people and even the city authorities were also not inclined to renounce their bishop - and Diogenes, after four months of insistent demands, had to leave 274. Two weeks later, Syrian entered Alexandria (Jan. 5, 356), commanding the troops located in Egypt, and was ordered to assist in the measures taken against Athanasius 275 . But since there was no direct order to him to remove Athanasius from Alexandria, Constantius either still had so much conscience that he did not suddenly decide to contradict his previous commands, or his negotiations with the Western bishops were not yet over, then matters remained in the same position. Meanwhile, the maintenance of military forces in Alexandria, the friendly treatment of Syrian with famous Arians, the disclosure of the Arians that they had a letter from Constantius about the expulsion of Athanasius - all this did not bode well. Another month passed in anxious anticipation. Suddenly, one night (from February 8 to 9), when the people, together with their archpastor, were in the church of Theona due to the advancing heel, Sirian moved up to five thousand armed soldiers to this church, and suddenly surrounded the assembly of worshipers. St. Athanasius, knowing against whom this attack was directed, and not wanting to endanger his flock, ordered the deacon to read Psalm (135) and the people to chant: for His mercy endures forever, meanwhile everyone should go home. The soldiers were already breaking down the church doors; but the people did not want to leave their Shepherd as a sacrifice to their enemies. The soldiers burst into the church, shot several arrows at the worshipers, drew their swords, surrounded the sanctuary, scattered throughout the church: the people did not disperse. Then St. Athanasius ordered a prayer to be said (probably a prayer of absolution), and when most of them had already left, and others were leaving, the monks and clerics carried him away with them. Amid the confusion caused by the rushing warriors and the shooting of arrows, several virgins lost their lives, others were robbed, others were violated 276 . But the one whom Syrian thought to capture into his hands, guarded by the right hand of God, passed unharmed among the soldiers looking for him, and, following the command of God, hid himself until the wrath passed by (Is. 26:20). The soldiers searched for him for a long time in other churches, but all in vain. He withdrew completely from Alexandria into the desert. Meanwhile, the people did not hesitate to complain to the city authorities about the riots and murders committed in the church, considering Sirian’s actions to be completely unauthorized. “If there is a command to persecute us,” said the complainers, “we are all ready to become martyrs. If there is no command from the Sovereign, we ask the eparch and all those in charge so that this does not happen in the future. We also ask that they not give us another bishop: to the death we are ready to stand for the most venerable Athanasius, whom God gave us from the beginning.”277 St. was in the same bewilderment regarding Syrian’s actions. Afanasy. Everything was finally explained. Four months after his removal from Alexandria (June 10), 278 Comita Heraclius arrived with an order to the Senate and people of Alexandria to send loyal people to pursue Athanasius if they did not want the Emperor to consider them his enemies. Constantius wrote that he only temporarily, out of respect for the friendship of his late brother, returned Athanasius to them, although he himself repeatedly, even after the death of Constance, assured Athanasius of the unchangeability of his disposition towards him. Supplementing what was said in the letter, Heraclius announced that the Emperor commanded that the churches be handed over to the Arians, and after that he demanded from the senators, even if they were pagans, a written promise that they would accept whomever the Emperor sent to them as bishop 279 . As a result of these commands, the great church of Alexandria (ἡ ἐ ν τ ῷ Καισαρε ί ῳ) 280, with the help of the pagans, was immediately occupied by the Arians 281. The holy meal, the episcopal throne, the presbyteral altar, the veils - everything that could be taken out of the church was taken out and, as if unclean, burned before the gates of the church. The pagans rejoiced. To find Athanasius, a strict house-to-house search was carried out: all dwellings, gardens and even tombs were examined. Athanasius was not found; but his enemies took advantage of this to inflict a new insult on those who were loyal to him. During the inspection, much was stolen; others have their houses sealed 282 . With the confiscation of churches from the Orthodox, the Orthodox clergy were also persecuted. Those who did not want to enter into communication with the Arians, following their Archpastor, had to flee from Alexandria; but their homes, left to their relatives, were also taken away from them. Those who were captured were subjected to torture and sent to the Arabian mines, where the harmful climate soon ended the lives of the unfortunate 283. Defenseless virgins suffered abuse and oppression. The beggars who ate at the churches were dispersed, and it was even forbidden to give them alms. This is how the flock of St. suffered. Afanasia! The times of pagan persecutors repeated for her, and she was deprived of a comforter 284. The position of the Alexandrian Church became even worse when the new bishop George arrived in Alexandria (February 24, 357). He was a man without education and a rude disposition; He once served, in economic matters, with the army 285, and now he was elected by the Arians in Antioch to replace St. Athanasius 286. According to even a pagan, he only knew how to please Constantius with denunciations and imaginary zeal for the benefits of the state 287; but, in fact, he only observed his own benefits. - Having appeared in Alexandria, during the great Pentecost, accompanied by the military leader Sebastian, he did not hesitate to intensify the persecution of the Orthodox. After Easter, new house-to-house searches were carried out. A week after Pentecost, with the same military leader and three thousand armed soldiers, George rushed towards the Christians, who at that time, according to custom, were praying in the cemetery. Several people were captured and a rampage began. They burned virgins over a burning fire, flogged men with needle rods, forcing them to accept the Arian confession; those who died in these sufferings were not allowed to be buried, and those who remained alive were exiled through sandy deserts to remote oases 288 . The zeal of the monks for their former Archpastor brought the fury of the persecutors upon the monasteries: they were ruined, and the monks were threatened with fire 289 . Finally, persecution was opened against all the bishops of Egypt who did not want to change their Orthodox confession. Sixteen of them, including ten installed under the predecessor of St. Athanasius, Alexandra, were sent to oases 290, to border deserts and to mines. To increase the difficulties of the journey, everyone was assigned the most distant stay from his previous residence, so that not all of the old elders were able to even reach the place of their imprisonment, and died on the way. Up to thirty other bishops were dispersed and their houses were plundered 291. In place of those imprisoned and expelled, people were chosen who promised to be of one mind with the Arians. They did not look at the fact that some of those elected had not yet been baptized, did not know what Christianity was, and had not received Christian instruction; that others sought ecclesiastical degrees only for selfish reasons, bearing in mind the advantages granted to the clergy. Such shepherds were given to the dioceses by the longtime friends of the Arians - the Meletians, who themselves, in their separation from the Church, had become coarse and had no education. Thus, - let's say in the words of St. Athanasius, - all of Egypt was defiled: hitherto only Orthodox teaching dominated here; now Arianism 292 was preached everywhere. Alexandria became a refuge for the Arians. Georgiev's friend and adviser, Aetius, nicknamed by his contemporaries ἄ θεος - atheist, moved here, and after him - Aetius' student Eunomius - who brought the beginnings of the Arian teaching to the last extreme of wickedness, and were the founders of the Anomean sect 293. Rejoicing at the successful fulfillment of his plans, Constantius congratulated the Alexandrians on having such an archpastor as George, and extolled his virtues to the skies, mocking at the same time - blinded by the hatred and slander of the Arians - the wandering Athanasius as a deceiver and villain. He described St. in the same hateful terms. Archpastor and in a letter to the rulers of Abyssinia, warning them in case of his appearance in that country, and demanding that he appointed the first Abyssinian bishop, Frumentius, for instruction and approval, to Alexandria to George 294. They even said that a price had been set for the head of St. Athanasia 295. It is difficult to read these letters, in which a feeling irritated by slander is so shamefully revealed - indignation, undeserved, goes beyond all limits of moderation - and an ungodly deed is presented as a matter of justice! To somewhat explain to ourselves such pitiful blindness in the soul of the persecutor, let us quote here the words of St. Afanasia. “Comparing the letters of Constantius,” he says, “I find that the Emperor does not judge on the merits of the matter, but is moved only by the thoughts of those around him, and has no judgment of his own. That’s why he writes - and then repents of what he wrote; repenting, he becomes irritated and grieves again; and doesn't know what to do. All this shows his lack of prudence. Such a person is justly worthy of every pity: free in rank and name, he becomes a slave of the wicked, dragging him at will 296." It is much more difficult to see the plight of the Church into which the gradually increasing domination of the Arians led it. Until Constance's death, evil was limited to the East. Western Orthodox bishops, under the patronage of the pious Sovereign, fraternally supported the unshakable defenders of the Orthodox faith in the East itself. The death of Constance took away this barrier to the spreading evil, this support for the persecuted shepherds of the East. Now in the West, councils are being established in which Arianism prevails; violence forces obedience to their decisions; those who disobey are expelled. And in the East, restored shepherds are forced to give up their thrones to false shepherds. But the voice of truth did not stop. Violence could not make error universal. The Lord turned the moment of the very triumph of the wicked to their overthrow. Expelled shepherds, writes St. Athanasius, turned their very imprisonment in favor of their service. Passing through countries and cities, they preached the true faith, although they were in bonds, and cursed the Aryan heresy. Thus, what happened was the opposite of what the persecutors wanted. The further the place of imprisonment was, the more the disgust for the Arians increased, and the imprisonment itself was a sermon against their wickedness. Who, looking at those passing by, was not surprised at them as confessors, and did not turn away from the persecutors 297? – But even in those churches that the Arians took over, attachment to the Apostolic and paternal faith remained. The Arians did everything in favor of their heresy, writes St. Athanasius, - but in every church they observe the faith they have learned, wait for their mentors, and reject the Christ-hating heresy, and everyone runs away from it like a snake 298. The intense persecution against the truth caused the most enlightened pastors of the East and West to examine in detail the grounds on which the Arians thought to establish their false teaching, and this exposed, before everyone, their contradiction to the Word of God and the general faith of the Church. The most significant accusatory works against the Arians, St. Athanasius in the East, and Hilaria in the West (12 books about the Holy Trinity), belong to the time of the exile of these shepherds. Finally, amid the victory that the Arians thought they would triumph over Orthodoxy, an irreconcilable division opened up in their society. Even at the beginning of Arianism, as noted above, not all bishops who supported Arius thought equally wickedly about the Son of God. During the struggle of the Arians with the Orthodox, this difference in way of thinking did not cease, but from time to time it was revealed in symbols issued at different councils; It was only restrained by the influence of the leaders of the Arian party. Now, when the defenders of the Nicene confession were considered already defeated, the Arians and Semi-Arians entered into a dispute among themselves, trying, before each other, to win over the voice of the Emperor. The blasphemous teaching of Arius found strict defenders in Aetius and Eunomius, who not only rejected the consubstantiality of the Son of God with the Father, but also did not want to recognize Him as similar to the Father in essence, which was allowed by the Semi-Arians, led by Basil, Bishop. ankirskiy The councils of Sirmium 2nd (357), Ancyra (358), Sirmium 3rd (358), Seleucia (359) and Constantinople (360) were a field in which one party competed with another, in the presence, sometimes, of Orthodox bishops. Such a division in Arian society, the base means that one party used to gain the upper hand over the other, the extreme wickedness of the Arians, the gradual rapprochement of the semi-Arians with the Orthodox - all this undermined the heresy: while the defenders of the Nicene symbol, with their unanimity, suffering, unchanging fidelity to the teachings of St. More and more fathers discovered that only they preserved the Divine truth, always one and the same. Having briefly pointed out a number of these events that have a close connection with the cause defended by St. Athanasius, and with his subsequent actions, we return to the story of the great Archpastor of Alexandria. Forced to leave Alexandria by force, he did not separate in spirit from his flock, but considered it his duty to take care of their welfare, as before, warning them against dangers and comforting them in sorrows. On the other hand, he saw the need to refute the slander with which they wanted to denigrate his name before the Emperor. Finally, jealousy for the truth prompted him to use the weapon of words against her triumphant enemies. These are the activities to which he devoted his time in his solitude. Persecuted by the Arians, St. Athanasius found refuge in the Egyptian deserts. He was sheltered here by the love of hermits faithful to their Archpastor. But then, he recognized that it was best to go personally to the Emperor, who was then in the West, to justify himself to him in the slander spread by the Arians, and to explain to him the true reasons for his removal from Alexandria. He still did not believe that such injustices could be committed by the will of the Emperor, who assured him of his favor. Athanasius had already set out on the road 299, left Egypt, perhaps reached Italy, and learned the true state of affairs after the Council of Milan: he learned about the violence to which Liverius and other Western bishops were subjected, about the government’s intention to offer all bishops a new Arian symbol for signing, and about the appointment of a new Bishop George in Alexandria. Then, not expecting anything good from personal explanations with Constantius, he decided to return to his deserts, and at the same time sent a circular letter 300 to all the bishops of Egypt, in which he warned them against new plans on the part of the Arians, urging them to invariably adhere to the symbol approved at the Council of Nicaea. Concluding this message, he wrote about his enemies: “until now they do not abandon the desire to shed our blood; but this does not bother me at all: for I know and am confident that those who endure will receive a reward from the Savior, that if you, like the Fathers, remain patient, be an image of the flock and reject the strange and alien invention of the wicked, then you will have the consolation of saying: I have kept the faith; and receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love Him.” – The fruit of this appeal was that the Egyptian bishops agreed to endure everything rather than join the Arian community. Returning to his desert dwellers, St. Afanasy had to seek safety in complete obscurity. Therefore, sometimes he left his monastic shelter and lived with animals 301. “And we cannot see the brethren,” he wrote to one bishop who was in exile, like him. - The Lord is my witness that from the time we were persecuted, I could not see my relatives. For what do the Arians not do? They guard on the roads, watch those leaving and leaving the city (Alexandria, where his relatives were), inspect ships, wander through the deserts, search