Part 37

There had subsisted a Misunderstanding between _Theophilus_ and _Flavianus_ ever since the Year 391. when the Council of _Capua_ was held. _Flavianus_ had refused to submit his Cause to the Judgment of _Theophilus_, pursuant to the Resolution of that Council; which he had highly resented; and, in the Height of his Resentment, as he was a Man of a fiery and choleric Temper, he had written to _Flavianus_ in a very haughty and imperious Style. To these Letters _Nestorius_, no doubt, alludes, where he tells us, that _Egypt_ could not, by her menacing Letters, though written in the Style, and with all the Haughtiness, of an imperious Tyrant, move or terrify the blessed _Flavianus_[1323]. It was necessary, in the first place, to remove the Misunderstanding which had so long subsisted between these Two Prelates; and in this _Chrysostom_ met with no Difficulty or Obstruction, _Theophilus_ readily agreeing to the Terms he proposed in the Name of _Flavianus_, and _Flavianus_ ratifying them, upon the first Notice, without the least Exception or Limitation. [Sidenote: Chrysostom _attempts a Reconciliation between_ Flavianus _and_ Syricius.] What these Terms were, we are no-where told; but it is certain, that, all Disputes being thereby composed, the Bishops of _Alexandria_ and _Antioch_ were intirely reconciled, and the Communion between them renewed, to the great Satisfaction of both[1324]. The next Thing to be attempted, and, as was apprehended, the most difficult to be accomplished, was the reconciling of _Syricius_ with the Bishop of _Antioch_, who had now held that See Seventeen Years, but had not been able, notwithstanding the great Character he bore, to obtain the Communion of _Syricius_, or any of his Predecessors, on account of their strong Prejudice against him, as well as his Predecessor _Meletius_, and their obstinate Attachment to the contrary Party, in Opposition to the far greater Part of the Eastern Bishops. [Sidenote: _His prudent Conduct._] But the Zeal of _Chrysostom_ was Proof against all Difficulties. Not despairing therefore of Success, he took the most effectual Means a consummate Prudence could dictate, to obtain it, advising the Bishops of _Antioch_ and _Alexandria_ to acquaint the Bishop of _Rome_, by a solemn Embassy, with their Reconciliation, and at the same time to beg, in the Name of _Flavianus_, the Communion of that See. This he knew would flatter the Vanity of _Syricius_, and be of more Weight than any Remonstrances they could make. They readily fell in with the Proposal, and Deputies were immediately chosen to put it in Execution. These were _Acacius_ Bishop of _Berœa_, _Demetrius_ of _Pessinus_, and several other Bishops, with _Isidorus_ Presbyter and Hospitaler of the Church of _Alexandria_, and a great Number of Presbyters and Deacons of the Church of _Antioch_. _Acacius_, who was at the Head of this Deputation, was charged by _Chrysostom_ to present to _Syricius_ the Decree of his Election to the See of _Constantinople_[1325]. That so great an Honour might not be conferred in vain on the See of _Rome_, it was thought adviseable to acquaint _Syricius_ with their Design, before they set out, and to be well assured of a kind Reception on their Arrival in the West. [Sidenote: Syricius _and_ Flavianus _reconciled_.] They gave him accordingly early Notice of their Intention, and he, taken with the Bait, readily promised to settle every thing to their Satisfaction[1326]; which he did accordingly, receiving them, on their Arrival at _Rome_, with the greatest Marks of Respect and Esteem, and admitting _Flavianus_ to his Communion. From _Rome_ the Deputies repaired into _Egypt_, where all the Bishops, following the Example of _Theophilus_ and _Syricius_, acknowleged _Flavianus_ for lawful Bishop of _Antioch_, and, assembling in Council, with great Solemnity, embraced his Communion. [Sidenote: _The Misunderstanding between the East and the West intirely removed._] From _Egypt_ the Deputies set out for _Antioch_, and there, by delivering to _Flavianus_ Letters of Communion from the Western and _Egyptian_ Bishops, completed the great Work, and with it their Deputation[1327]. Thus was an End put, at last, to the Schism of _Antioch_; and, after so many Years of Strife and Contention, a perfect Harmony and good Understanding were settled anew between the East and the West[N38].

