N38. IfSyriciusis to blame (and who, butBaronius, can excuse him?) for not acknowlegingFlavianus, at least after the Death ofPaulinus, the Election of his SuccessorEvagriusbeing unquestionably uncanonical and illegal; how much more is he to blame for not acknowleging him even after the Death ofEvagrius, when he had no Pretence whatsoever for denying him his Communion, and by granting it he might have put an End to the Schism?Baronius, to conceal the Truth, and mislead his Readers, takes a great deal of Pains, in his Account of this Schism, to place in a false Light all the Transactions relating to it. But, in spite of all the Art he has been able to use, to varnish over the Conduct ofSyricius, and impose on the Public, it must appear undeniable to every impartial, I may say, to every rational, Man, that the Schism, and the many Evils attending it, which are pathetically described byChrysostom, who was then atAntioch[1], were intirely owing to the Pride and Obstinacy of the Bishop ofRome, at least during the last Six Years, that is, from the Year 382. whenEvagriusdied, to 388. when he yielded, at last, upon his being courted to it by a solemn Embassy. He had nothing then to object against the Election, and much less against the Conduct ofFlavianus; and, if he had nothing then, he could have nothing before; so that it was merely from a haughty and obstinate Spirit that he refused to communicate with him, and, by such a Refusal, kept up and fomented a Division so pernicious to the Church.Baroniusrepresents him as labouring with indefatigable Pains to restore the Tranquillity of the Church, and leaving nothing unattempted that could any-ways contribute to the promoting of so pious an Undertaking, an Undertaking which he had so much at Heart. But that he had nothing at Heart besides the Glory of his See, is but too manifest from his Conduct; for the Minute that was saved, as it was by the above-mentioned Deputation, all the Difficulties vanished at once, which till then had obstructed the Work. As for the Conduct ofFlavianus, in refusing to submit his Cause to the Judgment of the Council ofCapua, or of theEgyptianBishops, appointed to judge it by that Council, it must appear, if impartially considered, more worthy of Commendation than Blame, tho’ condemned, in very unbecoming Terms, by the Sticklers for the See ofRome. He had been chosen in the Oecumenical Council ofConstantinople, in the Year 381. by the unanimous Voice of all the Bishops of the Diocese of the East, or the Patriarchate ofAntioch, and soon after ordained in their Presence, atAntioch, with the Approbation ofNestorius, then Bishop ofConstantinople, and the loud Acclamations of the far greater Part of the People ofAntioch, promising themselves, in him, a secondMeletius, in whose room he was chosen[2]. Being thus chosen and ordained, he was acknowleged by all the Bishops of the East, except those ofEgypt, of the Island ofCyprus, andArabia. Could he therefore, without shamefully betrayingthe undoubted Right, which the Bishops of each Diocese had of chusing their Metropolitan, suffer his Election to be questioned and canvassed by the Western Bishops, who had no Concern in it; and, besides, had openly espoused the Cause of his CompetitorPaulinus, and supported him, so long as he lived, with the most open and avowed Partiality? Could he, without foregoing, in a manner still more shameful, both his own Right, and that of his Electors, out of Compliance to the Bishops assembled atCapua, put himself upon the Level withEvagrius, whose Election and Ordination were undoubtedly illegal? Besides,Flavianuswas sensible, that the Eastern Bishops would have paid no manner of Regard to the Sentence of the Council; that, had the Council adjudged the See ofAntiochtoEvagrius, such a Judgment, instead of closing, would have widened the Breach between the East and the West; and consequently, that his complying with their Summons, far from answering the End they proposed to themselves, would more probably have had a quite contrary Effect, since he had but too much room to suppose, that the strong Prejudice, which they had on all Occasions betrayed against him, would incline them to favour his Competitor, notwithstanding the known Illegality both of his Election and Ordination. It was therefore, upon the Whole, very prudent in him to decline putting the Affair upon that Issue.1. Chrys. in Eph. hom. 11.2. Socr. l. 5 c. 5. Soz. l. 7. c. 3. Theod. l. 5. c. 9. Cod. Theod. ap. p. 104.

1. Chrys. in Eph. hom. 11.

2. Socr. l. 5 c. 5. Soz. l. 7. c. 3. Theod. l. 5. c. 9. Cod. Theod. ap. p. 104.

Flavianusendeavours in vain to gain over theEustathians.