homes, interrogate the brethren” 302. Despite all this, the Christians of Alexandria, devoted to their Shepherd, found means to provide him with the necessary information about their situation. When he learned that all the churches in Alexandria had been taken away from the Orthodox, in a consoling message he pointed out to them such advantages that no enemies could take from them. “They have buildings,” wrote St. Athanasius, you have the Apostolic faith. They own the place, but are alien to the true faith; and your place has been taken away, but there is faith in you. Let's consider what is more important: place or faith? It is clear that your faith is yours. Who has lost more, or who has more? Is it the one who has the place, or the one who has the faith? It is also a good place when the Apostolic Faith is preached in it. A place is also holy when the Saint dwells there... God will return the churches to us - we believe this: and now doesn’t faith replace them for us” 303? – The Shepherd was particularly concerned about defenseless virgins, whom the raging enemies subjected to abuse, wounds, death, and were not even allowed to bury the dead. St. Athanasius wrote several consoling messages to them. Unfortunately, they did not reach us 304. While consoling others, the great Athanasius himself did not seek consolation from people, but demanded only justice from them. Having not had time to personally explain to the Emperor the injustice of those accusations for which the Arians wanted to present him as an enemy of public welfare, he now sent his apology from the desert to the Emperor 305. Here he revealed his relationship with the Emperor Constance and the troublemaker Magnentius, explained the matter of serving in the church established by the Sovereign until its solemn consecration, and why he did not appear to him, having received permission, which, however, he did not ask for 306. Without offending Constantius with even a shadow of suspicion - so that he could believe slander, so that such unjust commands could come from him - complaining in everything about his enemies - the Arians, Athanasius showed his persecutor the easiest way out of the position in which his slanderers had placed him in relation to the defender of Orthodoxy. “I beg you,” he wrote in conclusion, “accept this apology, and return the bishops and other clergy to their fatherland and to their churches, so that in this way the deceit of the slanderers will be revealed, so that you yourself, Sovereign, now and on the day of judgment, will have the boldness to say to our Lord and Savior and the King of kings Jesus Christ: I have not destroyed anyone from yours. That's who plotted everyone's intrigues! And I was struck by the painful death and torment of the virgins and other insults inflicted on Christians, and returned those imprisoned to their churches.” Following this apology, St. Athanasius published another, in which he justified his flight from Alexandria. The persecutors wanted to take away from him the glory of his confessional feat, accusing him of cowardice, and thereby wanted to undermine the trust of the Orthodox children of the Church in him. To refute such a reproach, one had only to point out to the slanderers the violence that they inflicted on the churches in the East and West. “No one runs away from kind and meek people.” On the other hand, St. Athanasius presented in his apology examples from Old Testament and New Testament history of prudent avoidance of dangers. That he did not change the shepherd's duty to protect his flock was also proven by the fact that he was the last to leave the church when he invaded it with the Sirian warriors. – What is also noteworthy for us in this apology is the judgment of the Saint of Alexandria about his former friends, whom the cruelty of suffering defeated and forced for a time to yield to their persecutors. While he openly defeats powerful opponents, he at the same time spares the weakness of his friends. He did not say a single word in reproach to Hosea of ​​Cordoba, he only points out his merits to the Church and his dignity, and if he mentions his unfortunate fall, then he turns it into guilt for the persecutors themselves. Zeal for Orthodoxy never extinguished the spirit of peace and love in the Archpastor 307. Of the Fathers of the Nicene Council, remaining alone, guarding the house of God, guardian of the right faith betrayed by the fathers, St. Athanasius felt a great responsibility before the Church for the preservation of this sacred pledge. Realizing the full importance of the shaken truth, having learned through teaching and life that faith in the Son of God, Consubstantial with the Father, the Savior of the world, is the only basis of true hope for a poor person in this life and the future, having been convinced by the word of Christ and reflection that the whole Church is truly based and established on this rock, with this faith everything is firm in Christian teaching and in church institutions, without it everything fluctuates - St. Athanasius recognized the duty of a grateful heart to his Savior and Lord, the duty of love for his fellow men to oppose with all his might the false teaching that tried to eclipse this faith. This was proven by his entire life, subject to suffering, solely for his faith. If he had agreed to change his faith, all persecution would have ended by itself. Like-minded people of Eusebius,” he wrote to his bishops, “as you yourself know, offered me a choice: either agree with them, albeit feignedly, in wickedness, or expect attacks from them; but I did not want to pester them, and recognized that it was better to be persecuted from them than to imitate the example of Judas 308. All that remained was St. Athanasius to complete his feat: the word with which he defended the confessed truth at councils, in debates with heretics, and in the pulpit before his flock, to communicate to the whole Church, to strengthen it in writing for subsequent times; to consider in detail the imaginary evidence with which the heretics seduced the inexperienced, and to reveal their powerlessness, to reveal in full light the foundations of true faith in the Divinity of the Only Begotten Son of God Jesus Christ. Special cases, to refute certain opinions of heretics, were presented to St. Afanasy several times before. Sometimes in a sermon, in the interpretation of Holy Scripture, sometimes in letters, at the request of his friends, he entered into an examination of the evidence brought by heretics, as we see from the few experiments that have reached us. Thus, explaining the words of Jesus Christ: all things have been handed over to Me by My Father, he refuted the false conclusion drawn from here by the Arians in favor of their heresy 309. – The Arians reproached the Council of Nicaea for including in its confession about the Son of God the words: essence, consubstantial, which are not found in Holy Scripture. On this occasion, one of the friends of St. Athanasius asked him to explain how things went at the Council against Arius and his followers. Witness and participant in the actions of the Ecumenical Council, St. Athanasius, in an extensive letter, showed good reasons why the said words were accepted, not newly invented by the Council, but borrowed from the writings of some previous Fathers and teachers of the Church, defended them from the objections of heretics, and at the same time exposed their false wisdom about the Son of God 310. Likewise, wrote St. Athanasius in defense of St. Dionysius of Alexandria, in whose writings, against Sabellius, the Arians thought to find confirmation of their false teaching 311. Thus refuting Arian opinions and evidence piece by piece, St. Athanasius for a long time did not dare to undertake a more complete consideration of the foundations that they thought they would find for themselves in Holy Scripture. It was not the difficulty of resolving false speculation, but the height of the subject, about which the wicked so boldly and arbitrarily reasoned, that frightened the true Theologian. Meanwhile, the Egyptian monks repeatedly asked him to denounce the wicked heresy of Arius. Finally sending them an answer, he wrote: “Forgive me, a weak man. As much as I had the desire to write, as much as I forced myself to reflect on the Divinity of the Word, so much knowledge moved away from me - and to the extent that I thought to comprehend it, I felt myself abandoned by it. I couldn’t write, which seemed to be what was on my mind; but what he wrote came out weaker than the outline of the truth, albeit brief, that was in his mind. Believe me, I often decided to hold back and not write anymore. But so as not to upset you with silence, and not to detain those who question you and love to argue on the paths of wickedness, I forced myself to write a little. Accept this not as a complete statement of the doctrine of the Divinity of the Word, but as a scripture that can serve both to expose the wickedness of those who oppose Christ, and to instruct those who wish to follow the path of sound piety in Christ” 312. Sending the same word to Serapion, Bishop of Tmuite, St. Athanasius forbade copying it even for himself, adding: “it is not safe to publish your writings to the ignorant, especially about the highest and most important dogmas, so that, due to weakness or obscurity, what is not said enough turns to the detriment of the readers,” and therefore asked that what was not said be filled in and returned 313. So humbly did the Saint of Alexandria think about his labors, so carefully did he communicate them to others. Receiving new questions and objections, St. Afanasy wrote new answers and refutations to them. Paying attention to the works of the sophist Arius and Asterius 314 that were circulating, he resolved their intricate speculations and denounced the perverse explanations of the Word of God. Thus three more words “against the Arians” were composed, and all were accepted by the Church with triumph, as a victorious weapon against evil enemies. They rewarded the first, not entirely happy, experiments of polemics against the Arians by others, and opened the way for new champions of truth. The works of Marcellus of Ancyra, previously written against Asterius, were subject to suspicions of wrong-headedness, and due to their darkness and uncertainty, could indeed deserve such criticism 315. Scriptures of St. Eustathius of Antioch, also one of the first defenders of Orthodoxy against the Arians, slandered by them in Sabellianism, and languishing in obscurity of imprisonment for many years, could not have had extensive influence, and, perhaps, were even exterminated by the Arians 316. This is what the Orthodox had to resist the Arians, before the appearance of Afanasyev’s extensive creation. And after him, twelve books appeared “on the Holy Trinity” by the Gallican bishop Hilary, from the city of Poitiers, written by him during his imprisonment in Phrygia (before 360), for the Orthodox of the Western Church 317. No more than five or six years passed after St. Athanasius wrote his first letter against the Arians - he entered the same field with fresh strength, having recently completed his education in Athens, and having visited Egypt, a cleric of the Church of Caesarea in Cappadocia and its future bishop, St. Basil, with his books “against Eunomius” 318. After that, new works often began to appear, refuting Arianism, the same St. Basil, St. Gregory the Theologian, St. Gregory of Nyssa and others. Thus, the sixty-year-old old man, who from the desert defeated the enemy who took away everything from him except his faith, became the leader of this sacred squad of those who fought for the Word. But Arian wickedness rebelled not only against the Divinity of the Son of God: it spread just as many false opinions about the third Hypostasis of the Holy Trinity, about the Holy Spirit, denying His consubstantiality with the Father and the Son, and recognizing Him as the creation of the Son. St. Athanasius noticed this even in his words against the Arians 319. Others departed from the Arians in the doctrine of the Son of God, but remained with the same error regarding the Holy Spirit. – Having learned about this new modification of the heresy, St. Athanasius zealously set about refuting it, proving the consubstantiality and equal dignity of the Holy Spirit with the Father and the Son 320. So St. Afanasy began the fight against the Doukhobors, which was completed by the second Ecumenical Council. “And what was previously given,” let’s say with St. Gregory the Theologian, - to confirm to a great number of Fathers the dogma about the Son, then he subsequently taught by inspiration about the Holy Spirit.” And not just by his theological works, St. Athanasius defeated his enemies. At the request of the same monks who wanted to have a refutation of Arianism, he wrote a history of the modern disasters of the Church, from the beginning of the Meletian schism 321. Already in its content, this story naturally became a new denunciation against the Arians: because its subject is to depict their intrigues, violence, persecution. Moreover, it received an accusatory character from the presentation: appointed by St. Athanasius for the monks devoted to him, like a home recording, it represents the events and the writer’s view in their true form. Especially St. Athanasius dwells on the events of the last two or three years, after the Council of Milan, and here the story often gives way to a judgment in which the voice of a feeling echoes, upset by the wickedness, the violation of all order and the cruelties of the prevailing persecutors. From this story, together, it is clear that, despite the separation from his friends, in the desert he knew what was happening outside Egypt, what, for example, Liverius spoke in his favor, what Hosea wrote, and how their exile ended. No one forgot the great Saint in exile, to whom faith was dear. Thus, even while away from the affairs of the Church, the Saint was continuously occupied with its needs, its sorrows and suffering. Meanwhile, the circumstances of the Alexandrian Church, apparently, were ready to take a favorable turn for the Orthodox. George was expelled by the citizens of Alexandria 322, driven out of patience by his greed and oppression. He took control of the saltpeter and salt industries in Egypt; took charge of the extraction of papyrus and reeds; ordered that no one, except the people assigned by him, should dare bury the dead, and for this he collected payment for himself 323. Encountering resistance, he denounced the disobedient ones as rebels to Constantius 324. The fierce people attacked him in the church of Dionysius (Aug. 26, 358), and threatened to kill him, so that he soon had to leave the city. With the expulsion of the Arian bishop, the churches again came under the control of the Orthodox clergy. But, in such troubles, St. Afanasy could not return to his department. Trusting in God's Providence, he waited for the throne to be returned to him through legal means. A few weeks later, the military leader Sebastian appeared in Alexandria with an army, and the churches were again taken away from the Orthodox and handed over to the Arians (Dec. 24). And the next year (359) the Emperor sent a special official, the notary Paul, with a decree in favor of George, and to punish those responsible for his expulsion 325. More hope was promised, at least at the beginning, by the course of affairs at the councils appointed in the same year in Rimini for the western bishops, and in Seleucia for the eastern, in order to reconcile the two parties into which the Arian society was divided. Instead of unification, the Roman Fathers decided to invariably adhere to the Nicene Symbol. In Seleucia, more than a hundred bishops from the Semi-Arians rejected a small number (about 20) of the Arian bishops, among them George of Alexandria, and showed, although not all, an inclination towards rapprochement with the Orthodox, on whose side there were only Egyptians. St. Athanasius carefully observed these movements 326. But by the cunning of the Arians - Ursatius and Valens, everything was led to the fact that first the deputies of both councils, and then other bishops, signed a symbol, one of the worst among the Arian ones. Hence, even more confusion occurred in the Church. Afanasy's external situation did not improve at all. They were still looking for him in the deserts of Egypt. Artemius, who replaced the military leader Sebastian, 327 and who enjoyed the special power of attorney of Constantius, went himself with the Arian bishops and with a military detachment to look for him in the monasteries. Having received news that Athanasius especially loved the monks of Tavenna, Artemy thought to find him in their main monastery of Pabau. Sailing to him by river, he surrounded him with soldiers, interrogated the monks, searched the monastery, and found nothing. Artemy was, however, a pious man. He asked the monks for prayers for himself, and when they refused, according to the commandment of his abbot not to