Footnote N38:

If _Syricius_ is to blame (and who, but _Baronius_, can excuse him?) for not acknowleging _Flavianus_, at least after the Death of _Paulinus_, the Election of his Successor _Evagrius_ being unquestionably uncanonical and illegal; how much more is he to blame for not acknowleging him even after the Death of _Evagrius_, 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 of _Syricius_, 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 by _Chrysostom_, who was then at _Antioch_[N38.1], were intirely owing to the Pride and Obstinacy of the Bishop of _Rome_, at least during the last Six Years, that is, from the Year 382. when _Evagrius_ died, 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 of _Flavianus_; 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. _Baronius_ represents 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 of _Flavianus_, in refusing to submit his Cause to the Judgment of the Council of _Capua_, or of the _Egyptian_ Bishops, 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 of _Rome_. He had been chosen in the Oecumenical Council of _Constantinople_, in the Year 381. by the unanimous Voice of all the Bishops of the Diocese of the East, or the Patriarchate of _Antioch_, and soon after ordained in their Presence, at _Antioch_, with the Approbation of _Nestorius_, then Bishop of _Constantinople_, and the loud Acclamations of the far greater Part of the People of _Antioch_, promising themselves, in him, a second _Meletius_, in whose room he was chosen[N38.2]. Being thus chosen and ordained, he was acknowleged by all the Bishops of the East, except those of _Egypt_, of the Island of _Cyprus_, and _Arabia_. Could he therefore, without shamefully betraying _the 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 Competitor _Paulinus_, 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 at _Capua_, put himself upon the Level with _Evagrius_, whose Election and Ordination were undoubtedly illegal? Besides, _Flavianus_ was 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 of _Antioch_ to _Evagrius_, 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.

Footnote N38.1:

Chrys. in Eph. hom. 11.

Footnote N38.2:

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

[Sidenote: Flavianus _endeavours in vain to gain over the_ Eustathians.]

_Flavianus_, being thus at last, in the Seventeenth Year of his Episcopacy, acknowleged by, and united in Communion with, all the Bishops of the Catholic Church, spared no Pains to gain over the _Eustathians_, 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 for _Alexander_, one of his Successors, who had the Satisfaction of seeing all Party-Names laid aside, and the whole People of _Antioch_ united 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 of _Flavianus_, and Eighty-five after the Beginning of the Schism. Thus _Theodoret_, in his Ecclesiastical History[1328]. But _Theodorus_ the Lector assures us, that there still remained some Seeds of that unhappy Division till the Year 482. when the Body of _Eustathius_ being brought back to _Antioch_, the few _Eustathians_, who still continued to assemble apart, joined the rest of the Catholics, and the Name of _Eustathian_ was never more heard of[1329]. [Sidenote: Flavianus _honoured by the Church of_ Rome _as a Saint, tho’ ill used in his Life-time by the Popes_.] _Flavianus_ died 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 of _Rome_, _Damasus_ and _Syricius_, 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 of _Flavianus_, is his having accepted the Bishoprick of _Antioch_, contrary to the Oath he had taken, on Occasion of the Agreement between _Meletius_ and _Paulinus_, as I have related above[1330]. That he took such an Oath, is vouched both by _Socrates_ and _Sozomen_[1331]. But as he was looked upon by all the East, and extolled by _Chrysostom_, 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 of _Flavianus_’s Probity with such a scandalous Prevarication.

[Sidenote: Syricius _dies_.]