Flavianus, being thus at last, in the Seventeenth Year of his Episcopacy, acknowleged by, and united inCommunionCommunionwith, all the Bishops of the Catholic Church, spared no Pains to gain over theEustathians, that, by reuniting them to the rest of his Flock, he might have the Merit and Glory of establishing an intire and lasting Tranquillity in the Church committed to his Care. But his Zeal was not therein attended with the wished for Success. The Glory of completing so great and desirable a Work was, by Providence, reserved forAlexander, one of his Successors, who had the Satisfaction of seeing all Party-Names laid aside, and the whole People ofAntiochunited in one Flock, under one and the same Shepherd. This Union was made with great Solemnity, in the Year 415. Eleven Years after the Death ofFlavianus, and Eighty-five after the Beginning of the Schism. ThusTheodoret, in his Ecclesiastical History[1328]. ButTheodorusthe Lector assures us, that there still remained someSeeds of that unhappy Division till the Year 482. when the Body ofEustathiusbeing brought back toAntioch, the fewEustathians, who still continued to assemble apart, joined the rest of the Catholics, and the Name ofEustathianwas never more heard of[1329].|Flavianushonoured by the Church ofRomeas a Saint, tho’ ill used in his Life-time by the Popes.|Flavianusdied in the Year 404. the Ninety-fifth of his Age, and Twenty-third of his Episcopacy, and is now honoured as a Saint; a Distinction which none of his Competitors have deserved, though as much caressed and favoured by the Two Bishops ofRome,DamasusandSyricius, as he was opposed and ill used. How fallible have the Bishops of that See shewed themselves, from the earliest Times, in their Judgment of things! How rash in taking Parties, and fomenting Discords! How obstinate and inflexible in maintaining the Cause, which they had once undertaken, let it be ever so bad! The only thing that can be alleged against the Character ofFlavianus, is his having accepted the Bishoprick ofAntioch, contrary to the Oath he had taken, on Occasion of the Agreement betweenMeletiusandPaulinus, as I have related above[1330]. That he took such an Oath, is vouched both bySocratesandSozomen[1331]. But as he was looked upon by all the East, and extolled byChrysostom, even in his Life-time, as a Prelate of an unblemished Character, and never reproached, even by his greater Enemies, with such an Oath, in the many Disputes that arose about his Election, I had rather charge those Two Writers with one Mistake more (for they are guilty of many others), than a Man ofFlavianus’s Probity with such a scandalous Prevarication.

Syriciusdies.

Syriciusdid not long enjoy the Satisfaction he had, to see the Schism ofAntiochended in his Days, and a good Understanding settled anew between the East and the West. He died the same Year 398. and, according to the most probable Opinion, on the 26th ofNovember[1332]. He is said, in his Epitaph, quoted byBaronius[1333], to have been a Man of a tender, compassionate, and generous Temper; to have studied the Happiness of the People committed to his Care; to have spared no Pains in procuring them the Blessings that flow from Peace and Tranquillity; and to have screened several Persons from the Wrath of the Emperor, to maintain the Rights of the Church[1334].|Was once honoured asa Saint.|He is commended byAmbrose, and the whole Council ofMilan, asa vigilant Pastor[1335], byIsidoreofSevilleasan illustrious Pontiff[1336]; and he has even a Place among the other Saints, in most of the antient Martyrologies[1337]. HoweverBaroniushas not thought him worthy of a Place in theRomanMartyrology. It is well known, that the Charge of revising and correcting theRomanMartyrology was committed, by PopeGregoryXIII. toBaronius, with full Power to reject such as he should judge unworthy, and admit others in their room, whom he should declare worthy of the public Worship, and a Place there[N39].|Why expunged byBaroniusout of theCalendar of Saints.|The Keys of Heaven, says a modern Writer, speaking of that Charge,were taken fromPeter,and given toBaronius;for it was not byPeter,but byBaronius,that some were excluded from, and others admitted into, Heaven[1338]. He then shews, that by thisSecond Minos, as he styles him, several were driven from the Seats they had long held in Heaven, and to which they had a just Claim, to make room for others, who had no Claim. Among the former he namesSyricius, whom he thinksBaroniusought to have treated in a more friendly manner, upon the Recommendation ofAmbrose, of the Council ofMilan, and ofIsidore. What thus prejudicedBaroniusagainst him, and outweighed, in his Scales, all the Recommendations that could be produced in his Favour, was his Indifference forJeromandPaulinus, and the Kindness he shewed toRuffinus,Jerom’s Antagonist.Syricius, instead of protectingJerom, as his PredecessorDamasushad done, against theRomanClergy, whom he had provoked with his Writings, gave him, in a manner, up to their Resentment; which obliged him to abandonRome, and return into the East, as I have related above. The Name ofPaulinus, afterwards Bishop ofNola, is famous in the History of the Church, and celebrated byJerom,Ambrose,Austin, and all the Writers of those Times. He had abandoned the World, and the immense Wealth he possessed, to lead a retired Life; and, in the Year 395. he passed throughRome, in his Way toNola, which he had chosen for the Place of his Retirement. The Treatment he met with atRome, from that Clergy, andSyriciushimself, must have been very unworthy of a Man of his Character, since it obliged him, as he himself writes[1339], to quit the City in great Haste, and pursue his Journey toNola. Two Years afterwardsRuffinuscame toRome, and there met with a very different Reception. ForSyriciusreceived him, tho’ violently suspected ofOrigenism, with the greatest Marks of Esteem and Affection; and, after having entertained him a whole Year, gave him Letters of Communion at his Departure. Of thisJeromcomplains, as if Advantage had been taken of the Bishop ofRome’s Simplicity, to impose upon him[1340]. I will not pretend, as some have done, to justifyRuffinus; but cannot help observing, that such a Charge ought not to be admitted against him, upon the bare Authority ofJerom, or of those, who have only copied what he writ.