pray with anyone who has fellowship with the Arians, he prayed alone in their church 328. And it was not only the monks who remained faithful to their archpastor. Lucifer, one of those three bishops who, for refusing to sign the condemnation of Athanasius at the Milan Council, was sent to prison, transferred from place to place, and finally, sent to Thebaid, sent to the Emperor an apology for Athanasius, in which he proved the injustice of his action in relation to the Saint of Alexandria 329. Unfortunately, the irritable tone of the defender did much harm to his goal: however, after everything that was said and written in defense of St. Athanasius, it was difficult to expect that a calmer defense could have any effect. Persecution of St. Athanasius was brought to an end by the death of Constantius (November 3, 361) and the decree of his successor Julian, by which all bishops expelled during the previous reign returned “to their cities and provinces.” However, they owed this decree not to the new Emperor’s respect for Orthodoxy; because all the bishops returned without any difference in their way of thinking; and even more so because Julian at the same time declared his patronage of the pagan religion. No! – He wanted to contrast his reign with the reign of Constantius, as distinguished by freedom and tolerance 330, although he soon changed his intention. “Be that as it may,” now Athanasius had a free path to Alexandria, especially since his partner was no longer there 331. On February 8, 362, Julian’s command about returning bishops was received in Alexandria; Twelve days later, St. re-entered his Church. Afanasy. How her faithful children, from whom he had been separated for six years, rejoiced at this! The return of Athanasius was for them both a reward for the feat of suffering suffered, and a consolation in the upcoming, no less difficult, circumstances. Julian issued a direct command to open the pagan temples, and restore the offerings of sacrifices to the gods, to take away from the churches what the former emperors had handed over to them from the pagan temples and priests. Hatred of Christianity was expressed in every letter that he sent to Alexandria. The new leaders of the region tried to revive dying paganism; the temple of Serapis was filled again with fans from everywhere 332. The pagans were delighted when they found an Apis bull with all the necessary qualities - and hastened to notify Julian about this as a good omen for the war he was undertaking against the Persians 333 . Not embarrassed by the vain plans of blind hostility against Christianity, well understanding that it was impossible to return the world to dark pagan beliefs from the light of the Gospel, relying on the power of the name of Christ, which had conquered the world, Athanasius calmly carried out his work and tried to establish peace in his city and in other churches. With such irritation against Christians, to which the pagans were brought by George, with the patronage, or at least the inattention of the government, to any oppression of Christians, he did not arouse complaints from anyone. On the contrary, eliminating any reason to insult the pagans, he restored between the inhabitants of the city of different faiths the harmony in which they had lived before under him. “He reconciles,” says St. Gregory the Theologian, - restless with each other and with themselves, without requiring intermediaries; frees from oppression those who suffered insults (from George), without discerning whether someone belongs to his side or to the opposite side” 334. It was more difficult to peacefully end the matter with the Arian bishops installed in Egypt. Expelled, whose places they illegally occupied, like St. Athanasius, returned to their cities, and by all rights should have taken their place. But here the peace was not broken. “He cleanses the sanctuary,” says St. Gregory, - from the sellers of Christ who spoil the shrine, so that in this too you can be an imitator of Christ; however, he does this not with a whip made of ropes, but with a convincing word.” When Arianism was not supported by the highest authorities, and it did not take root in the hearts of the people, it had nothing to stand on. Let's say more. At a time when Julian was ready to patronize any sect to the detriment of the Orthodox Church, and, as a pupil of Eusebius of Nicomedia 335 , he called to himself his old friend, Aetius 336 , extolled the teaching of Photinus 337 , mocked the mysteries of the Christian faith, and forbade Christians from entering schools - at this time St. Athanasius gathers members of the Church scattered by persecution, explains misunderstandings between fellow believers, and strives to establish peace in the Churches on the unshakable foundations of faith in the consubstantial and Trinitarian Divinity. “He restores the fallen teaching,” let us say in the words of St. Gregory, - and again the Holy Trinity is freely confessed, placed on the candlestick, and illuminating the souls of all with the pure light of the one Divinity. Again he gives the laws of the universe; attracts the minds of all; writes messages to some, calls on others; others come and are not called, and receive edification; and offers everyone one law - voluntary consent.” This is how St. describes Gregory of the affairs of the famous Alexandrian Cathedral, which convened St. Athanasius, so to speak, in view of the mocking pagans (362). In the last years of the reign of Constantius, partly by deception, partly by coercion, the Arians managed to persuade almost all the bishops of the East and West to sign such a symbol of faith, which said about the Son of God that “He is like the Father according to the scriptures.” In a word similar, they wanted to get closer to the Semi-Arians; adding: according to the scriptures they gave themselves the freedom to explain the permissible similarity, in any sense 338. Involved in deception, they soon saw their mistake; forced by fear, they wanted to correct their guilt when the danger had passed. The distrust of the flock towards unstable or short-sighted shepherds, different interpretations of accepted words increased confusion in the Churches. They were perplexed where to find a foothold, and did not find who better to turn to than the archpastor of Alexandria. The Church of Antioch presented a particularly pitiful sight. After the expulsion of St. Eustathius, the Arians ruled over it for more than thirty years: but a society remained here, invariably devoted to their archpastor and Orthodoxy. In 360, when the deposed Eudoxius moved from the throne of Antioch to Constantinople, after much debate, Meletius, who was first the bishop of Sebaste in Armenia, then of Beroea in Syria, was elected as his successor. The Arians thought to see in him their like-minded person: but they were deceived. Combining meekness and moderation with the severity of piety, but at the same time - firmness in his confession - in the very first sermon, after his dedication, he clearly expressed that to recognize the Son of God as a creature means not to understand the teachings of Scripture 339. Irritated by this, the Arians, a month later, expelled him from Antioch, and elevated in his place Euzoius, one of those deacons whom Alexander of Alexandria condemned and deposed for being of the same mind with Arius. From here there arose a new division between the Christians of Antioch. Some stuck to Euzoius, others, abhorring his wickedness, continued to recognize Meletius as their bishop, but did not merge with the society of the Eustathians, who did not want to accept him as chosen by the Arians. St. Eustathius himself had already died: the society of those devoted to him was ruled by Presbyter Pavlin. With the Orthodox Antiochians, led by Paulinus, St. Athanasius had long been in communication 340. And now two deacons were sent to him from there. To discuss the acceptance of bishops turning to Orthodoxy, and to organize the affairs of the Church of Antioch, St. Athanasius decided to establish a council of Egyptian bishops, mostly confessors who had returned from prison, and others. One of the Western bishops exiled to Thebaid under Constantius, Eusebius of Vercelli, who took an active part in the affairs of the Antiochian church, also arrived at this council, and another, his comrade in exile, Lucifer of Calaria, went straight to Antioch to promote the pacification of this church. But Lucifer, who knew little how to control himself and act in a meek conciliatory spirit, instead of trying to merge the two divided Orthodox societies in Antioch, only strengthened the division between them. Without waiting for the decision of the Alexandrian Council, he installed Paulinus as a bishop, while another society of Orthodox, more numerous, did not want to lose Meletius 341. The Council of Alexandria, not knowing about what happened in Antioch, had in mind to establish such rules regarding the acceptance into communion of all those converting from the Arians, which could be applied to the affairs of the Church of Antioch. Guided by the spirit of peace and love, he determined: to accept into church communion all those who turn to the Orthodox Church, but so that they agree to accept the Nicene Symbol, anathematize the Arian heresy, and condemn the teaching of those who recognized the Holy Spirit as a creature. Under the same condition, the council granted the exercise of their rights to all bishops who were involved in communication with heretics through deception, fear and coercion, and are now seeking peace with the Church. But this leniency could not be used by the main perpetrators of heretical troubles 342. Such orders could easily lead to the establishment of peace in the Church of Antioch: the Meletians, who had recently fallen behind the Arian society, having fulfilled the demands of the council, were to form one Church with the Eustathians, and since St. Meletius followed the Nicene confession, then he had to remain a common shepherd for everyone. In order to eliminate any misunderstandings between the faithful children of the Church and those received into communion, and thereby facilitate their mutual merging into one society, the council found it necessary to enter into an explanation of some special expressions that were used in different Churches in the teaching about the Holy Trinity. This was all the more necessary because in the Church of Antioch itself, between the adherents of Eustathius and those who held Meletius, there was a dispute about this, and some suspected the others of wrong-mindedness 343 . Speaking about the Three Persons of the Holy Trinity, some used the expression: Three Hypostases. Others, accepting the word: hypostasis in the meaning of essence (ο ὐ σ ί α), and recognizing the consubstantial persons in the Holy Trinity, expressed this with the words: one hypostasis, i.e. essence, and the expression: three hypostases were rejected as unjustified. Having explained the meaning that both of them connected with the word: hypostasis, and in which they did not differ from each other, the council concluded with the desire to use those expressions that are used in the Nicene Symbol. Finally, since recently wrong-thinking has begun to spread in the doctrine of the incarnation of the Son of God: some, recognizing in Him the union of the Divine nature with the human, did not allow in His human nature the presence of the highest power of the spirit - the mind, claiming that the Word, or the Divine nature, replaced it; then the Council rejected this superstitious wisdom as false. Having made such determinations, the council instructed two of its members, Eusebius of Vercelli and Asterius of Arabia, to report them to the Orthodox Antiochians meeting with Paulinus, and most convincingly asked these bishops to take care, as fathers, mentors and trustees, to attract the separating Meletians to unanimity 344. But it was already too late. The matter was upset by the indiscretion of Lucifer, and he himself, not agreeing to prudent leniency in relation to bishops drawn into communication with heretics, separated from the Church. At least the orders of the Alexandrian Council for other churches did not remain fruitless. The voice of peace and forgiveness from the lips of the shepherd - who, due to his long-term suffering, alone could be strict with his fallen brothers without reproach - was received by the entire Church with delight. Pope Liverius, the bishops of Macedonia, Achaia, Spain and Gaul repeated it at their councils 345. Asterius in the East, Eusebius in the West, returning to their dioceses, proclaimed the word of peace in the churches they visited along the way. And many bishops were not slow in making peace with the Church, which they had offended with their cowardice. Not to mention how important were the dogmatic definitions set by the council about the Divinity of the Holy Spirit and about human nature in Jesus Christ, which served as an explanation and addition to what was said in the Nicene symbol. Let us pay attention to one explanation of theological terms. St. Gregory the Theologian, a witness to the controversies that arose from their different uses, ranks this case of Athanasius among his most important exploits. This is more useful than lengthy works and speeches, he says, preferable to many vigils; this is equal to the glorious expulsions and repeated flight of Athanasius himself 346. Athanasius' strong influence on the city of Alexandria and on the affairs of distant churches alarmed Julian. From Alexandria, until recently famous for its philosophy, which sought to support the beliefs of paganism, he expected assistance, and not opposition to his plans. And he summoned the bishops from captivity, Orthodox and Arians, not for the good of the Church, but in order to further upset it with discord and, amid disagreements, do what he wanted 347 . Deceived in his expectations, he took advantage of the crafty uncertainty of his edict on the returned bishops. It did not say directly that they could take over the management of their churches, although no one else could understand this permission. So, accusing Athanasius of having arbitrarily usurped rights that had been taken away from him by previous emperors, Julian gave the order to expel him from Alexandria immediately. “The god-honoring people of Alexandria,” he wrote, “causes no little trouble because he has again taken the throne 348,” and threatened the gravest punishment for failure to comply with this order, although he could not help but know that the majority of the inhabitants were on the side of Christianity, and therefore Athanasius. No matter how unfair such a command was, Athanasius obeyed, and immediately leaving the city (October 23, 362) settled not far from it 349. The faithful saw him off with sorrow and tears; but he consoled them: don’t cry: this is a small cloud, and it will soon pass. The next day, following Athanasius, two of his presbyters, Paul and Asterius, were expelled and sent into prison. This did not happen without violence and even bloodshed. The Church of Caesar was once again damaged by fire. In all this, the main participant was some royal philosopher, Pythiodorus, perhaps a member of the pagan museum, or the Alexandrian school 350. Dissatisfied with the removal of their bishop, the Alexandrians asked the emperor to return. But Julian, calling the petitioners “the sick part of the city,” not only rejected their request, but also ordered the expulsion of Athanasius from Egypt. In his message to the Alexandrians, Julian reminded them of the founder of their city, Alexander, of their former beliefs, mocked the veneration of the Son of God, rudely laughed at Athanasius, and presented him as a person harmful to public peace 351. All this, however, poorly concealed his secret thought, which was expressed more clearly at the same time, in his letter to the Egyptian prefect: “It is very unpleasant for me,” Julian wrote about Athanasius, that, with his efforts, all the gods are neglected, and during my reign he dared to baptize noble Greek women” 352. That's what irritated Julian! Having learned about the unsuccessful consequences of the petition of the Alexandrians, St. Athanasius secretly left his place of residence and retired to upper Egypt, to the monks who had previously given him refuge 353. It was not worth it for them to endure any kind of suffering for their archpastor: they considered it much more pleasing to God and superior to prolonged fasts, reclining on the bare ground and other feats of self-mortification 354 . Hearing about the violence that was committed in Syria and Palestine - how bishops and laity were killed there in cruel suffering - one could fear a similar fate for Athanasius. But the danger only further demonstrated the greatness of his spirit and the special watch over him of the Supreme Providence. Moving from place to place, St. Athanasius arrived in Antinous, to Abba Pammon, who had his own monastery here 355. The abbot of Tavenna, Theodore the “sanctified,” also came to him here, who also had a