_Syricius_ did not long enjoy the Satisfaction he had, to see the Schism of _Antioch_ ended 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 of _November_[1332]. He is said, in his Epitaph, quoted by _Baronius_[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]. [Sidenote: _Was once honoured as a Saint._] He is commended by _Ambrose_, and the whole Council of _Milan_, as _a vigilant Pastor_[1335], by _Isidore_ of _Seville_ as _an illustrious Pontiff_[1336]; and he has even a Place among the other Saints, in most of the antient Martyrologies[1337]. However _Baronius_ has not thought him worthy of a Place in the _Roman_ Martyrology. It is well known, that the Charge of revising and correcting the _Roman_ Martyrology was committed, by Pope _Gregory_ XIII. to _Baronius_, 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]. [Sidenote: _Why expunged by_ Baronius _out of the Calendar of Saints_.] _The Keys of Heaven_, says a modern Writer, speaking of that Charge, _were taken from_ Peter, _and given to_ Baronius; _for it was not by_ Peter, _but by_ Baronius, _that some were excluded from, and others admitted into, Heaven_[1338]. He then shews, that by this _Second 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 names _Syricius_, whom he thinks _Baronius_ ought to have treated in a more friendly manner, upon the Recommendation of _Ambrose_, of the Council of _Milan_, and of _Isidore_. What thus prejudiced _Baronius_ against him, and outweighed, in his Scales, all the Recommendations that could be produced in his Favour, was his Indifference for _Jerom_ and _Paulinus_, and the Kindness he shewed to _Ruffinus_, _Jerom_’s Antagonist. _Syricius_, instead of protecting _Jerom_, as his Predecessor _Damasus_ had done, against the _Roman_ Clergy, whom he had provoked with his Writings, gave him, in a manner, up to their Resentment; which obliged him to abandon _Rome_, and return into the East, as I have related above. The Name of _Paulinus_, afterwards Bishop of _Nola_, is famous in the History of the Church, and celebrated by _Jerom_, _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 through _Rome_, in his Way to _Nola_, which he had chosen for the Place of his Retirement. The Treatment he met with at _Rome_, from that Clergy, and _Syricius_ himself, 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 to _Nola_. Two Years afterwards _Ruffinus_ came to _Rome_, and there met with a very different Reception. For _Syricius_ received him, tho’ violently suspected of _Origenism_, 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 this _Jerom_ complains, as if Advantage had been taken of the Bishop of _Rome_’s Simplicity, to impose upon him[1340]. I will not pretend, as some have done, to justify _Ruffinus_; but cannot help observing, that such a Charge ought not to be admitted against him, upon the bare Authority of _Jerom_, or of those, who have only copied what he writ.

Footnote N39:

The _Roman_ Martyrology 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 in _a State of Happiness_, or _in 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 the _Roman_, 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, _Gregory_ XIII. thought it necessary to interpose his _infallible Authority_; and, having accordingly, ordered _Baronius_ to revise and correct the _Roman_ Martyrology, he confirmed, by a special Bull, dated the 14th of _January_ 1584. all the Emendations, Additions, Corrections, _&c._ which _Baronius_ had been pleased to make, threatening with _the Indignation of the Almighty God, and of his Apostles St._ Peter _and St._ Paul, all who should presume to make any further Alterations. And yet many Alterations have been made since _Gregory_’s Time; and that many more might and ought to be made, has been sufficiently shewn by many Protestant, and some Roman Catholic, Divines.

[Sidenote: Jerom _and_ Ruffinus _quarrel_.]

_Jerom_ and _Ruffinus_ had 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, that _Jerom_ not only quarreled with _Ruffinus_, but with all the Friends of _Ruffinus_; 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 celebrated _Roman_ Matron _Melania_, so frequently spoken of, and so highly commended, by _Austin_, by _Paulinus_, and, above all, by _Jerom_ himself, who has filled his Letters with her Praises, proposing her as a true Pattern of every Virtue becoming her Sex.

[Sidenote: Jerom _quarrels with all the Friends of_ Ruffinus, _especially with_ Melania.]

_Melania_ had retired with _Ruffinus_ to _Jerusalem_, Twenty-seven Years before, and continued there practising, under his Direction, those Works of Charity, which _Jerom_ so often admires and extols. It could not therefore be expected that she should discard the _Partner of her holy Life, and all her good Works_, as _Paulinus_ styles 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 for _Ruffinus_, 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 against _Ruffinus_ himself. [Sidenote: _His Conduct towards her._] In one of his Letters, still extant[1342], after finding Fault with one of _Ruffinus_’s Friends, thought to be _John_ Bishop of _Jerusalem_, he adds; “But, after all, he is not so much to blame as his Instructors _Ruffinus_ and _Melania_, who, with a great deal of Trouble and Pains, have taught him to know nothing.” _Ruffinus_ tells us, that _Jerom_, finding that _Melania_, 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. _Melania_ lived Eighteen Years after, steadily pursuing the same Course of Life, for which _Jerom_ had once proposed her as a Pattern to her whole Sex[1344]. She died at _Jerusalem_ in 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 in _Persia_ or _Britain_, 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 which _Jerom_ had 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 a Matron, _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 famous _Pelagius_ had inscribed a Book to her before he broached his Opinions, _Jerom_, in the Letter which he writ to _Ctesiphon_ against the _Pelagians_, could not forbear bringing her in, and observing on that Occasion, with a malignant Quibble, that the very Name of _Melania_ bespoke (in the _Greek_ Tongue), and sufficiently declared, the _Blackness_ of her Treachery and Perfidiousness[1346].

[Sidenote: Syricius _not to be condemned on the bare Authority of_ Jerom.]