N39. TheRomanMartyrology contains the Names of such Saints as may be publicly worshiped, and of the Places where they died, with a succinct Account of the most remarkable Feats which they are supposed to have performed. I said,who are publicly worshiped; for in private every one is allowed to honour, worship, and invoke whom they please, provided they have sufficient Grounds to believe them ina State of Happiness, orin the Way to it, that is, in Heaven, or in Purgatory; for the Souls in Purgatory may be privately worshiped and invoked; nay, most of the Popish Divines are now of Opinion, that even a canonized Saint may be still in Purgatory. When Learning began to revive, many gross Mistakes were discovered in theRoman, as well as in the other Martyrologies, some being placed among the Saints, and consequently worshiped as Saints, who had been notorious Sinners; and others daily invoked, who had never existed. That the Church therefore might be no longer misled in her Worship,GregoryXIII. thought it necessary to interpose hisinfallible Authority; and, having accordingly, orderedBaroniusto revise and correct theRomanMartyrology, he confirmed, by a special Bull, dated the 14th ofJanuary1584. all the Emendations, Additions, Corrections,&c.whichBaroniushad been pleased to make, threatening withthe Indignation of the Almighty God, and of his Apostles St.Peterand St.Paul, all who should presume to make any further Alterations. And yet many Alterations have been made sinceGregory’s Time; and that many more might and ought to be made, has been sufficiently shewn by many Protestant, and some Roman Catholic, Divines.

JeromandRuffinusquarrel.

JeromandRuffinushad lived several Years in close Friendship, and great Intimacy; but, falling out in the Year 393. their former Friendship was turned at once into an open and avowed Enmity. What gave Occasion to this Breach I shall relate hereafter, and only observe here, thatJeromnot only quarreled withRuffinus, but with all the Friends ofRuffinus; nay, and with those too, who, professing an equal Friendship for both, would not break with either, or any-ways interfere in the Quarrel. Among these was the celebratedRomanMatronMelania, so frequently spoken of, and so highly commended, byAustin, byPaulinus, and, above all, byJeromhimself, who has filled his Letters with her Praises, proposing her as a true Pattern of every Virtue becoming her Sex.

Jeromquarrels with all the Friends ofRuffinus,especially withMelania.