monastery nearby, on the opposite bank of the Nile, in the vicinity of Hermopolis, dependent on Tavenna. St. Athanasius intended to sail further, to take refuge in the monastery where they had previously searched for him. Both abbas offered him their services. Pammon expressed a desire to be his companion, Theodore gave him a covered boat and monks to steer it, and both tried to console him. But, strengthened by prayer, he did not lose heart. “Believe me,” he answered his companions, “my heart is not as full of hope in days of peace as in times of persecution. For I am confident that, suffering for Christ, and strengthened by His grace, even if I am killed, I will find even greater mercy from Him.” “But this time the perspicacious elders had something more than ordinary consolations to announce to him. “At this hour Julian has fallen in Persia,” said Theodore. A prophetic word comes to him: a contemptuous and offended man and a great man will die in nothing” (Hab. 2:5). At the same time, Theodore predicted that Julian’s successor would be a Christian, but would not live long, and therefore advised St. Athanasius, without bothering himself with further travel, to Thebaid, secretly rush to the court of the new sovereign. “You will meet him on the way,” added Theodore, “you will be received by him with love, and you will return to your Church” 356. Julian died in the war against the Persians, struck by an arrow (June 23, 363). Jovinian, who was elected to his place, was indeed devoted to the Christian faith. So, the kingdom of the pagans ended. Julian's assassination attempt was the last attempt of dying paganism to once again dominate the empire; but this attempt was repelled by the right hand of the Most High. St. Athanasius, having heeded the advice of the perspicacious elder, was not afraid to take the distant path indicated to him for the good of the Church 357. In the then state of affairs, it was not necessary to lose sight of the fact that the Arians would try to anticipate the favor of the new Sovereign. So, without stopping long in Alexandria, and without revealing his intention to many, St. Afanasy went to the East, to Syria. There is news that he even reached Edessa, and there he also warned Jovinian against the suggestions of two Arian bishops who had already come here with their confession 358. In Antioch, when he was surrounded by preachers of various teachings, Jovinian wished to have a written presentation of the teachings of the faith from the oldest of the Eastern representatives, in pulpit and merit, a participant in the Nicene Council, who stood at the head of the Orthodox. St. Athanasius presented him with this confession, which he had hitherto defended with words and suffering. Having praised the Sovereign's disposition towards heavenly objects, he proposes to adhere to the symbol of the Nicene Council, as the Apostolic Faith, accepted by all, except for a few; denounces the Arians for their daring attempts to replace it with their symbols; enumerates the countries in which it is contained, ranging from Spain to Cappadocia; rejects the ungodly teaching that the Son came from nothing; condemns the naming of the Son only as similar to the Father; finally, he clearly confesses the uncreatedness of the Holy Spirit glorified to the Father and the Son, and the one Divinity in the Holy Trinity 359. The emperor accepted this confession, and did not look for another. The Macedonians sent their confession to him, but it was rejected by them. The Bishop of Antioch, Meletius, also presented his statement of faith with a council of other bishops of Syria, which was joined by people who knew how to adapt to circumstances, from the Arians. The Meletyevo Confession, as well as the Afanasyev Confession, contained the Nicene symbol with some explanations; but they were not quite complete and definite 360. Not having time to win the Emperor over to their side, the Arians at least tried to denigrate the Saint of Alexandria in his eyes. Euzoius, the Arian bishop in Antioch, wanted to use the court eunuchs - Provatius and others - for this purpose; summoned the Arian priest Lucius from Alexandria to replace Athanasius. The Arians stopped the Emperor when leaving the palace and on the streets, and did not spare words, slander and condemnation against St. Archpastor. They even shouted: “He was exiled under the most God-loving, wise and blessed Julian; he is destroying our city; no one wants to go to his church, he calls us heretics.” But the Emperor, with direct and sharp answers and unexpected questions, embarrassed the heretics and dispelled their slander. Provatius, who decided to imitate the eunuchs of Constantius's reign, was severely punished, and Lucius was sent away with contempt 361. Finally, releasing Athanasius to his flock, the Emperor provided him with his message, in which, glorifying his holy and godly life, setting him as an example to the flock, and his suffering for the Orthodoxy that was dear to him, he expressed his will that he return to the works of his ministry among his church, and shepherd the people of God 362. Stay of St. Athanasius in Antioch, apparently, should have led to his rapprochement with Meletius. But Meletius, due to a misunderstanding and the suggestions of ill-intentioned people, himself avoided relations with him 363. On the one hand, the installation of Paulinus as a bishop by Lucifer, whose close relationship with Athanasius was known, on the other, the accession to the Meletian Council of some Arian bishops, whose sincerity in converting to Orthodoxy was very doubtful, could easily separate the primates of the two great churches of the East. There even appeared an essay in which the Meletian Confession, although without a clear indication of it, was subject to censure: the affectionate writer also condemned such expressions as were allowed by St. Afanasy, although he did not recognize them as completely sufficient. This work, written by one of the adherents of Paulinus, could alienate St. even more. Meletius from those who had communication with Peacock 364. Return of St. Athanasius to Alexandria (February 13, 364), for the fourth time - with the glory of a confessor of the truth, with victory over the machinations of his enemies, it seemed that he could already promise peace to the last years of his arduous and long-suffering life. But, according to the fate of the Most High, he had to endure another feat. – Jovinian, not reaching the capital, died on the way (February 19, 364). His successor Valentinian accepted his brother Valens as his co-ruler, and entrusted him with the eastern half of the empire, which included Egypt. Valens, baptized by the Arian bishop in Constantinople, Eudoxius, gave him an oath to support his confession by all means. Valens's wife, Albia Dominica, also an Arian, strengthened this disposition in him. These are the reasons for new persecution of Orthodoxy, and new disasters for St. Afanasia! Fifteen months later, upon the return of St. Athanasius to Alexandria (May 5, 365) 365, a command was received from Valens, by which all bishops expelled by Constantius and returned from captivity by Julian were again subjected to exile, under the threat of collecting, otherwise, a huge penalty from the local city authorities 366. The city was in great commotion. Prefect Flavian, along with other city authorities, urgently demanded that Athanasius leave their city: the people did not agree to let him go. Afanasy's defenders asked that it be better to delve into the circumstances of the case, proving that the emperor's command did not apply to him. This dispute continued for about a month. Finally, the prefect announced (June 8) that he had submitted this matter to the emperor for resolution. The city has calmed down. Another four months passed in anticipation; suddenly, one night, prefect Flavian, with the military leader Victorinus and a military detachment, occupied the Church of Dionysius, where Athanasius lived at that time, made a strict inspection of the bishop’s home, and did not find him anywhere (Oct. 5). St. Athanasius, a few hours before, left the city and hid not far from it, in the village where his relatives were buried 367. There was still no solution from Valens. Probably the revolt of Procopius 368, who took possession of the capital while the emperor himself was in the provinces, slowed things down; and the fear of new displeasures in Alexandria, in such troubled times, forced Valens to stop the persecution against the archpastor, to whom not only Alexandria was committed. He ordered that he be returned to the city - and the official sent with this command, the city authorities and the people solemnly went to Athanasius in his refuge, led him into Alexandria and into the Church of Dionysius (February 1, 366), from where he had to flee in four months. After that, they were already afraid to disturb his peace. While in other places the persecution of the Orthodox was raging, St. Athanasius was a Guardian Angel for his country and for his church. The Arians installed their bishop in Alexandria, Lucius, the same one who had sought this honor even under Jovinian: but as soon as he appeared in the city, the prefect, after two days, escorted him out of there with a military guard, fearing popular indignation (Sept. 24, 367). It has already been forty years since St. Athanasius, in the rank of hierarch, on the throne and in exile, always labored tirelessly for the word of truth. The Lord strengthened his strength, and the last years of his life were no less marked by beneficial activities for the church, like the first. All who held Orthodoxy dear turned their eyes to him, conformed their teachings to his teachings, and submitted their perplexities to him for resolution. Even the unthinking sought his approval. He denounced their false wisdom, encouraged and supported new defenders of the truth, and took care of the pacification of the Church. Modern errors, spreading among the people, required cautionary instructions for those who stood within the fence of the Church. What was needed here was not so much a detailed polemic against cunning speculation as a simple indication of the foundations on which the dogmas of the saving faith, falsely explained by heretics, are affirmed. In this exact form, St. Athanasius wrote his instruction: “on the Incarnation and against the Arians,” where he, with the words of Scripture, proves the truth of faith about the Divinity of the Son of God and the Holy Spirit, and touches on other dogmas based on it 370. But the solicitude of the Saint of Alexandria extended not only to his flock. He learned that in the Carthaginian region adjacent to his district, preachers appeared who opposed the importance of the Council of Nicea to Rome, which unfortunately ended in agreement - to exclude the word from the symbol: consubstantial. St. Athanasius, on behalf of all the bishops of Egypt, wrote a letter there in defense of the Ecumenical Council and the dogma approved by it 371. “The Word of the Lord, says the Holy Hierarch of God in this epistle, spoken by the Ecumenical Council in Nicaea, stands forever.” From this message it is also clear that St. Athanasius wrote to the Pope, Damasus, against the Milanese bishop Auxentius. While the other defenders of Arianism in the West, Ursacius and Valens, had already been deposed, this accomplice of them remained in his place, to the detriment of the Church. And Afanasy’s insistence did not go unnoticed. At the Council of Rome, Auxentius was condemned 372. In the last years of St. Athanasius, we often see him struggling with various errors that damage the right meaning of the teaching about the incarnation of the Son of God. They, in part, degenerated from Arianism, which, while denying His Divinity, could not correctly understand His human nature; partly, they were spread by opponents of Arianism, in the vain confidence that they had found new ways, unknown to the Church, to explain the incomprehensible mystery of the incarnation. Such errors were met by the Bishop of Corinth, Epictetus, and the Bishop of Onuphis (in lower Egypt), Adelphius, each in his own area, and considered it their duty to present to the ecumenical teacher how they refuted the newly emerging false ideas, and ask for his guidance 373. St. Athanasius, approving of their teachings, offered them his defense of the truth from Holy Scripture. A similar answer is made in the first book against Apollinaris, who boasted before others of his fellowship and like-mindedness with Athanasius, and was one of the zealous defenders of the Nicene confession of the Son of God, but thought incorrectly about the human nature He assumed. Without calling him a false teacher, St. Athanasius refutes his opinions and evidence, and shows what consequences they lead to. The second book against Apollinaris 374 presents the same defense of church teaching. Thus, St. Athanasius was a leader for everyone not only in the doctrine of the Triune Divinity (Θ εολογ ί α), but also in the doctrine of the economy of salvation (ο ἰ κονομ ί α), and in his writings he left the Church with weapons against those heresies that arose in the next century, destroying one another, and both deviating to the extreme from the right the path of church teaching indicated by the Saint of Alexandria. Guiding others to right understanding and defense of the dogmas of faith, St. Athanasius looked with consolation at the works of the newly emerging defenders of the truth, helped them with his advice, and supported them. A certain Maximus the philosopher, a native of Alexandria, presented to him his refutation of the wicked Arian rumors, also about the incarnation. Approving his work, St. Athanasius also points out aspects that the writer did not pay attention to 375. – When the monks of Caesarea were indignant that their archbishop, St. Basil, on one occasion, preaching about the Holy Spirit, for fear of the Arians, did not call Him God in his word, although on other occasions he repeatedly, from Scripture and by the power of inference, proved that He is God; then St. Athanasius wrote to unreasonable zealots so that they obey their Archpastor, like children to their father, and do not contradict what he finds necessary. “We can all boldly say that Vasily is an adornment of the Church, he strives for the truth, and if he is weak, then for the weak, that he may gain the weak. Our beloved brethren, having in mind the purpose of his truth and adaptation to circumstances, should glorify the Lord for giving Cappadocia such a bishop as any country would like to have.”376 But standing up for the truth and approving of its new defenders, St. At the same time, Athanasius was concerned about the pacification of the Church. He himself informed St. Basil of Caesarea 377 and Bishop Rufinian 378 of the resolutions of the Council of Alexandria on the acceptance into church communion of those seeking peace with the Church. To Diodorus, Bishop of Tire, appointed by Paulinus of Antioch, he wrote: “Do not strive to argue with heretics, but overcome their verbosity with silence, and their malice with meekness” 379. St. Epiphanius of Cyprus, regarding some disputes about the time of celebrating Easter, friendly advised: “Stop being angry; “It is better to pray that lasting peace may be established in the Church, and that heresies that arise from a crowd that breathes murder will cease.”380 – But the most important of the reconciliatory deeds of the Saint of Alexandria was his concern for restoring peace between the churches of Syria and Asia Minor with the Roman Church, and for the pacification of the Church of Antioch. The Eastern bishops hoped that when peace was established between East and West, the Western Emperor Valentinian could, with his suggestions, stop the cruelty of the Arians, protected by Valens, just as before Constantine II and Constance assisted Athanasius himself in returning to his throne. But Valentinian did not have the same zeal for faith that the children of Constantine the Great showed. However, St. Athanasius with zeal began the work of pacification, when the eastern bishops, through St. Vasily was offered to take upon himself the mediation in these relations. Letters from St. Basil to Athanasius show what hopes they all placed in the archpastor of Alexandria; but the Lord did not allow either one or the other saint to live to see the fulfillment of their ardent desires. St. Athanasius reposed on May 3, 373, after forty-seven years of ruling the Church of Alexandria. Five days before his death, he ordained in his place one of the oldest presbyters of his Church, Peter 381: because the Arians were only waiting for the death of the blessed Saint in order to introduce their bishop, Lucius, who had already been installed by them, into Alexandria. But this did not save her from the terrible Arian invasion. The Alexandrian Church mourned a special disaster: the deprivation of a shepherd, whom no one could replace for her, and the plunder of Christ's flock by wolves. Nineteen presbyters and deacons and twenty-three monks from