CHAPTER XX

OF THE SYNOD AT SARDICA

THE Western prelates an account of their being of another language, and not understanding this exposition, would not admit of it; saying that the Nicene creed was sufficient, and that any thing beyond it was a work of supererogation. But when the emperor had again written to insist on the re-establishment of Paul and Athanasius in their respective sees, but without effect in consequence of the continual agitation of the people, these two bishops demanded that another Synod should be convened, both for the determination of their case, as well as for the settlement of other questions in relation to the faith: for they made it obvious that their deposition arose from no other cause than that the faith might be the more easily perverted. Another general council was therefore summoned to meet at Sardica, a city of Illyricnm, by the joint authority of the two emperors; the one requesting by letter that it might be so, and the other of the East readily acquiescing in it. This Synod was convened at Sardica, in the eleventh year after the death of the father of the two Augusti, during the consulship of Rufinus and Eusebius. Athanasius states that about 300 bishops from the western parts of the empire were present; but Sabinus says there came only seventy from the eastern parts, among whom was Ischyras of Mareotes, who had been ordained bishop of that country by those who deposed Athanasius. Of the rest some pretended infirmity of body; others complained of the shortness of the notice given, casting the blame of it on Julius bishop of Rome, although a year and a half had elapsed from the time of its having been summoned: in which interval Athanasius remained at Rome awaiting the assembling of the Synod. When at last they were convened at Sardica, the Eastern prelates refused either to meet or to enter into any conference with those of the West, unless Athanasius and Paul were excluded from the convention. But Protogenes bishop of Sardica, and Hosius bishop of Cordova in Spain, would by no means permit them to be absent; on which the Eastern bishops immediately withdrew, and returning to Philippolis in Thrace, held a separate council, wherein they openly anathematized the term consubstantial: and having introduced the Anomoian opinion into their epistles, they sent them in all directions. On the other hand those who remained at Sardica, condemning in the first place their departure, afterwards divested the accusers of Athanasius of their dignity: then confirming the Nicene creed, and rejecting the term ἀνόμοιος, they more distinctly recognized the doctrine of consubstantiality in epistles addressed to all the churches. Both parties believed they had acted rightly: those of the East conceived themselves justified, because the Western bishops had countenanced those whom they had deposed; and these again were satisfied with the course they had taken, in consequence not only of the retirement of those who had deposed them before the matter had been examined into, but also because they themselves were the defenders of the Nicene faith, which the other party had dared to adulterate. They therefore reinstated Paul and Athanasius in their sees, and also Marcellus of Ancyra in Galatia Minor, who had been deposed long before, as we have stated in the former book. This person at that time exerted himself to the utmost to procure the revocation of the sentence pronounced against him, declaring that his being suspected of entertaining the error of Paul of Samosata, arose from a misunderstanding of some expressions in his book. It must however be noticed that Eusebius Pamphilus wrote three entire books against Marcellus, in which he quotes that author’s own words to prove that he asserts with Sabellius the Libyan, and Paul of Samosata, that the Lord Jesus was a mere man.