Melaniahad retired withRuffinustoJerusalem, Twenty-seven Years before, and continued there practising, under his Direction,those Works of Charity, whichJeromso often admires and extols. It could not therefore be expected that she should discard thePartner of her holy Life, and all her good Works, asPaulinusstyles him[1341], the Minute the other was pleased to dislike him, or, indeed, that she should take any Part at all in the Quarrel. And yet, because she prudently declined taking Part, but continued to shew the same Affection and Esteem forRuffinus, which she had done before;Jerom, forgetful of the Regard that was due to a Matron of her Birth and Piety, and of the high Encomiums which he had himself bestowed on her, began to inveigh with no less Bitterness against her, than againstRuffinushimself.|His Conduct towardsher.|In one of his Letters, still extant[1342], after finding Fault with one ofRuffinus’s Friends, thought to beJohnBishop ofJerusalem, he adds; “But, after all, he is not so much to blame as his InstructorsRuffinusandMelania, who, with a great deal of Trouble and Pains, have taught him to know nothing.”Ruffinustells us, thatJerom, finding thatMelania, who was a Matron of great Judgment and Penetration, did not approve of his Actions and Conduct, thereupon spitefully erased out of his Chronicle, what he had there written in her Praise[1343]. But he did not, nor was it, perhaps, in his Power to make such an Alteration in all the Copies; for what he is said to have cancelled, is still remaining in all the printed, as well as manuscript Copies of that Work, which have reached our Times.Melanialived Eighteen Years after, steadily pursuing the same Course of Life, for whichJeromhad once proposed her as a Pattern to her whole Sex[1344]. She died atJerusalemin the Year 411. and died poor, having spent an immense Estate in relieving the Needy and Indigent, not only of the Countries where she lived, and through which she passed, but those too of the most distant Provinces of the Empire. For Persons in Poverty and Distress, whether inPersiaorBritain, says the Author of her Life[1345], were alike the Objects of her Charity, and felt alike the Effects of her Generosity and Good-nature. She died, but with her did not die the Rancour and Spleen whichJeromhad for so many Years harboured in his Breast against her. For, carrying his Resentment even beyond the Grave, while the Poor were every-where bemoaning, with Tears, the Loss of so generous a Benefactress, while the Writers were paying the deserved Tribute of Praise to the Virtues of so pious aMatron,Jerom, instead of joining the rest in the common Grief, strove to dry up their Tears, to drown their Praises, by throwing out several peevish and ill-natured Reflections on the Memory of the Deceased. As the famousPelagiushad inscribed a Book to her before he broached his Opinions,Jerom, in the Letter which he writ toCtesiphonagainst thePelagians, could not forbear bringing her in, and observing on that Occasion, with a malignant Quibble, that the very Name ofMelaniabespoke (in theGreekTongue), and sufficiently declared, theBlacknessof her Treachery and Perfidiousness[1346].

Syriciusnot to be condemned on the bare Authority ofJerom.

Such was the Conduct ofJeromtowards that illustrious Matron, in her Life-time, and after her Death. From this Conduct I leave the Reader to judge, whether the Authority of so prejudiced a Writer ought to have been of such Weight withBaroniusas to make him exclude her, as well asSyricius, from theRomanMartyrology, or the Calendar of Saints. Should we grantRuffinusto have really held the Errors whichJeromcharged him with, it must still be owned, thatMelaniaacted, as became a Person of her Wisdom, Piety, and Experience, in suspending her Judgment, and not breaking withRuffinus, till she was otherwise convinced, than by the Invectives of his Antagonist, equally levelled against herself, that he was no longer worthy of her Friendship and Regard. As forSyricius,Jeromrather commends than blames him, even where he complains of his Kindness toRuffinus. For he only says, thatRuffinusabused the Simplicity ofSyricius, who judged of the Spirit of others from his own[1347]; which was saying, in other Words, that he was a good Man, but mistaken in his Judgment, or not infallible: so that his only Crime, according toJerom, was want of Infallibility. However, upon the Authority of that Father,Baroniusnot only condemns the Conduct ofSyricius, but, rashly prying into the inscrutable Secrets of Providence, pretends his Days to have been shortened for the Countenance he gave toRuffinus, and the Remissness he shewed in suppressing the Errors, with which he was charged. It is certain, thatRuffinuswas well received, and entertained, in a very hospitable manner, bySyricius, during his Stay atRome; and that, upon his leaving that City, he received from him Letters of Communion. Now, ifSyriciusdid not know, or did not believe, thatRuffinusheld those Errors, how unjust is it to blame him for the Kindness heshewed to a Man ofRuffinus’s Character! If he did know, and yet gave him Letters of Communion, how willBaroniusbe able to clearSyriciusfrom the Imputation of holding the same Errors[N40]?

N40. A modern Writer[1], taking the Part ofSyriciusagainstBaronius, has composed a whole Dissertation, and not a short one, to shewhow undeservedlySyriciushas been cashiered in this Review of the Church triumphant, while many others passed Muster for great Saints, whose Virtues, he might have said, whose very Existence,may be justly disputed. I shall not enter into the tedious Detail of his Arguments and Reasons, but only observe, that the Name ofSyriciusought not to have been struck out of the Calendar, while the Names of theArianPopeLiberius, and the AntipopeFelix, his Antagonist, were kept in; though, upon other Accounts, I think him myself very unworthy of the Name of a Saint.1. Florentinus, in vetus Martyrol. Hieronymi, p. 1001-1010.