Alexandria, eleven bishops from Egypt, were immediately sent to different places for imprisonment. Peter himself was forced to flee to Rome. The reign of horrors has come again for Alexandria - desecration of shrines, violence, cruelty 382. But having, by the will of God, left his flock in suffering on earth, the true shepherd interceded for it all the more in heaven, assisting with his prayers the host of saints who then fought for Orthodoxy: Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian, Gregory of Nyssa and others. The virtues and merits of St. Athanasius for the Church of St. Gregory the Theologian briefly depicted in these words: “his life and morals are the rule for bishops; its dogmas are laws for Orthodoxy”: because these were the dogmas of the Church, the dogmas of the word of God. “The only begotten Son of God is true God, consubstantial with the Father. The Holy Spirit, equal in honor with the Father and the Son, is the true God, consubstantial with both.” These are the dogmas of the Apostolic faith, the faith of the martyrs, the faith of the entire primacy of the Church, which Athanasius found in the word of God, in the writings of the Fathers, in the unanimous confession of the ecumenical council - and he devoted his entire life to defending these saving dogmas from attacks and misinterpretations of heretics. After defending Orthodoxy, the second thing St. Athanasius was to pacify the Church, agitated by heretics; he tried to explain the misunderstandings between those who held the right faith, and showed condescension to those who were attracted to the side of false-minded people by deception and threats. Thus, while defeating the enemies of Orthodoxy, he at the same time tried to heal the wounds they inflicted on the Church. As in the teaching of St. Athanasius, and in other matters of his pastoral ministry we see firmness worthy of a faithful guardian of the Divine laws. The Libyan military leader behaved unworthy of the Christian name; with brutal cruelty he tortured his subordinates and lived dissolutely. This was during the reign of Valens, when St. Athanasius himself was in danger of expulsion. Despite the fact, St. The archpastor, seeing the need to stop the temptation, pronounced excommunication against the unworthy member of his flock, and reported this to the Archbishop of Cappadocia, St. Basil, to whose diocese the military leader of Libya belonged, as a native of Cappadocia 383. In his life, following the rules that he learned in his youth from the ascetics of piety, St. Athanasius reciprocally rendered a service to the desert dwellers by depicting for them the life of the great Anthony. Depicting his exploits, he set out in the form of a narrative the rules of monastic life, as St. Gregory the Theologian. This biography was the first worldwide announcement of the hidden exploits of the great desert dweller, and with the name of St. Athanasius quickly swept to the borders of the East and West. St. Ephraim the Syrian pointed it out to his disciples in Edessa; it was read in Trier - and the courtiers left the light to imitate the Egyptian desert dweller 384. Augustine heard a story about him in Milan, and this decided his struggle with himself in order to surrender to the Lord 385. St. Athanasius wanted the example of monastic life to edify not only those who have withdrawn from the world. He called the disciples of the desert, who stood above others by their virtues, to serve the Church and appointed them to be bishops. Also St. Alexander chose among the monks the shepherds of the Church 386: the successor of St. Alexandra imitated his example, and the more beneficial the first experiences of such an election turned out to be, the more constrained the circumstances of the Church required its shepherds to be ready for all kinds of hardships, the more willingly St. Athanasius entrusted the care of Christ's flock to the monks, eliminating any pretext on their part for evasion. In this regard, especially noteworthy for us is his letter to Dracontius, whom he promoted from the abbot of some monastery to the bishop of Hermopolis, against his wishes. At that time, the Alexandrian Church was threatened by the invasion of the Arians. Whether out of fear of the upcoming struggle, or out of disposition to a desert life, Dracontius, at his very ordination, announced with an oath that he would not stay long in the department, and indeed, he soon left his throne. Having received news of this, St. Athanasius sent his presbyter to him with a message in which he exhorted him to return to his flock. At the same time, he wrote: “You were not the only one appointed as a monk, you were not the only one who was previously abbot, and was loved by the monks. You know that Serapion (of Tmuite) is a monk, and was formerly the leader of many monks. You are not unaware of how many monks Apollos was the father of: you know Agathon and Ariston; Do you remember Ammonius, who departed with Serapion; of course, I also heard about Muit in the upper Thebaid; You can learn about Paul of Latopol and many others. All of them, after their appointment, did not contradict, but, bearing in mind the example of Elisha and Elijah, following the disciples and Apostles of the Lord, they accepted the care entrusted to them, did not neglect the service, and did not become worse than themselves, but they expected an even greater reward for their work, excelling, and exhorting others to excel in virtue. How many people have they converted from idols? How many have been distracted from demonic customs by your admonitions? How many slaves presented themselves to the Lord? - So that those who see these signs cannot help but be surprised. Isn’t it a great sign to establish a maiden in a virginal life, to make a young man abstinent, to make an idolater a Christian?” 387 Admonition of St. Athanasius achieved his goal, and Dracontius, returning to his flock, showed himself to be a worthy shepherd of the flock of Christ, having suffered exile from the Arians. Such influence on his flock, the bishops taken from the desert, and their firmness in confessing the right faith, should have favored the saint even more. Athanasius for election to the highest ecclesiastical degrees, mainly from among the monks. And we see that when the persecution of the Orthodox began in Egypt, shortly after the death of St. Athanasius, - among those expelled by the Arians there were up to eleven bishops, “who from youth to old age labored in the desert” 388. The example of the Alexandrian shepherds was imitated by the leaders of other churches, wherever monasticism was established. Everywhere the strict life of the monks, their zeal for Orthodoxy attracted the attention of the people and pastors, and when they were elected to episcopal sees, the votes were often inclined in favor of the monks. So varied and beneficial was the influence of St. Athanasius on the life of the Church! Evsev. Histor. Church 6, 1. See Ideler Hermapion. 1841. Pars 1, pag. 22 et not. Of all the countries of the pagan world, Egypt alone was honored with a visit by the Lord during its infancy. In this visit, the teachers of Alexandria saw the preliminary defeat of the spirit of darkness that dominated here by those who came to destroy the works of darkness. This is indicated by St. Athanasius of Alexandria in his essay “On the Incarnation of God the Word.” Orr. Athanas. ed. Montfauc. T. 1. p. 75 and 78. In the same sense, Eusebius, Bishop, explains the quoted words of the Prophet. Caesarea, most indebted for his education to the Alexandrian teachers. Demonstrate. Evangel. L.VI. With. 20. L. IX. p. 421. ed. Paris, 1628. Gommentar. in. Esaiam in Montf. Collect, nov. Patrum Graecor. T. II. p. 423 et sq. The explanation is used by: bl. Hieronymus Orr. T. IV. in Patrolog. Curs. Complete. T. XXIV. p. 181. 250.. bl. Theodoret Orr. ed. 1642. T. 2. p. 71., and Procopius ed. 1580 p. 261. The fall of idols in Egypt, upon the entry of the Lord into this country, is mentioned in the ancient apocryphal Gospel de nativitate s. Mariae s. XIX. Codex. Apocryph. N. Testam. ed. a Thilo. T. 1. p. 399. Jablonsk. Pantheon Aegypt. I. IV. With. 1. p. 170 et. sq; c. 3. p. 234 et sq. – Letronn Recueil des inscriptions de 1'Egypte 1849. T. 2. p. 469. Hengstenberg d. Rucher Moses. 1841.s. 110. Letronn. T. 1. p. 400. Greuzeri Comment. Herodoteae; 1819. p. 183 et sq. According to Tertulian, the insufficient flooding of the Nile in previous times was the cause of persecution of Christians. Apolog. With. 40: si Nilus non ascendit in arva, – statim: christianos ad leonem. Euseb. Histor. Const. 4, 25. Socrates Hist. Eccl. 1, 18. Sozom. 5, 3. Τ ὰ ποτ ά μια ὒδατα ἀ ν ά γαγε ἐ π ὶ τ ὸ μ έ τρον α ὐ τ ῶ ν, κατ ὰ τ ὴ ν ο ὴ ν χ ὀ ριν, ε ὐ φρ ά νον κα ὶ ἀ νακα ί νισον τ ῆ ἀ ναβ ά σει α ὐ τ ῶ ν τ ὸ πρ ό σωπον τ ῆ ς γ ῆ ς - the ancient Christians of Alexandria prayed at the Liturgy. Renaud. Liturg Orient T. I. p. 148. words p. 8. 33. et not Renaud. p. 213. Maternus (Firmicus Maternus), appealing to the emperors Constance and Constantius for the extermination of remaining paganism everywhere, also describes the rituals of the Egyptian holidays as still being performed. Ratrolog. Curs. T. XII. Materni de errore profanarum religion. Cap. 2. 14. 23. 28. – Livanius (in orat. pro templis) speaks of these rituals, as if they had never been prohibited. Liban. l. With. Eunapius in vita Aedes. ed. Boissonad. 1849. p. 471. – This church was destroyed about 20 years after the death of St. Afanasia. Contemporary Rufinus describes in detail the circumstances of this event. Histor. Eccl. 2, 22 et sq. Rufn. Histor. monach. c. 7. Comparison Pallad. Lausic. c. 52. On the southern borders of Egypt, in the city of Philae, in order to satisfy the demands of neighboring wild tribes who disturbed Egypt with their attacks, the veneration of Osiris and Isis was maintained, even until the time of Justinian. Letronn. Tom. 2. p. 205. Philon. in Flacc. p. 971.973. Diodor. Sicil. Biblioth. histor. XVII, 52. The entire population of Egypt, according to the same Diodorus, extended to seven million. Josephus, with the exception of Alexandria, puts the number of inhabitants of Egypt to 7,500,000. De bell. iudaic. II, 18. ldeler. Hermapion. p. 59.n. 101. From this close connection between the Egyptians and the Jews, so long-standing and lasting, the influence of the Hebrew language on the Coptic language is explained. Codex Theodos. L. XVI. Tit. VIII. With. commentar. Gothofredi. p. 235. The Jews were expelled from Alexandria already under St. Cyril, Patriarch of Alexandria (Socrat. Η. Ε. 7. 13), in 415 or 416 Cod. Theodos. L. XVI. Tit. 2. 1. 42 . Euseb. N. Ε 5, 10. Hieronym. de vir. illustr. c. 36. – Guerike de schola. quae Alexandriae floruit, catechelica 1824. Among them, eight books of Origen against Celsus deserve first place. Origen's scientific research on the text of the translation of the Seventy Interpreters and the comparison of this translation with the Hebrew text and with other translations are known; also the works of Pierius on the purification of the text of the New Testament books. Many Alexandrian teachers were engaged in the explanation of Holy Scripture: Panten, Clement, Origen, Pierius, etc. The merits of the Alexandrian mentors in the fight against Gnosticism are especially noteworthy. For others, see below about Dionysius of Alexandria. Among the mentors of the catechetical school were bishops in Alexandria: Heraclius, St. Dionysius, St. Peter, Achilla. Mingarelli veterum testimonia de Didymo Alexandrino. 1764. p. 5 et sq. Vita s. Antonii. Orr. Athanas. T. 1. p. 634. Sozom. N. E. I. c. 13. This city was located in middle Egypt, now Ahnas, from the ancient Egyptian name: chnes. Sliampollion l'Égypte sous les Pharaons. 1814. T. 1. p. 309. Παρεμβολ ή . For the meaning of this word in Egypt, see Letronne Recueil. T. 1. p. 10, 11. The place is determined, firstly, by the indication of St. Athanasius that St. Anthony crossed the river, and Heracleopolis was on the western bank of the Nile; secondly, by the hitherto preservation of the Antoniev monastery, according to the ancient division, in the Afroditonolsky district, or nome, in the east. bank of the Nile. See Description de l'Égypte fait, pendant l'éxpedit. de l'armée Française. T. IV. 1821. p. 420. Ave. Anthony died at the age of 105, in 356. He went to live in the fortification for 35 years, as noted by St. Afanasia. Bucolia was the name given to the seaside at the confluence of the Nile, east of Alexandria. Bl. Jerome writes about St. Hilarion the Great that he also had a desire to retire to Bucolia, eo quod nullus ibi christianorum esset, sed barbara tantum et ferox natio. Vit. s. Hilar. n. 43. One of the branches of the Nile was directly called Bucolic, now called Damiata. The path to this desert, and the very location of St. Anthony here, is described by Bl. Jerome in the Life of St. Hilarion. This monastery is not far from Klyzma (Moskha, Meadow of Spirits, ch. 132 according to Russian translation). After the death of St. Anthony, it was destroyed more than once by the Saracens or Arabs. One of these devastations, which occurred at the beginning of the 16th century, is mentioned in the inscription on the Coptic Gospel. Angel. Maji. script, vet. T. V. par. 11. p. 124. At the beginning of the 18th century. The Jesuit scientist Snkard visited this monastery and described in detail its then state. Lettres Édifiant. 1838. T. I. p. 495. This monastery is also mentioned in the description of Egypt compiled by the French expedition, T. IV. r. 387. This is the name of the first monastery of St. Anthony in "Lavsaik" Palladius, cap. 25. Hieronymi vita s. Pauli Evenutae. n. 9. St. Basil V. rules on asceticism, set out at length. Question 7. Creativity. You. Vel. Part 5. The life of St. Pachomius, described according to the legends of his disciples in the same century, presents a living picture of the newly established community. In Act. ss. Maji d. 14. T. 3. p. 295. Ταβ έ νησις. The monastery was later called that way, probably from the island of Tavenna, hitherto known among the Arabs under the name Jezire-el Gharib, that is, the western island. And its Egyptian name means a place abundant with palm trees of Isis. In ancient times it belonged to the region, or nome, of Dendera. Schamp. T.I.r. 236. In relation to Pispir, the monastery of St. Anthony, it is much further south. See Prolog, ad. vitamin s. Pachomii p. 295. Epist. Ammonii Episc. ibid, p. 349 n. 6. In addition to some rules given to St. Pachomius by the Angel (Vit. s. Pachom. n. 7. Pallid. Lausiac. p. 37. Sozom. Η. Ε. 3, 14), more detailed instructions for cenobitic monasteries were written by Pachomius himself (vit. p. 57) and his immediate successors, in Coptic, translated from the Greek translation bl. Jerome into Latin, and placed between his works. Orr. Hieron. ed. Migne T. 2. p. 61. Παβ ά ε. vit. Pachom. n. 35 et al; in Champollion (l'Egypte sous Pharaons. T. 1. p. 243). Pboou, in the vicinity of Diospolis. Vit. Pachom. ib. Champollion T. I. b. 241, 242, from the city Χοινοβ ό σχια, in Coptic Scheneset. Vit. Pach. ib. At Champ. T.I.p. 235. Tmounschons. Vit. Pach. n. 52 et 72. Tiveve - at Champ. Thbeou T. I. p. 240, – Phnoum – Phnoum p. 184. Vit. Pachom n. 51 et 74, at Champ. Tsmine. p. 265. Vit. Pachom. n. 86-Ammon in a letter to Theophilus, Αρх. Alexandria about St. Theodore, also mentions the monastery built by the monk near Ptolemais. Act. ss. Maji. T. III. p. 354.n. 17. Pallad. Histor. Lausiaca. cap. 7. Praefat ad. Regul. s. Pachomii, p. 64. “Diebus Paschae, exceptis his, qui in monasterio necessarii sunt, omnes congregantur, ut quinquaginta millia fere hominum passionis Dominicae simul celebrent festivitatem.” Palladius in Lavsaik says that the number of all the brethren in the monastery extended to 7,000 people: that in one Tavennian monastery there were up to 1,400 people, in others - 300 and 400 each. cap. 20, 38 et 39; in one of the convents there are up to 400 nuns, cap. 39 et 41. But in another place he puts the Tabennisiots up to 3000 hours cap. 48 – Rev. Cassian, who visited Egyptian monasteries at the end of the 4th century, and lived in them for a long time, considers in the Tavenian monastery “the most populous of all,” more than 5,000 brethren, under the control of one abba. De institut. renunciant. L.IV. c. 2. Regul. Pachom. n. 2. following the example of the Old Testament Church and in accordance with local customs. Jablonsk. Orr. T I. r. 407. ed. Waler. Vit. Pachom. n. 60. Epist. Ammonii n. 19. The Greeks lived in a special house, under the supervision of a presbyter who arrived from Alexandria. Pachomius began to study Greek in the later years of his life. Vit. Pachom. n. 19. Cronius testifies about St. Anthony in Palladius. Histor Lausiac. With. 26. His teaching, given by St. Athanasius in his life, translated “from the Egyptian language.” Likewise, Pimen the Great did not know Greek. Apophthegm. Patr Coteller. T.I.p. 636. Rufin. Histor. monach. cap. 18. Pallad. Lausiac. cap. 76. This testimony is also confirmed by Sozomen N. E. VIII 28. Rufin. Histor. monach. c. 7. Rufin, c. 5. Aegyptior.monach. Histor. in. Coteller. Monum. Eccles. Graec. T. III. p. 175. The city is now completely covered with sand. Description de l'Egypt. T. IV p. 389. On the shores of Lake Mareota, Jews were still looking for a secluded refuge during the time of Philo. Euseb. N. E. 2, 17. Pallad. Histor. Laus. With. 7. Rufin p. 22. Sozomen, 6, 36. The name of the mountain from the abundance of nitra, or saltpeter in the lakes, was soon applied to the spiritual labors of the hermits, according to Jeremiah. 2, 22 Apophtegmat. Patr. in Coteller. monum. T.I.p. 351. Rufin. c. 22. at a distance of 10 Roman miles from the Nitrian mountain, or, as Sozomen says 6, 31, 70 stadia. Rufin. With. 29. a whole day's journey away. The name of the monastery, so famous in our country, is local Egyptian or Coptic, and means a long and narrow valley. Champoll. T. 2. r. 297. Cassian. Collat. 51, p. 3, speaks of Abba Macarius: qui habitationem scythiothicae solitudinis primus invenit. Rufin. c. 29. Cassian. Collat. 10. c. 2: qui erant in eremo scithi commorantes, quique perfectione ac scientia omnibus, qui erant in Aegypti monasteriis, praeminebant. Floss, Macarii Aegypt. Epistolae 1850. p. 59. According to the research of scientists, Ave. Macarius died in 390, and from Palladium Lavsaik news (cap. 19); that he settled in the desert for 30 years, and lived there for 60 years. Apophtegm. Patr. Cotell. T. I p. 530, 539. The Makariev Monastery, known to this day, is not far from the saltpeter lakes. A description of this monastery is from Sicard, who visited it in 1712. Lettr. Edifiant. t. I. r. 453, and Tischendorf, who was there recently, Reise in d. Orient. 1846. T. I. pag. 110 et sq. In Gospel. Math. hom. 8. ed. Montfauc. p 127. Abba Apollos, in Palladius in Lavsaik ch. 52. Euseb. Histor. Eccl VI, 42 – 46 Ecumenical Council of Nicaea 1. Right. 6. This testimony appears repeatedly in the writings of St. Afanasia. Apolog. contr. arian. p. 123. 187. Epist. Encycl. ad Ep. p. 398. Elsewhere there are believed to be about 90 bishops. Apol. ad Imper. Constant. p. 312. Ep. ad Afros, p. 899. The title of Pope was previously adopted as an honorary one by some bishops of Alexandria, for example. Heraclius in 111 century. Evseb. N. E. VII, 7. – St. Athanasius called St. Pope. Constantine the Great in his message. Apolog. contr. arian. p. 784; Others were also named, for example. subordinate bishops and presbyters, r. 181. 185. Timothy, Bp. Alexandrian, second successor of St. Athanasius, in her review of him, also calls him Pope. Facund. Hermiac. in Patrolos. curs. T. 67. p. 614. Lequien. Or. Chr. T. II. p. 353. Clausen de Synesio, Libyae Pentapoleos Metropolita. 1831. p. 173 et sq. Rules of St. Peter about the penitents, given in 306, are found in the Pilot's Book. They refute what is presented in St. Epiphany of Cyprus (Haeres. 68), according to the stories of some follower of Meletiev, excessive condescension and weakness in the actions of the Archbishop of Alexandria. S. Epiphan. Haeres. 68 p. 718. Acta s. Petri in Angel. Maji Spicil. Rom. T.III. p. 680. See the letter to him from the confessors - Hesychius, Pachomius, etc., preserved in an ancient translation in Latin. Routh. Reliqu. sacr. T. III. p. 381. S. epiphanii adv. haeres. p. 719. Routh. T.Sh. p. 348. 381. S. Athanas. Apolog. contr. arian. p. 177. Socrates. H.E. 1, 6. S. Athanas. Apolog. contr. arian. p. 187. Opp. s. Athanas. T.I.p. 401. coll. p. 260. It extended up to 30 stadia in length. Ioseph. Elav. de bell, iudaic. 2, 16. Martyr, s. Petri Alexander. p. 687. The church in which the relics of St. were buried is mentioned here. Evangelist Mark, and where the other Saints of Alexandria were buried. Haeres. LXIX. p. 1. 2. Βαυκαλις, according to Philostorgius, a local Alexandrian word, meant a vessel for water, in the form of a jug L. 1. p. 4. This word is often found in legends about Egyptian ascetics. S. Athanas. Apolog. T.I.r. 304. The church of Kirin, which is mentioned by St., is not considered here either. Afanasia. Histor. arian. T.I.p. 350. For comparison, it can be noted: in Oxyrhynchus, a completely Christian city in middle Egypt, there were twelve churches. Rufini Histor. monach. With. 5. – In Constantinople at the beginning of the 5th century there were 14 churches. Orr. s. Athanas. T.I.r. 190. S. Athanas. Apolog. T.I.r. 303. Chronicon Paschal, p. 514. Procopius (Ἀ ν έ κδοτа p. 26) and others date this institution to the time of the Emperor Diocletian (See Comment. ad cod. Theod. L. XIV. Tit. XXVI. 1. 2). S. Athanas. Apolog. T.I.r. 138. Socrates. N. E. 2, 17. S Athanas. Histor. arian. p. 381. Palladius in Lavsaik mentions the presbyter Isidore, a stranger of the Alexandrian Church, p. 1. and about the presbyter Macarius, overseer of the almshouse for the crippled in Alexandria p. 6. Histor. arian. ad monach. T.I.p. 382. For the order of initial teaching at that time, see Origen. in Рsal. 36. Nom. 3. ed. Lomatz. T. 12. r. 189. A word of praise to Athanasius. TV St. Ot. in Rus. translation T. 2. De incarnate. T.I.r. 96. Guerik. de school Alexandr. Pars. 1. p. 81. The assumption that St. Athanasius was a student of St. Anthony, is based solely on the preface to the life of Anthony, written by St. Afanasy. Here he says: δι ὰ το ῦ το ὕπερ ἀ υτ ό ς τε γιν ώ σκω, πολλ ά κις γ ὰ ρ ἀ υτὸ ν ἐώ ρακα, κα ὶ ἂ μαθε ῖ ν ἡ δυν ή θην παρ’ α ὐ το ῦ ἀ κολουθ ή σας ἀ υτ ώ χρονον ο ὐ κ ὀ λ ί γον, κ ὶ ἐ πιχ έ ων ὓδωρ κατα χε ῖ ρας α ὐ το ῦ , γρ ά ψαι τ ῆ ε ὐ λαβε ῖ ᾳ ὑ μ ῶ ν ἐ σπο ύ δασα. This is how this passage is read in the Montfaucon edition of the works of St. Athanasius, on the basis of four manuscripts from among those from which this life was published. The ancient translation of the Life of Antonius into Latin, made by Evagrius (IV century), agrees with this reading: ideo ea, qiue et ipse noveram: frequenter enim eum visitavi, et quae ab eo didici, qui ad praebendam ei aquam non pavlulum temporis cum eo feci, dilectioni vestrae indicare properavi. But in the other four Greek lists, according to the testimony of the same Montfaucon, it read like this: δι ὰ το ῦ το ὕπερ ἀ υτ ό ς τε γιν ώ σκω, πολλ ά κις ἀ κολουθ ή σαντος α ὐ τ ῷ χρ ό νον ο ὐ χ ὁ λ ί γον, κ ὶ ἐ πιχ έ αντος ὓδωρ κατ ὰ χε ῖ ρας α ὐ το ῦ, γρ ά ψαι τ ῆ ε ὐ λαβε ί ᾳ ὑ μ ῶ ν ἐ σπο ύ δασα. Ορρ. s. Athanas T. I. p. 794. Monfaucon subsequently found the first reading in two more ancient Roman codes; but I also found the second one. Collect. nov. Patr. et Sciptor. Graecorum. 1707. T. 2. animadversiones in vitam et scripta s. Athanasii. p. X. He found the last reading, although with some errors, in the codes of the Coalene Library CCLVII (12th century), CCLXXXII (11th century) and CCCLXVIII (10th century). Bibliothec Coislian. p. 304. 399 et 565. To resolve the confusion - which reading to prefer - we turned to the Greek manuscripts of Muscovy. Synodal Library and to ancient Slavic translations. In the Greek manuscript Synod. under No. 156 (according to the Matthaei catalogue, eleventh century) the disputed words read: παρ ὰ το ῦ ἀ κολουθ ή σαντος α ὐ τ ῷ ... κ ὶ ἐ πιχ έ αντος... In manuscript No. 158 (also from the eleventh century)... παρ’ α ὐ το ῦ ἀ κολουθ ή σας α ὐ τ ό ν... κ ὶ ἐ πιχ έ ων... also and in paper list No. 168 (fifteenth century). - In the ancient Bulgarian translation of the life of Antoniev, compiled at the behest of the Bulgarian Archbishop John (as stated in the appendix), this passage reads like this: I myself have seen it, and learned from him, having followed him for quite some time and pouring water on his hand... So, the Bulgarian translation agrees with the reading according to which St. Afanasy himself was a student of Antoniev. We would gladly follow this reading if we had not found in the life of St. Pachomius, compiled in the 4th century, a clear indication that St. Athanasius wrote the life of Anthony based on the testimony of reliable monks, and not based on his own acquaintance with him. Οὕτος, says the biography writer Pakhomiev about Athanasius, παραλαβ ῶ ν μον ά ζοντας ε ἰ δοτας τ ὰ κατ’ α ὐ τ ὸ ν ἀ κριβ ῶ ς ἔ γραψεν (τ ὸ ν β ί ον το ῦ μακαρ ί ου Ἀ ντον ί ου). Act. ss. Mayi 14 d. Append, p. 41.n. 63. And it couldn’t be otherwise: St. Afanasy could not personally know all the circumstances of Antonieva’s life. spent in the desert, and ending thirty years after St. Athanasius could have been a student of Anthony. In this case, in addition to indicating his own acquaintance with Anthony, it is natural to expect the biography writer to indicate the testimony of other reliable men about him. And this is represented by lists that have the reading: κ ὶ ἃ μαθε ῖ ν ἡ δυν ή θην παρ ὰ το ῦ ἀ κολουθ ή σαντος α ὐ τ ῷ κ ὶ ἐ πιχ έ αντος. Sozomen calls St. Athanasia ὁ μοδ ί αιτον κ ὶ ὑ πογραφ έ α Alexandra. 2, 17. There are no hints of Arian disputes in them, nor expressions adopted by the Church as a consequence of these disputes. Blazh. Jerome puts these two works in first place, among other works of St. Afanasia. De viris illustr. With. 87. In terms of presentation, they are much more lively. Philostorgius, an Arian, in his history of the Church 2, 15. and 3, 15., listing those who came out like Arius from the Antioch school, counts up to eleven bishops in Syria and Asia Minor, most of whom later took an active part in the cause of Arius, and adhered to his side. Letter of Arius to Eusebius of Nicomedia in Epiphan. Ηaeres. LXIX § 6. Theodoret. H.E. 2, 5. Letter from Eusebius of Nicomedia to Paulinus of Tyre. Theoderet. 1, 6. See an excerpt from Eusebius’ letter to Arius in St. Afanasia. De Synodis p. 730. Eusebius of Nicomedia writes about the disposition of Eusebius of Caesarea towards Arius towards Paulinus. Theodoret, 1, 6., St. Athanasius de Synodis. p. 730. – Theodotus of Laodicea, whom Eusebius so praises in his history VII, 32., Paulinus of Tire, later of Aitiochi, also glorified by Eusebius X, 1., who favored Arius, perhaps came closer in their dogmatic opinions to Eusebius. See Evseb. contr. Marcell. L. 1 c. 4. p. 27. This circular letter is between the writings of St. Afanasia. A similar message to Bishop Alexander. Byzantine - in Theodoret N. E. 1. 4. Apolog. contr. arian. p. 128. Epistol. 1. ad monachos Aegypti. Opp. s. Cyr. Alexandr. T. II. Par. II p. 1. Evseb. de vit. Constant. II. c. 72. He was in Nicomedia for about 5 months, until April. 324. Gothofredi Chronologia cod. Theodos. p. XXIII. Sozomen. I. 15. This was decreed in Vieinia by Eusebius of Nicomedia, in Palestine by Eusebius of Caesarea, Peacock of Tire and Patrophilus of Skiopolis. Evseb. de vita Constant. II. With. 64–72. According to Philostorgius, an Arian, there were 22 of them, namely: six from Libya, one from Egypt, two from Palestine, two from Phenicia, three from Cilicia, three from Cappadocia, two from Pontus and three from Vieinia. L. I. p. 8. But other historians say nothing about the Cappadocian like-minded people of Arius. Rufii writes closer to the truth: decem et septem soli tunc fuisse dicuntur, quibus Arii fides magis placeret. Hist. Eccles. I. 1. c. 5. The same number of defenders are shown by Arius and Gelasius in the acts of 1 Om. Sob. 2, 7.-Bl. Theodoret 1, 5 and 7, numbers 12 people by name. The Alexandrian Cathedral of 340 Apol speaks about this. with arian. p. 128, and historians testify: Rufin. 1, 5. Socr. I, 17. Sozom. I, 17. Theodoret. I, 26. Philostorgius also testifies to this. 1, 9. In his letter to the Church of Caesarea, Eusebius, partly by slander, partly by false interpretation, tries to explain his consent to sign the symbol of Nicea. Socrates 1. 8. Socrates. 1. 8, 9. Sozom. 1. 20, 21. The name Porphyrians is given from the name of Porphyry the philosopher, famous for his attacks on Christianity (d. 302 or 303). Message from the Imp. Constantine to the Church of Nicomedia - Theodoret 1, 20; but not all; and quite placed in Gelasius. Comment. Concil. Nicaeni. ed. 1590. Par. 111. p. 217. Other adherents of Arius also soon forgot this promise to adhere to the symbol of Nicaea, as the letter of Imp. Constantine to Theodotus of Laodicea ib. p. 217. Epistle of the Council of Nicaea to the Church of Alexandria. Socrates 1, 9. The sixth rule of the Council may partly relate to this: “Let the ancient customs accepted in Egypt, and in Libya, and in Pentapolis be preserved, so that the bishop of Alexandria has authority over all of them.” At that time, some dioceses in Syria, Cilicia and Mesopotamia did not agree with other Churches in celebrating Easter. S. Athanas. de Synod. p. 719. St. testifies Cyril of Alexandria in Prologo Paschali. Ideler Handbook. d. chronology. 12. 13. s. 258. This and more in Socrates 1, 9. The list is placed by St. Afanasy in apolog. cont. arian. p. 187. Evidence from antiquity about the year of death of St. Alexander and the election of St. There is disagreement among themselves about the appointment of Athanasius as bishop. According to the chronological preface to the newly discovered Easter letters of St. Athanasius (see Larsow, Die Festbriefe d. heil. Athanasius, Leipzig, 1852, Vorbericht, 26) the death of Alexander followed 17 Apr. 328, and the consecration of Athanasius as bishop took place on June 8 of the same year. But this news is contradicted by St. Athanasius that Alexander died five months after returning from the Council of Nicea, trace. in 326 (Apol. c. arian., c. 59). The words of Athanasius are confirmed by the testimony of Theodoret (Hist, eccl., I, 26) and the author of Libell. Synod., as well as the tradition transmitted by many ancient writers, that the bishopric of Athanasius lasted 46 or 47 years. According to information found in a recently discovered Coptic eulogy to Athanasius, he was elevated to bishop at the age of 33 (See Lemm, Koptische Fragmente, Memoires de l'academie imperiale des sciences de st. Petersbourg, VII serie, t. 36, N 11, s. 36, Petersburg, 1888). If the election of St. Athanasius was elected bishop in 326, then the year of his birth, according to this news, should fall on. 293 Note ed. Sozomen (11, 17) gives a story about this from the lost work of Apollinaris of Laodicea (in Syria), with whom St. Afanasy. Apol. contr. arian., p. 129. Apolog. cont. arian. p. 128. Letter Ep. Ammonius about the life of St. Pachomius and Theodore. Act. ss. maii T. 3. p. 350. Vita s. Pachomii Acta ss. maii T. 3. p. 304. The journey even extended to Siena. Wed. Vorbericht, Larsow, s. 27. The life of St. Pachomius describes a visit to St. Athanasius of the Taveni Monastery; the neighboring bishop of Tentir, Serapion, was also present. According to Philostorius, this was three years after the Council of Nicaea 2:7. Socrates 1, 24 Theodoret. S. 21. S. Athanas. Histor. arian, p. 347. Mentioned here are: Asclepius of Gaza, about whom in the message of the Council of Sardica (347) it is said that 17 years ago he was deprived of the throne by the Arians; and Eutropius of Adrianople, against whom they armed Basilina; mind. in 330 and 331 Apolog. contr. arian. p. 178. An excerpt from this letter is given by St. Afanasy. Apolog. contr. arian. p. 178. The epistle fully quotes St. Athanasius in Apolog contr. arian p. 179. and in the passage - Theodoret 1, 27. Apol. contr. arian. p. 182. About the council, which was intended for Caesarea - Sozomen. 2, 25. This whole matter, in detail with all the documents, is presented by St. Athanasius in his apology against the Arians. r. 181 et sq. Eusebius - life of Constantine, book. 4. Ch. 43. Ἐ μο ὶ δε γρ ά φει κ ὶ ἀ ν ά γκην ἐ πιτ ί θησιν, ἅξε κ ὶ ἅκοωτος ἡ μᾶς ἐ πιξ έ λλεσθαι. Apol. cont. arian. p. 187. S. Athanas. ad episcopos Aegypti et Libyae p. 276. θησαν. Apolog. contr. arian. p. 187. Their names are in the signature to the complaint filed at the council. Apolog. contr. arian. p. 196 Evseb. contr. Marcell e. 1. I 4 p.m. 18 Apolog contr. arian. p. 187. 195. 196. In the latter case, Flakyllus of Antioch is also included among them. Epist. synod alex in apol. contr. arian. p. 131. Sozomen 2, 25, referring to the very acts of this council, calculates the presented accusations in detail. In his "apology against the Arians" St. Athanasius concerns the most important ones. Apolog. contr. arian. p. 128 This can be seen from Alexander’s letter to Bishop. Solunsky, to Dionysius Apolog. arian p. 197. Dionysius himself writes about this p 197 coll. words by Athanasius R. 188, 189. Request for this from Egypt. bishops to Dionysius - in the apology of the r. 196. On one of these advertisements, the time when it was submitted was noted, namely: to the consulate of Julius Konstantin and Rufin Albin, at 10 days of the month. Fof, i.e. 335 Sep. 7 days Apolog. contr. arian p. 133–136 188–193. 197 and 198 Life of Constantine IV, 41. Sozomen. 2, 26. 27 Epistle of the Council of Jerusalem in Alexandria - in Apolog, p. 199, and in the work of St. Athanasius "on councils" r. 734. The council’s unclear expression about those received into communion: τους περ ὶ, Αρειον, St. himself explains. Athanasius in words: Epistle of Constantine - in Apologist. Afanas. r. 201. in Socrates 1, 34. Sozomen. 