1. Florentinus, in vetus Martyrol. Hieronymi, p. 1001-1010.

The Misunderstand-ing betweenSyriciusandPaulinusnoCharge againstSyr-icius.

As for the TreatmentPaulinusofNolamet with fromSyricius, there was, no doubt, a Misunderstanding between them; but, as I am quite in the Dark as to the Cause of it, I will not take upon me to condemn the one rather than the other. Perhaps they were both to blame; perhaps they both meant well, and neither was to blame. However that be, the Misunderstanding between them was soon removed; for, during the remaining Part ofSyricius’s Life,Paulinuswent constantly toRomeonce a Year, as he himself declares, in one of his Letters[1348].Syricius, it is true, did not takeJerominto his Protection, as his Predecessor had done, nor shew him the same Kindness; which is the Third Charge brought byBaroniusagainst him, but of no more Weight than the other Two, that is, of none at all.Jerom, prompted by his Zeal, and censorious Temper, could not help inveighing, with great Bitterness, in all his Writings, against the Looseness and Debauchery, which universally prevailed, in his Time, among theRomanClergy, and the pious Frauds they made use of to extort Legacies and Presents from old Men, from Widows, and from Orphans.Syriciusmight have been as much offended at the Vices of his Libertine Clergy, asJeromwas, and even studied to reform them; but, at the same time, be glad, without deserving the least Reproach on that score, to get rid of so troublesome a Censor, who thus exposed their Irregularities to the Eyes, and them to the Contempt, of the World[N41].

N41. The Festival ofSyriciuswas never kept, it seems, by public Authority; but is marked in some antient Martyrologies, on the 22d ofFebruary, and in others on the 26th ofNovember. The last was more probably the Day of his Death, since he is said, both byProsperandIsidore, to have governed 14 Years, to complete which one Month only will be wanting, if we place his Death on that Day; and several, if withBaroniuswe suppose him to have died on the 22d ofFebruary[1]; for, as to the Year of his Death, there is no Disagreement among Authors.Baroniusmentions an antient Picture, Part whereof, says he, is still to be seen in the Title of PopeSyricius[2]. But that Picture is no more to be seen, and he explains himself no farther.1. Vid. Boll. 22 Feb. p. 282.2. Bar. ad ann. 395. n. 6.

1. Vid. Boll. 22 Feb. p. 282.

2. Bar. ad ann. 395. n. 6.

Syriciuswas interred in the Cœmetery ofPriscilla, but his Body was translated, about the Latter-end of the Eighth Century, to the Church of St.Praxedes[1349], where his Remains (forBaroniuswill not allow us to call them Relics) still lie unregarded.

Year of Christ 398.bracketAnastasiuswritestoPaulinus.

Syriciuswas succeeded byAnastasius[1350], after a Vacancy of Twenty Days, according to some; and, according to others, of near Two Months. He was no sooner chosen, than he writ a kind and obliging Letter toPaulinus, then atNolainCampania, and an other in his Commendation to the Bishops of that Province[1351]. This he is supposed to have done, in order to efface the bad Impression, which the TreatmentPaulinushad met with in the Time ofSyricius, might have given him against that See, and theRomanClergy.

What occasioned theQuarrel betweenJeromandRuffinus.

It was in the Time ofAnastasius, and soon after his Election, that the famous Dispute arose betweenJeromandRuffinus, which was afterwards carried on with a Warmth on both Sides quite unbecoming Men of their Profession. Of this Quarrel, and the PartAnastasiusacted on that Occasion, the Writers of those Times give us the following Account.Ruffinus, a Presbyter ofAquileia, and a great Admirer ofOrigen, having accompaniedMelania, whom he had attended Twenty-five Years atJerusalem, on her Return toRomein the Time ofSyricius, was received there with extraordinary Marks of Esteem by theRomanClergy, andSyriciushimself, as I have observed elsewhere[1352].|RuffinustranslatesOrigen’sPeri-archon.|Encouraged by the Reception he met with, he continued a whole Year atRome; and during that Time published, butwithout putting his Name to it, aLatinTranslation ofOrigen’sPeriarchon, orTreatise of Principles, having first removed the Prejudice which some might entertain against that Writer, by the Translation of an Apology, which the MartyrPamphylushad composed in his Vindication, while he was in Prison. To this Apology he added a Piece of his own, shewing that most of the Errors ascribed toOrigenhad been maliciously inserted into his Works by his Enemies after his Death[1353]. In the Preface to thePeriarchonitself he also declared, that, in Imitation of a learned Brother, meaningJerom, who had translated above Seventy ofOrigen’s Books, he had either corrected or suppressed such Errors as had appeared to him repugnant to the Articles of the Catholic Faith[1354].|Many atRomeembrace the ErrorsofOrigen.|The Work, thus recommended, was received with uncommon Applause atRome, and the Sentiments ofOrigengreedily embraced, and warmly maintained, by great Numbers of the Clergy as well as the Laity, to whomOrigenhad till then been, it seems, utterly unknown. This happened in the Time ofSyricius, who, either not suspectingRuffinus, as he had not put his Name to the Translation, or perhaps not judging him worthy of Censure for barely relating the Sentiments of another, or supposing that, agreeably to his Preface, he had suppressed whatever was wrong in the original Work, gave him Letters of Communion at his Departure fromRome: for he had no sooner published his Translation than he left that City and returned toAquileia.Syriciusdied soon after, andAnastasiuswas no sooner chosen in his room, than the famousRomanMatronMarcella, offended at the new Doctrines that began to prevail inRome, applied to him, pressing him to put a Stop to the growing Evil, and at the same time accusingRuffinusas the Author of the Translation, to which alone it was owing[1355].|Errors left in theWork, notwithstand-ing the Correctionsmade by the Trans-lator.|To make good this Charge, she produced some Copies corrected withRuffinus’s own Hand; and several Persons appeared, who, having by her means been reclaimed from the Errors ofOrigen, owned they had been led into them by the Disciples ofRuffinus[1356]. ThisJeromcannot relate without launching into the Praises of his HeroineMarcella, crying up her Zeal, extolling her Courage and Resolution, in thus making head against so numerous a Band, meaning theOrigenistsinRome, while the Clergy declined that Trouble, or rather promoted the Doctrines they ought to have opposed. But elsewhere he will not allow Women,under any Pretence whatsoever, to concern themselves in religious Controversies.To meddle in Disputes concerning Faith or Religion, is not at all the Province(says he, with the Words of St.Paul)of silly Women, laden with Sins, led away with divers Lusts, ever learning, and never able to come to the Knowlege of the Truth[1357]. But he speaks here ofMelania, who was no less attached toRuffinusthanMarcellawas to him.

Jerom’s ChargeagainstRuffinus.

In thePeriarchonwere contained, without all doubt, many unfound and unwarrantable Notions, andRuffinuscorrected those only that related to the Trinity.He corrected, saysJerom,whatOrigenhad impiously written concerning the Trinity, being well apprised it would have given great Offence atRome.But as to his other Errors, those especially concerning the Fall of the Angels, and the first Man, the Resurrection, the World or Worlds ofEpicurus,the Restoration of all Things, &c.he either left them, as he found them in the Original, or confirmed them with Reasons borrowed from the Comment ofDidymus,an avowed Defender ofOrigen.Thus he declared himself a Catholic with respect to the Trinity; that in other Points the Reader might not be aware of him as an Heretic[1358].

Ruffinus’s Answers.

In Answer to this Charge,Ruffinusdeclared, that it was never his Intention to correct all the Errors that were ascribed toOrigen; that the Declaration he had made, in his Preface to thePeriarchon, ought to be restrained to those Errors only that related to the Trinity; and that it was very uncharitable to judge of his Faith, from the Faith of the Author he translated, and not from his own Words. He then declares his Sentiments touching some particular Points, in whichOrigenwas thought to differ from the Church; adding, that whereOrigendiffered from the Catholic Church, he differed fromOrigen.

JeromcondemnsOrigen,and inveighsagainstRuffinus.

Anastasius, notwithstanding the Solicitations ofMarcella, declined either proceeding againstRuffinus, or censuring his Translation, till Two Years after, whenJerom, in a new Version which he published of the same Work, undertook to prove, that several Opinions ofOrigenwere truly heretical, and as such ought to be condemned by the Church. As toRuffinus, he inveighed bitterly against him, as if he had translated that Work with no other View but to propagate the Errors it contained. Thus began the famous Quarrel betweenthese Two Writers, which occasioned no small Disturbance in the Church, some siding withJeromagainstRuffinus, and others withRuffinusagainstJerom. Among the former, the most sanguine wereTheophilusBishop ofAlexandria,EpiphaniusBishop ofConstantiain the Island ofCyprus, andAnastasiusBishop ofRome.Theophilusnot only condemned in a Council, which he summoned for that Purpose, the Errors ofOrigen, butOrigenhimself, declaring him an Heretic, and forbidding all under his Jurisdiction to read, or even keep his Works by them; which is the first Instance we have of such Prohibitions.|Origencondemned byAnastasiusand sev-eral other Bishops.|His Example was followed byEpiphanius,Anastasius,VeneriusBishop ofMilan,ChromatiusBishop ofAquileia, and several others. But some, and among the restJohnBishop ofJerusalem, andChrysostomthen Bishop ofConstantinople, disapproving the rash Conduct of their Collegues, could by no means be induced to confirm the Sentence they had pronounced; whichEpiphaniusresented to such a Degree, that he immediately separated himself from their Communion.Sozomenadds, that he even refused to pray for youngTheodosius, while he was dangerously ill, because his MotherEudoxiawould not banish fromConstantinoplesome Monks who had warmly espoused the Cause ofOrigen[1359].RuffinusranksEpiphaniusamong those Plagiaries, who, borrowing fromOrigenall they said or writ, cried down his Works, in order to deter others from reading them, and consequently from discovering, that what was admired in them was not their own[1360].

Ruffinusis summonedtoRome.

Origenbeing thus condemned as an Heretic, near 150 Years after his Death,Anastasius, at the Instigation ofMarcella,Pammachius,Oceanus, and some other ofJerom’s Friends inRome, writ toRuffinus, complaining of his Translation, and summoning him to appear, and give an Account of his Faith. In Answer to this Letter,Ruffinussent him a Confession of Faith intirely agreeable to that of the Catholic Church, adding, that he held no other; that his Faith had been sufficiently tried in the Persecution ofValens; and that, as to the Translation ofOrigen’s Work, he had there neither approved nor disapproved, but barely related, the Sentiments of that Writer. He modestly declined complying with the Summons calling him toRome;and concluded with declaring, that the Faith of theRomanChurch and his were one and the same[1362][N42].

N42. The chief Errors ofOrigenwere concerning the Trinity, the Resurrection of the Body, the Eternity of Hell-Torments, and the Origin of Souls. If his Works were not interpolated by the Heretics, asRuffinuspretended they were, it is no easy Matter to determine what was his real Opinion with respect to the Trinity; for in some Passages he seems to acknowlege an Equality, and in others to establish an Inequality, between the Father and the Son. As to the Resurrection, he was accused of not believing, that the Body, at least the same Body, was to rise from the Dead. He denied the Eternity of Hell-Torments, and held, that even the Devils would repent in the End, and be saved. He maintained the Souls to have been created before the World; to have been confined to the Bodies, which they animated, as so many Prisons, toexpiateexpiatethere the Sins which they had committed; to be in perpetual Motion passing from one Body to another, and at last to become Angels. With the Three last Errors chieflyRuffinuswas charged by St.Jerom; and it was to clear himself from such an Imputation, that, in his Answer toAnastasiussummoning him toRome, he declared his Belief with respect to those Articles, styling his Answer on that Account anApology. As to the Trinity, those whom they calledOrigenists, were allowed, even by their Enemies, to be quite orthodox in their Belief of that Mystery. Touching the Resurrection,Ruffinusdeclared and explained his Faith in such clear Terms as ought to have left no room, even for St.Jerom, to arraign him on that Head. He expressed himself in a manner no less orthodox with respect to the Eternity of the Pains of Hell. But, as to the Origin of Souls, he owns himself to be quite at a Loss what to think, and what to determine, on that Subject, since no particular Opinion had been yet settled by the Church, and the Ecclesiastical Writers disagreed in that Point among themselves; some believing, withTertullianandLactantius, the Souls to have been formed with the Bodies; and others maintaining, withOrigen, that they were all created before the World: as to himself, he declared, that he held nothing for certain but what he was taught by the Church,viz.that the Souls as well as the Bodies proceeded from God[1]. ThisJeromcalled a false, artful, and imposing Confession, as ifRuffinusdid not believe what he professed in the most solemn Manner to believe; andAnastasius, judging of his Faith not from his own Words, but from those ofJerom, separated himself from his Communion.I cannot help observing here, thatJerom, whom nothing now will satisfy but the Condemnation ofOrigen, used a few Years before to inveigh with the same Gall and Bitterness against the Enemies of that Writer as he does now against his Friends, condemning with as much Acrimony those who accused him, as he now condemns those who excuse him.Origenhad been condemned in his Life-time byDemetriusBishop ofAlexandria, and by several other Bishops: andJerom, after telling us, in speaking of the Judgment that was given against him, that he had written more Books than others had time to read; and that in the Number of his Volumes he had surpassedVarro, and the other most eloquent Writers bothGreekandLatin; adds,But what Reward did he receive for so much Toil and Labour? He was condemned by the BishopDemetrius;and, if we except the Bishops ofPalæstine, Arabia, Phœnicia,andAchaia,he was condemned by all the rest. EvenRomeassembled her Senate against him, not because he taught any new Doctrines, or held any heretical Opinions, which those who snarl at him, like so many mad Dogs, would fain make us believe; but because they could not bear the bright Rays of his Eloquence and Knowlege, and were forced to be dumb when he spoke. This Passage is quoted byRuffinus, andJeromhimself owns it to have been copied from his Letter toPaula[2].By the Senate thatRomeassembled againstOrigen,Jerommeant, no doubt, the Bishop and Clergy of that City: and that he made no Account of their Judgment, sufficiently appears from the contemptuous and ironical Manner he speaks of it. However, that Father is brought in byBaroniusas an Evidence forInfallibility, on account of the Regard which he afterwards paid to the Judgment ofAnastasius, styling ita decisive Sentence. ButJeromhad then changed his Opinion; andAnastasiusonly condemned what he had condemned before; so that from the great Regard whichJeromshewed on that Occasion for the Judgment ofAnastasius,Baroniuscan at most conclude, that he thought the Popes infallible when they agreed with him; for that he thought them fallible when they disagreed with him, is manifest from his not acquiescing in the Judgment of another Pope condemningOrigen, when he himself had not yet condemned him.1. Ruff. ad Anast. p. 202.2. Hier. vir. illustr. c. 54. Ruff. l. 2. p. 225.

I cannot help observing here, thatJerom, whom nothing now will satisfy but the Condemnation ofOrigen, used a few Years before to inveigh with the same Gall and Bitterness against the Enemies of that Writer as he does now against his Friends, condemning with as much Acrimony those who accused him, as he now condemns those who excuse him.Origenhad been condemned in his Life-time byDemetriusBishop ofAlexandria, and by several other Bishops: andJerom, after telling us, in speaking of the Judgment that was given against him, that he had written more Books than others had time to read; and that in the Number of his Volumes he had surpassedVarro, and the other most eloquent Writers bothGreekandLatin; adds,But what Reward did he receive for so much Toil and Labour? He was condemned by the BishopDemetrius;and, if we except the Bishops ofPalæstine, Arabia, Phœnicia,andAchaia,he was condemned by all the rest. EvenRomeassembled her Senate against him, not because he taught any new Doctrines, or held any heretical Opinions, which those who snarl at him, like so many mad Dogs, would fain make us believe; but because they could not bear the bright Rays of his Eloquence and Knowlege, and were forced to be dumb when he spoke. This Passage is quoted byRuffinus, andJeromhimself owns it to have been copied from his Letter toPaula[2].

By the Senate thatRomeassembled againstOrigen,Jerommeant, no doubt, the Bishop and Clergy of that City: and that he made no Account of their Judgment, sufficiently appears from the contemptuous and ironical Manner he speaks of it. However, that Father is brought in byBaroniusas an Evidence forInfallibility, on account of the Regard which he afterwards paid to the Judgment ofAnastasius, styling ita decisive Sentence. ButJeromhad then changed his Opinion; andAnastasiusonly condemned what he had condemned before; so that from the great Regard whichJeromshewed on that Occasion for the Judgment ofAnastasius,Baroniuscan at most conclude, that he thought the Popes infallible when they agreed with him; for that he thought them fallible when they disagreed with him, is manifest from his not acquiescing in the Judgment of another Pope condemningOrigen, when he himself had not yet condemned him.

1. Ruff. ad Anast. p. 202.

2. Hier. vir. illustr. c. 54. Ruff. l. 2. p. 225.

Back to Index Next