2, 28. Eusebius of Caesarea then spoke his speech on the thirtieth anniversary of the reign of Constantine, which is usually placed after his story about the life of Constantine. This is what St. himself writes. Athanasius, referring to the testimony of the Egyptian bishops who were present. Apolog. contr. arian. p. 203. This is confirmed by the bishops in the conciliar letter of 340. 132. So, should we believe Sozomen, who says 11:28 that Eusebius and his comrades defended before Constantine the justice of what was decreed by the Council of Tyre, on the basis of research carried out in Egypt by those who were now personally before the Sovereign? One might think that Sozomen borrowed this too from the acts of the Arian Council to which he refers. Sent, cathedral, Alexander. 340, b. 132. This order was made no later than three years before the Council of Tyre, in 332 Chron. Alex. In 334, special privileges were established for shipowners who were supposed to deliver grain to Constantinople. Cod. Theodos. L. XIII. Tit. V.I.7. In Apol. contr. arian. p. 125. 126. See a similar case in the same years with Sopater, in Eunanius. – Vitae Sophistar. p. 463. ed. Dübner. Ep. Constantini Caesaris ad populum Catholicae Ecclesiae Alexandriae. S. Athan. p. 203. Histor. arian. ad monach. p. 374. 375. Here he repeats the words of the Epistle of Constantine. Ἐ πυρ ώ θη, κ ὶ ἀ ντ ὶ τ ῆ ς ἀ κρο ί σεως ε ἰ ς τ ὰ ς Γαλλ ί ας ημᾶς ἀ π έ στειλεν Apol. cont. arian. p. 205. In Apolog. contr. arian. p. 126. Vit. s Anton, p. 847–849. For the time of this event, see Montf. animadvers. in vit et script, in Collect nov. Patr. Graecor. T. 2 p.m. XXIII. Information about this is found in Sozomen 2, 31, but it seems that he unfairly attributes this to the time after the death of Arius. St. Athanasius notes that, having previously been lenient towards Arius, after his death Constantine condemned him as a heretic. Histor. arian. p. 375. Ep. Ammonii de ss. Pachom. et Theodor. Act ss. maji T. 3. Append, p. 66. Ep. s. Athanas. ad Serapion p. 341. In the same year, when the Council of Tyre was held, and the thirtieth anniversary of the reign of Constantine was celebrated, the Empire was divided between the three sons of Constantine. V. and his two nephews. Lebeau Hist. du Bas-Empire. T.I.p. 341. Hence Trier in Ammianus Marcellinus - domicilium Principis clarum XV. With. II. Act. ss. Maii Τ VII. p. 19. Hieronym iu Chron: Maximinus Trevirorum Episcopus, – a quo Athanasius Alexandriae Episcopus honorifice susceptus est.” Ad episc. Aegypt. p. 278. Apolog. ad Imp. Constant, p. 304. Ep. Constantini Caesar, p. 203. The famous story of Pontitian in the “confession” of Bl. Augustine XIII, 6. refers to Trier. S. Hieronym, Ep. V. sec. ed. Vallarsi. Codex Theodos. L. XVI. T. I. 2, 3. His famous decree against paganism, 341: cesset superstitio; sacrificiorum aboleatur insania. S Athanas. Apolog. ad. Constant, p. 299. Ibid. 297. This was around 340. Apolog. contr. arian. p. 203. Histor. arian. ad. monach. p. 349. Apolog. ad. Imper. Constant. p. 298. The African Bishop, Virgil of Tapsia, calls this priest the Evangel. Dial, contr. arianos. Patrolog. Curs. T. LXII. p. 155. Socrates 2, 2. Sozom. 3, 1. Theodor. 2, 3. Gregory God. in the laudatory speech of St. Afanasy Ch II. Ammianus Marcellinus the pagan Eusebius put it this way: apud quem (si vere dici debeat) multa Constantius potuit. L. 18 c. 4. Apolog ad lm. Constant, p. 298. 23 Nov 337 Approx. ed. Epist. synod. Alex. 340 an. in Apolog. p. 140 All this can be seen partly from the message of the Council of Alexandria (340), partly from the History of Socrates. This message has not reached us, but is mentioned in the message of Pope Julius. Apologia p. ar. r. 142. Mentioned in the message of the Council of Alexandria in 340 Apol. The message of the Council, in its original form, was supported by various documents, which were later omitted by the scribes, partly, perhaps, because they are found in other defensive writings of St. Afanasia. It is placed in his apology against the Arians r. 125. All this is clear from the above-mentioned letter of Julius to the Antiochians. St. Athanasius in the book: “On the Councils” cites all four Symbols of the Antiochian river. 735–738. He is called Emesa after the city in which he was later a bishop. He was the favorite of Constantius, whom he accompanied on campaigns. Bl. Jerome (id Chronico) calls it arianae signifer factionis. Augusti Eusebii Emiseni opuscula, 1829. pag. 59 et coct. See Gregory the Theologian, praise. sl. The year is established on the basis of St.'s own news. Athanasius that three years passed from his arrival in Rome to the Council of Sardica (343). Apol. Const., 4. Approx. ed. According to the preface to the Easter letters (Vorbericht, Larsow, 301), Athanasius disappeared from Alexandria on March 19; four days later (March 23) Gregory entered there. Ed. All this is set out in the district letter of St. Afanasia. r. 110 – 118. Comparison. Histor. arianor. p 349. Vita S Antonii p 857. This prediction refers to the first invasion of the Arians on the Church of Alexandria, as can be seen from the order of the narrative This message has not reached us, but is known from a summary in Sozomen 3, and from the answer of Pope Julius. S. Ath. opp Tip. 123 et 352. The cathedral was, as St. writes. Athanasius, in the church where the priest Viton gathers people (for divine services) (p 140), probably the same one who was with Vincent from Pope Sylvester at the Ecumenical Council. S. Athan Histor arianor p. 352. The acts of this council have not reached us The letter of Pope Julius was placed by St. Athanasius is completely in his apology p 141. Apolg. ad Imp. Constant. p. 299 Markella's life was briefly sketched by Bl. Jerome (Ep. 127. sec ed. Vallarsi), who had a close acquaintance with her, especially through scientific works, already in the later years of her life. He says directly: Haec ab A1exandrinis sacerdotibus, papaque Athanasio et postea – Petro, vitam beati Antonii adhuc tunc viventis, monasteriorumque in Thebaide, Paschomii et virginum ac viduarum didicit disciplinam. There are many letters to this Markella from Bl. Jerome has survived to this day. For her he also wrote some interpretations of St. books. Marcella died in 412. About Isidore Palladius in Lavsaik ch. I.; about Ammonius in Socrates 4, 23. S. epiph. haeres. LXVIII. p. 723. Histor. ar. p 350 – 352. Vita S Anton, p 859 Apolog. ad Imp. Constant, p. 297. 298. The council took place in the fall of 343, as is clear from the Easter letters of Athanasius. Note ed. This is exactly what St. says. Athanasius in the History of the Arians. In an apology against the Arians p. 168. He cites up to 280 names of Orthodox bishops alone. those who signed the definition of the Sardican Council, but including here also those who signed after the Council. Er. Synod. Sardicens. omnibus Episcopis. in Apolog. p. 169. Eusebius of Nicomedia died in 342. The leaders of Arianism are indicated by the Sardician Council itself, in its definition; and the names and dioceses of their adherents are known from the signatures in the message of the Council of Philippolis, which separated from Sardinia. The message is preserved between historical passages in Op. Ilaria Patrolog. Curs. T. X. p. 676. Ep. Synod. Sardic. ad. omnes Ep. p. 166 The excuses of the Arianists are indicated in their Philippian Epistle. Patrolog. Curs. T. X p. 668. 669. Hosea himself wrote about this to Imp. Constance. Er. Hosii ar. S. Athan. in Historia arianor. p 370. The number of those present and the names of their dioceses, according to the signatures on the various messages issued from the council, are determined in the studies of Ballerini, ed. at the Creations of St. Leo Pope of Rome. Patrolog. Curs. T. LVI. p. et 59. St. testifies to this. Athanasius in the letter of the Council of Alexandria to the Antiochians 362 S. Ath. Orr. T. I. p 772. 773. Therefore, it is unfair in the history of Theodoret 2, 8. that a new definition of faith is given, as if on behalf of the Council of Sardicia, mentioned by Socrates 2, 20, and Sozomen 3, 12. These definitions of the Sardican Council are set out in its message to all bishops. S. Ath. Opp. T.I.p. 162 – 168., are repeated in his other letters: to the Egyptian Churches - p. 159 – 161., and in particular: to the Alexandrian river. 155 – 159. and Mareot Patrol. T. LVI. r. 846. About the rules of the Sardican Cathedral, as not having the closest relation to the matter of St. Athanasius, and decided, as can be seen from the very composition of the council, according to the needs of the Churches located in the western half of the Empire, we do not need to talk here. The signatures are given in the very message of the Sardican Cathedral, placed in the apology of St. Afanasia. T.I.r. 168. 169. This is how Theodoret 2:8 sets out the contents of Constance’s letter. Socrates 2:22 and Sozomen 3:20 speak directly about the threat of war. Epistle of the Council of Philippopolis by Hilary. Fragment. III. Patrolog. T. X. p. 658. It was even sent to Africa - to the Donatists. Historia arianorum. p. 354–356. Montfaucon. Collect. Nova Patr. Graecor. T. 2. p. 20 S. Ath. apol. ad Imp. Constant, p 298. Apol. contr. arian. p. 171. Letters to them Constance is cited by Athanasius in his apology for R. 170 and in History of the Arians p. 357. There is news about Gregory in Theodoret 2, 12., that he was killed by the people in Alexandria. But other historians do not confirm this; and St. Athanasius expresses his death as follows: τελ ευτ ῆ σαντος Γρηγορ ί ου. r. 356. St. Athanasius placed this message in his apology for R. 171, but not quite. He kept silent about the praise concerning his face. It is fully contained in Socrates 2, 23. According to the testimony of Vita acephala, 1 and the preface to the Easter letters, the return of Athanasius to Alexandria took place on October 21. 846 Approx. ed. In Ilarius Fragm. II Patrolog. Curs. T. X. p. 647, and translated into Greek. St.'s tongue Afanasia Apolog. p. 176. 177. In the same year, Constantius extended this regulation of the rights of the clergy to other areas of his empire, as can be seen from the decree to his proconsul of Asia, Severian. Cod Theodos L XVI Tit 2. 1 9. Here, in fact, it goes without saying ἀ τ έ λεια, or ἀ λειτουργησ ί α, i.e., freedom of the clergy from curial positions. Apolog. contra arian p 178. Histor arian p 356. Socrates. 2, 23. Sozom. 3, 20. Theodoret 2, 12 Er. Synodi Hierosolymitanae in Apolog contra arian p 175 Apolog. r. 177. 204.-The time of publication of this Apology is determined by the fact that St. Athanasius points to the repentance of Ursatius and Valens for slandering him as proof of their innocence (p. 123. 176. 177). And this change in them occurred after the Council of Sardicia. Meanwhile, subsequently, Ursacius and Valens again went over to the side of the Arians, and announced that the repentance they submitted was forced: which was no later than 352 - If we add to this that in the apology of St. Athanasius points out the new unrest of the Arians (page 123) and his expulsion as a recent event, ἃ ν ῦ ν π έ πονθα (page 178): then there is no doubt that the apology was written in 350 or 351. At the same time, we must, however, agree that those mentioned at the end of this work later events, such as the fall of Liverius, were added to the apology only later. Apolog. ad Imperat. p. 309. Histor. arian. p. 358. On p. Drave, where Essek, or Osek, is now. The battle took place on September 28. 351 Sulpic. Sever. Histor. 2, 38. Patrolog. Curs. T. XX, p. 150 St. defends himself against all these accusations. Athanasius in his Apology to the Emperor, p 295. Liberii epist ad Constantium in Fragment historicis ap. Hilarium. Patrolog. Τ X p. 683. About another forged letter from Liverius to the East. for bishops, see Kustan's remarks Patrolog VIII p. 1393. Sozomen. 4, 9. Athanas. apologia ad Constant, p. 307. Hence, for the last twenty years of the life of St. Athanasius, a very useful guide in relation to chronology is the short narrative published by Maffem (Observat. Litterar. Vol. 3) about events from the life of St. Athanasius, located over the years, probably contemporary in Alexandria itself. It is named by the publisher Historia acephala. We use significant excerpts from it included in the publication of Rufinova East. Church in Patrolog. Curs. T. XXI, p. 493 et ​​seq. (A new and better edition of it was made by Sievers, in Zeitschr. fur histor. Theol. 1868, 87 – 162 ss. Ed.). Suplic. Sever. 11, 39. p. 150. “Edictum ab Imperatore proponitur, ut qui in damnationem Athanasii non subscriberent. in exsilium pellerentur. The history of the Council of Arelat, described by Hilary (Fragm. I, p 631). it didn't reach us. S. Hilarii lib. contr. Constant, p. 588. S. Hilarii fragm. VI. p. 688 Ep. Constantii ad. Evsebium, ex actis Eusebii. Patrolog. Curs. T. XIII. p. 564. This is how Hilary describes the first actions of the council upon the arrival of Eusebius. Ad Const, lib. Patrolog. X. p. 562. Sulpic. Sever, p 151. Hilarius de Synod, p. 531. Lucifer, dc non conveniend. cum haeretic. Patrol. XIII. p. 780 And in the essay: Moriendum esse pro Filio Dei p. 1011. 1015. 1031. Conf. ib p. 748–750. Dixistï pacem volo firmare in imperio meo,” Lucifer repeatedly repeats the words of Constantius. Patrolog. ХIII p. 749. S Athan. Hist arianor p. 368 390 With such and such measures, up to 300 votes could probably be collected in the Western Empire in favor of the Milanese definition. And this is why Socrates 2, 36 and Sozomen 4·, 9 speak of three hundred Western bishops present at this council. Vita Luciferi in Patrolog. T. XIII. r. 739 Hist Arian p. 370 et seq. Hist, acephala in not ad Ruphin. p 498. This was, according to the testimony of Athanasius himself, 26 months after the appearance of Montana in Alexandria. Apolog ad Imperat p. 308. Apolog. ad Imperat p 308. 309. Histor acephal p 493 His arian. p 373. Apolog. ad Imper. p 310. Apolog. de fug. p. 334.His. arian. p. 394. Histor. acephal. p. 493. Of the two complaints against Syrian filed by the people, one is preserved in the “History of the Arians”, the last one, dated February 12, b. 374. 393. Historian. p. 374–377. Probably the same one in which they served on Easter, as stated above. For a) both there and here, it is called the “great” church. b) Histor. arian. p. 388, a newly built church that was sacked by the Arians. called: ἡ ἐ ν τ ῷ Καισαρε ί ῳ. And at St. Epiphany (Haer. 69. p. 728) the newly created church is called Καισαρ ί α ( σ ύ ν τῇ ν ῦ ν χτισθε ί σῃ τῇ Καισαρ ί ᾳ λεγομ έ νῃ). Histor. acephal. p. 494. notes that this was four days after the arrival of Heraclius. There was a rumor that St. Afanasy hid in the house of a virgin, precisely on the assumption that they probably wouldn’t look for him there. Pallad. Lausiac. With. 136. At St. Athanasius, these mines are called φα ί νω. See about them Relandi Palaest. 1716. p. 702. Raumer Palaestina. 1838. p. 272. See Gregory the Theologian saying that he was a receiver of pork meat for the army. Part 2. St. Athanasius generally calls him a receiver of government goods. Hist. ar. r. 389. Ammian. Marcelin. 22, 11. Slich. Cod. Theod. I. XV, de oper. public I. 1. not. Gothofredi. Great, or upper, and Ammoniyev. About the sixteen exiled bishops Apolog. ad. Imperat. p. 312 316.et. Histor. arian. p. 387. – About thirty – forced to flee. Apolog. de fug. d. 324. Hist. arian. p. 387. Theodoret. Hist. 2, 27. Philostorg. 3, 20. Both letters were placed by St. Afanasy in Apolog. ad Imper. at p. 313. The message to Abyssinia is inscribed in the name of two brothers, the rulers of this country: Ἀ ιζανᾶ and Σαζ ανᾶ. Both of these names were found in 1806 on the same monument in Abyssinia Salt voiage a Méroé. Rufin Histor Eccl 2, 16. St. himself points to this journey. Athanasius in apology to Constantius, r. 312. ἤ δη δ ὲ τ ῆ ς ὁ δο ῦ μο ῦ ἐ μβ ά ντος, κα ὶ ἔ ρημον ἐ ξελθ ό ντος... He points out his stay in a foreign country in his district letter to the bishops of Egypt, where he says: r. 274. Ἥχουσα ἐ ν το ῦ ς μ έ ρετι το ύ τοις διατρ ί βων... p. 275: κ ὶ γ ὰ ρ κα ὶ το ύ ς Επισκ ό πους τ ῶ ν μερ ῶ ν το ύ των ἤδη διοχλε ῖ ν ἄ ρχονται. The bishops mentioned here are not Egyptian. In another place p 291. he directly says that “the bishops of these countries” intend to stand for the faith to the point of blood, hearing the loyalty of the Nicene confession of the Egyptian bishops. Conf. et. p. 277. Ad. Episcopos Aegypti et Lybiae ep. encyclica – contra arianos p. 270 – 294. The time of this letter, in addition to consideration of the indicated circumstances, is revealed from the remark of St. Athanasius, that 55 years have already passed since the Meletian schism was condemned, and 36 since the (first) condemnation of the Aryan heresy. Apolog. ad Constant, p. 318. κ ὶ θηρ ί οις συνῴχησα. About his stay in the desert, see also r. 312.681 Epist. 2. ad Lucifer, p. 966 An excerpt from the message, preserved in Latin. Orr. s. Athan. T.I.p. 968. In addition to the passage in the history of Theodoret 2, 14. Orr. s. Athan. p. 1284. Apolog. ad Imperat. Constantium p. 295–319. It is written in the form of a defensive speech, which St. Athanasius, according to the custom of that time, intended to pronounce it before the Emperor. Upon returning to Egypt, he added an explanation to it - why he did not present her personally. In setting out all the accusations mentioned above, we showed what could be said to refute them, using the apology of St. Afanasia. Apolog. de fuga sua p. 320–336. About Hosea p. 322 Er. encycl. ad Episc. Aegypt. p. 293. Opp. s. Athan. T.I.p. 103. De decretis Nicaenae Synodi T. I. p. 203. Written before the resumption of persecution against St. Athanasius under Constantius. p. 209. De sententia Dionysii p. 243. Er. ad monach. p. 343. 344. Ep. ad. Serap. 342. That the letter inscribed to Serapion referred to the Bishop of Tmuite is evident a) from other letters of St. Athanasius “about the Holy Spirit”, where they are directly inscribed with r. 647., and where he is supposed to know what was written against the Arians about the Son of God p. 649.; b) from the fact that there is no other Serapion known who would himself engage in similar debates with heretics. Serapion, Bishop of Tmuite, probably from the catechets of the catechetical school (Fabr. Bibl. Graec. T. IX. p. 154), glorified by Bl. Jerome for his learning, and is known for his polemical work against the Manichaeans, which Fakund (pro defenso trium capit. XI, 2) is attributed even to Athanasius. Patrolog Curs. T. LXVII. p. 801. From the work of Asterius, extracts are given in the first three words of Athanasius against the Arians. Asterius's works date back to the first years of the emergence of Arianism. Marcellus' lengthy work, de subjectione Domini Christi, is known from passages preserved by Eusebius of Caesarea, who wrote against him in two books: "against Marcellus." and in three - “about church dogmas.” Of these, only fragments have survived, especially among the Antiochian writers. They were collected by Fabricius. Bibl. Graec. T. IX. p. 135. Patrolog. Curs. T. X. 26 et 39. The first three books against Eunomius contain a refutation of his apology presented at the Council of Constantinople, 360, which was attended by St. Vasily, This refutation appeared no later than 364. Orat. 2. contr. arian. p. 410. 412. Or. 3. p. 564. Likewise Hilary de S. Trinitate Lib. II. c. 4. Epistol. 1–4. ad. Serapionem p. 647–714. The second and third epistles contain an abbreviated summary of what is said about the Divinity of the Son of God in the words against the Arians and in 1 last. to Serapion about the Holy Spirit. Later, the following were written about the same subject: a) the book “On the Trinity and the Holy Spirit,” preserved only in a Latin translation. r. 969–981 (Patrolog. T. LXII. p. 307. between op. Vigilius of Thapsius), and b) an essay against the Macedonians, from which only an excerpt has survived. Montfau s. collect. Patr. Graec. T. 11. p. 102. Hist, arian. ad monach. p. 343–395. The beginning of this story is missing. According to the publisher's probable guess, what is missing is precisely what is set out in detail in the second part of the first apology of St. Afanasia. Perhaps this omission depended on the scribes, who omitted from history what was equally stated in the apology. Montfauc. ad mon p. 398. Epiphan. haer. LXXVI. p. 918. Ammian Marcell 22, 11, pagan, writes: professions suae oblitus, quae nihil nisi justum suadet et lene, ad delatorum ausa feralia desciscebat. Hist. aceph. p. 494. Et proposuit (Paulus notarius) imperiale praeceptum pro Georgio et domuit multos ob eius vindictam (23 June 359). Ammianus Marcellinus in the same year mentions the sending of the notary Paul to Egypt to investigate the attackers who allegedly came to a pagan temple in Abydos with secret questions to the deity revered here. – One order could be connected to another. Let us add to this that Marcellian describes the notary as the most ferocious person. XIX, 12. He described the actions of these two councils, and according to some he even attended one; for in describing them he says that he conveys ἅ περ ἐώ ρακα κ ὶ ἔ γνον ἀ κριβ ῶ ς. But it is more likely that he saw only the definitions of one or another council. How could he decide to come out of his solitude and appear in front of his enemies? – De Synod, p. 716. This is precisely what Ammonius says in a letter to Theophilus about St. Theodore the Sanctified. Act ss. Mai. T. 3 p. 356. And this determines the time of the described event. S. Pachomii vita. Act. ss. Maii T. 3. p. 330. Subsequently, this Artemius suffered for the name of Christ from Julian, atoning for his guilt before the Church with his blood. In his confession of faith, before the Emperor himself, the faith of the Church in the Son of God is clearly expressed. His suffering is described by St. John of Damascus, and in Greek. language published by May ni Spicileg. Rom. T. IV, p. 340. His memory is celebrated on October 28. Luciferi pro s. Athanasio libri duo. Patrolog T. XIII. p. 817. The time of writing of these books is determined by reference to a) George of Alexandria and his violence; b) for the war between Constantius and Sapor, the Persian r. 857, which began at the end of 359. Based on the content of these books, it is difficult to imagine that they could be praised by St. Athanasius, as it appears in his (second) letter to Lucifer, known only in Latin, and issued from the hands of the Luciferians. S. Ath. Orr. T.I.p. 265. It is even more incredible that St. Athanasius translated, or ordered to be translated, them into Greek, in which they do not exist. So, it is difficult to agree with Montfaucon that the letters of St. Athanasius to Lucifer has reached us intact. Returning to Alexandria after a long wandering, George did not extinguish the previous enmity against himself, but intensified it even more. Ammianus Marcellinus (Lib. XXII. p. 11) testifies that the people were especially irritated by his threat to destroy the famous church of the Serapis. Passing by him one day, he said: How long will this coffin stand? - Julian himself, reproaching the Alexandrians for the murder of George, wrote to them: for what untruths were you indignant at George? Perhaps because he irritated the late Constantius against you - then he brought an army into the holy city (Alexandria), because the Egyptian military leader occupied the most holy temple (pagan), stealing from there images, offerings and all the decoration of the sanctuary (Iulian. Ep. X. ed. Spanheim. p. 370). So, according to the assurance of the other, George aroused special hatred among the pagans. And so, as soon as the news reached them that Constantius had died, that Julian owned the Empire, they rebelled against George and killed him, along with some other persons they hated. Histor. aceph. p. 497. – The story of Ammianus Marcellinus that the pagans killed George upon receiving news of the death of Artemius, who was equally hated by them, is incredible because Artemius died as a martyr of Antioch, where Julian arrived at the end of July 362. In this case, the death of George would have occurred upon St.’s return to Alexandria. Athanasius, who arrived there on February 20, as evidenced by the story of an unknown writer (Historia acephala). And according to other writers, there are no clashes between St. Athanasius and George in Alexandria is unknown. So, we must accept the testimony of this story that George was killed back in December 361. Eunapii Vitae sophistarum. ed. Boissonad. 1849. p. 471. In the laudatory speech of St. Afanasy. Amm. Marcell. 22, 9. Ab Evsebio ibidem (Nicomediae) educatus. Excerpt from a letter from Facundus IV, 2 See the four Arian symbols: the 3rd Sirmian, - proposed to the Council of Rome (Theodoret. II, 21), - compiled by the Arians in Seleucia, and the Constantinople, - all 359, by St. Athanasius de Synod. p. 721.745–747. This word was placed by St. Epiphany in the history of heresies. Haer. 75. rub. 876 with some, however, comments. Rufin. Hist. Eccl. I, 27. 28. Although this rule about bishops is not found in the epistle of the Council of Alexandria to the Antiochians, it was decreed at the same time, as can be seen from the epistle of St. Athanasius to Rufinian b. 963. See Theodoret. Hist. Eccl. 5, 3. Expression: The Three Hypostases were defended by the adherents of St. Meletia. Er. ad Antiochenos ar. s. Athan. p. 770. Hieronym. adv. Lucifer. Patrolog. XXIII. p. 175; s. Athanas. p. ad Rufinian. p. 963. Creativity. You. Vel. pis. 196. Hilarii Fragment. Historic. XII. p. 714. Creation St. Grieg. Part 2. A word of praise to Athanasius. Amm. Marcell. 22, 5. Quod agebat ideo obstinate, ut dissensiones augenta licentia, non timeret unanimantem postea plebem. Hist. acephal. p. 501. Et eodem momento, quo propositum est edictum, episcopus egressus est civitatem, et commoratus est Thereu. Thereu, Thereon. probably - Herev, the first station from Alexandria, one day's journey from No., mentioned by St. Athanasius in the life of Anthony V. b. 890, in Grieg's praise. Theologian Part 2. About the imprisonment of the elders Hist. aceph. Pythiodorus is also mentioned here, who with his gang insisted on the prefect to expel the presbyters. St. also speaks about him. Grieg. The theologian in 1 accusatory word on Julian Part I. The burning of the church is mentioned - St. Epiphanius (Haer. 69. T. I. r. 728) and St. Ambrose of Mediolan e. 40. (Patrolog. T. 16. p. 1107). Er 6. “If by December Athanasius does not leave the city, and even Egypt,” Julian wrote, “then, I swear by Serapis, I will exact a hundred pounds of gold from your cohort.” Hist, aceph. p. 501. Episcopus moratus, sicut praedictum est, apud Thereon, ascendit ad superiores partes Aegypti, usque ad Hermopolim et Antinoum. St. Gregory Theologian Part 2. Pammon is probably the same person as Abba Pamva, about whom the Patericon also says that he was close to Athanasius and was invited by him to Alexandria. We follow the story of St. himself about this. Athanasius, set out in a letter from Ammonius to Theophilus, Bishop of Alexandria. Ammonius, in the years 351–354, lived in Tavenna with Theodore, and reporting about him what he knew, he recalls, among other things, this story heard from the lips of St. Athanasius by Theophilus himself, when he was still a presbyter of Alexandria. Act. ss. Maii T. 3. p. 356. Opp. s. Athan. T. 1. p. 868. The further narration of an unknown, contemporary writer about the affairs of Athanasius agrees with this. Quo in his locis degente,” he continues after the words above, “cognitum est, Iulianum imperatorem mortuum, et Iovianum christianorum imperatorem.” Ingressus igitur Alexandriam latenter Episcopus, adventu ejus non pluribus cognito, occurrit navigio ad imp. Jovianum, et post , ecclesiasticis rebus compositis, accipiens litteras venit Alexandriam et introivit in Ecclesiam Athir XIX die, consul. Ioviani et Varroniani, ex quo exiit Alexandria secundum praeceptum Iuliani, usque dum advenit praedicto die Athir XIX, post annum unum et menses III et dies XXII. Hist. aceph. p. 503. But here, instead of the month Athir (corresponding to our Oct. 28 - Nov. 27) there should be Wechir (which corresponds to Jan. 26 - Feb. 25). Otherwise, removing St. Athanasius from Alexandria would have lasted not a year and three months, but a year and nine months, and therefore the return to Alexandria must be set on February 13. 364 Sozomen VI, 5, like an unknown contemporary of St. Afanasia, says; that he, after consulting with a few friends, recognized it as necessary to see the sovereign, a Christian, in person. Others say, he adds, that the sovereign himself called him. Philostorius, who himself belonged to the same sect, writes about this. N. E. VIII, 6. Jovinian was in Edessa on September 27. 363 (Cod. Theod. L. VII. Tit. 4 . E. 9), arrived in Antioch in October (Theoph. Hist. p. 45). Moratum paulisper Antiochiae principem, notes Amm Marcellinus 25, 10. Orr. s. Ath. T. 1. p. 781. In the history of bl. Theodoret, this presentation has the form of a conciliar letter, on behalf of Athanasius and other Egyptian bishops. But in the manuscript it is simply written: about faith in Jovinian. - Moreover, St. Gregory the Theologian speaks of this confession, not as a conciliar one. It is placed in Socrates 3, 25 Petitio ad Iovin. s. Athan. T. 1. p. 782. Opp. s Athan. T. 1. p. 779 St. Basil V. clearly writes about this in his letters to Meletius and Epiphanius of Cyprus. Pis. 85 and 250. In manuscripts it even appears with the name of St. Afanasy, but on an unfair guess. It's called βιον Σαμοσ ά τεα κατ ὰ τον ὁ μουσ ί ου. Ορρ. S. Athan. Τ. 2. ρ. 31. Hist, acephal. p. 509. Usually, the beginning of the persecution of Valentov is believed to be later, precisely in 367. But Garnier, not yet knowing the modern Alexandrian record of the affairs of Athanasius, only on the basis of the commendable word of St. Gregory to Vasily V. and letters from Vasily himself, proved that the persecution began much earlier. Valens arrived in Cappadocia back in 365 with a horde of Arian bishops to establish his wickedness here too. Vita Basilii M. With. 10. § V – VII. Now, the evidence of the mentioned note confirms the criticism's consideration. A vivid description of the beginning of Valens' persecution can be read from St. Gregory Part 4. But due to the troubled circumstances of the empire it was suspended, and then resumed with renewed vigor. In Alexandria this penalty is set at three hundred pounds. gold: mulctae auri librarum ССС; traces three times more than what Julian had appointed in such a case. This entire story of a contemporary (Hist, aceph. p. 509) was rewritten by Sozomen in his history 6, 12. Only chronological evidence is missing. The place where St. settled. Athanasius, is called πατρ ῶ ον μν ῆ μα, and in the contemporary record - villa iuxta fluvium novum, that is, near the new canal, which was built around that time by the prefect Tatian. Cod. Th. cum not. Gothofred. T. IV. p. 653. The riot opened on September 24th. 365., and ended with the battle of Nakolia on May 27, 366. Hist. acephal p. 509.510 Orr. s Athan. Τ. 1. p. 871 Orr s. Athan. T. 1. p. 891 This is clear from the message of St. Athanasius to Epictetus r. 901, which is cited by Theodoret 2, 22 and Sozomen 6, 23. Epist ad Epictetum p 301. ad Adelph p. 911 Advers. Apollo. libri duo p. 922. Er. ad Maximum p. 918. Maximus the Philosopher, probably the same one who subsequently appeared to St. Gregory the Theologian, and enjoyed his favor for some time. Words 25. Creativity. Gr. Theologian Part 2. He presented his essay “on faith against the Arians” to Emperor Gratian. Hieron. de vir. illustr. With. 127. In addition, St. St. also probably wrote to Maximus the Philosopher. Basil's answer about Dionysius of Alexandria. Pis. 8. Creativity. St. Vas Ch. 6. Er. ad Palladium T. 1. r. 957. In a similar way, he wrote to John and Antiochus the presbyters, R. 956. Er. ad Rutiniau. Orr. s. Atihan. T. 1. p. 963. An excerpt from this letter was preserved by Facundus (pro defens. trium capit. 1. IV. p. 2. Patrolog. T. 67. p. 612), but it is unfair to Diodorus of Tarsus, who also came from Antioch, but belonged to the society of Meletius. The virtues of Diodorus of Tyre are praised by Rufinus Hist. Eccl. 2, 21. St. wrote to him. Epiphanius of Cyprus “on precious stones” in the vestments of the Jewish high priest. Orr. s Epiphan. T. 2. r. 225. The passage is preserved in the preface to the so-called Paschal or Alexandrian chronicle Ed. 1832. p. 9. About the time of death in Histor. aceph. it is directly said: alio consulatu Valentiniani et Valentis IV, Pachom VIII, dormiit, which indicates May 3, 373. About the dedication of Peter also p. 510. The memory of the Saint is celebrated everywhere on May 2. But in the Greek menaions, apparently, the bringing of the relics of St. is remembered on this day. Athanasius from Alexandria to Constantinople for in the verses written to this day it is said, probably by an Alexandrian: Αθαν ά σιε πο ὐ κομ ὶ ζῃ μοι π ά λιν; κα ὶ νεκρ ὸ ν ἐ ξ ό ριζον ἐ κπ έ μπουσι σε. And another poet also wrote: Δευτερ ί η ν έ κυς Ἀ θανασ ί ου ε ἰ σεκομ ί σθη. Siberi Martyrologium Metricum Eccl. Graecae p. 160 et. 460. (According to the preface on the Easter letters of St. Athanasius, his death followed Pachoam VII., and on VIII., i.e., May 2, under which date the memory of St. Athanasius is actually listed in the Roman and in all eastern monthly books. In view of these evidence, it is more likely to assume a copyist’s error in the news Vith. acephala. Cf. Larsow, S. 48. Ed. note). See Epistle of Peter of Alexandria in history. Theodoret IV, 22. Creation St. You. V. part 6 letters. 57 Confession August. VIII. With. 6 S Athanasii Apolog. ad Imper. p. 313. Opp. s. Ath. T.i. p. 267. Letter written around 354 Epist. Petri Alexandr 111 Theodoret. Hist. IV, 22. Compiled by the former rector of the Moscow Theological Academy, Archpriest Alexander Vasilyevich Gorsky († 1875) and originally published in Add. to Creation St. Oo., Part X, 1851. Chronological amendments made by publishers on the basis of newly discovered documents (Chapter of Easter letters) are marked with a special note. You might be interested in: