Part 43

Eusebius, whose conduct was so unconstant and equivocal, shines to most advantage in his works, especially those which he composed in defence of Christianity before the Arian contest arose. The first of these is his book against Hierocles, who, under Dioclesian, was a prosecuting judge at Nicomedia, and afterward rewarded for his cruelty against the Christians with the government of Egypt. In a book he wrote he made Apollonius Tyanæus superior to Christ. But Eusebius demonstrates the history of this magician, written by Philostratus, when he taught rhetoric at Rome, one hundred years after the death of that magician, to be false and contradictory in most of its points, doubtful in others, and trifling in all. About the time he was made bishop he conceived a design of two works, which showed as much the greatness of his genius, as the execution did the extent of his knowledge. The first of these he called The Preparation, the other The Demonstration of the Gospel. In the first he, with great erudition, confutes idolatry, in fifteen books, showing that the Greeks borrowed the sciences and many of their gods from the Egyptians, whose true history agrees with that of Moses; but the fictions of their theology are monstrous, impious, and condemned by their own learned men; that their oracles, which were only a chain of impostures and frauds, or the responses of devils, never attained to any infallible knowledge of contingencies, and were silenced by a power which they acknowledged superior. He also shows the Unity of God, and the truth of his revealed religion as ancient as the world. In his Demonstration of the Gospel, in ten books, he shows that the Jewish law in every point clearly points out Christ and the gospel. These books of Evangelical Preparation and Demonstration furnish more proofs, testimonies and arguments for the truth of the Christian religion than any other work of the ancients on that subject.

Eusebius’s two books against Marcellus of Ancyra, and three On Ecclesiastical Theology, are a confutation of Sabellianism. His topography or alphabetical explication of the places mentioned in the Old Testament, is most exact and useful. It was translated into Latin, and augmented by St. Jerom. Eusebius’s useful comments on the Psalms were published by Montfaucon (Collect. Nova Script. Græc. Paris, 1706). His fourteen Discourses, or Opuscula, published by F. Sirmond (Op. Sirmond, t. 1), are esteemed genuine, though not mentioned by the ancients. His discourse on the Dedication of the Church at Tyre, rebuilt after the persecution in 315, contains a curious description of that ceremony and of the structure. By his letter to his Church of Cæsarea, after the conclusion of the council of Nice, he recommended to his flock the definitions and creed of that assembly. His panegyric of Constantine was delivered at Constantinople in presence of that prince, who then celebrated the thirtieth year of his reign by public games. The praises are chiefly drawn from the destruction of idolatry; but study reigns in this composition more than nature, and renders the discourse tedious, though the author took some pains to polish the style. His four books of the life of Constantine were written in 338, the year after that emperor’s death. The style is diffusive, and the more disagreeable by being more labored. Phocius reproaches the author for dissembling or suppressing the chief circumstances relating to Arius, and his condemnation in the council of Nice.

The Chronicle of Eusebius was a work of immense labor, in two parts; the first, called his Chronology, contained the distinct successions of the kings and rulers of the principal nations from the beginning of the world; the second part, called the Chronicle or the Rule of Times, may be called the table of the first, and unites all the particular chronologies of different nations in one. The second part was translated into Latin, and augmented by St. Jerom. The first part was lost when Joseph Scaliger gathered the scattered fragments from George Syncellus, Cedrenus, and the Alexandrian chronicle; but Scaliger ought to have pointed out his sources; and has inserted many things which certainly belong not to Eusebius.

Our author’s name has been rendered most famous by his ten books of Church History, which he brings down to the defeat of Licinius, in 323, when he first wrote it, though he revised it again in 326. He collected the Acts of the martyrs of Palestine, an abstract of which he added to the eighth book of his History. Rufinus elegantly translated this work into Latin, reduced to nine books, to which he added two others, wherein he brings down his history to the death of Theodosius. Eusebius copied very much Julius Africanus in his chronicle; and in his History, St. Hegesippos (who had compiled a History from Christ to 170) and others. This invaluable work is not exempt from some mistakes and capital omissions; nor was the author much acquainted with the affairs of the Western Church. See Ceillier, t. 4, p. 258, &c. Christophorson, bishop of Chichester, elegantly translated this History into Latin, but changed the manner of dividing the chapters. The translation of the learned Henry Valesius is most accurate. Eusebius was one of the most learned prelates of antiquity, and a man of universal reading; but he did not much study to polish his discourses, which is the common fault of those that make learning and knowledge their chief business.

[181] Theodoret, l. 1, c. 20, 21. S. Hier., l. 3, in Rufin., &c.

[182] Eus., l. 4, de Vit. Constant., c. 61, p. 518.

[183] Sozom., l. 2, c. 19, p. 469.

[184] See Tillemont, Ceillier, Cave, Hist. Littér., p. 187, t. 1, and Solier, the Bollandist, Hist. Patr. Ant. c. 24, p. 36.

[185] Theodoret, l. 1, c. 20. Theodorus Lector, l. 2, c. 1, p. 547. Theophanes, p. 114. See Tillem, note 4, p. 653.

[186] St. Jerom (ep. 126, p. 38) calls St. Eustathius a loud sounding trumpet, and says he was the first who employed his pen against the Arians. The same father admires the extent of his knowledge, saying that it was consummate both in sacred and profane learning (ep. 84, p. 327). His just praises are set forth by St. Chrysostom in an entire panegyric; and Sozomen assures us (l. 1, c. 2) that he was universally admired both for the sanctity of his life, and the eloquence of his discourses. The elegant works which he composed against the Arians were famous in the fifth century, but have not reached us. But we have still his Treatise on the Pythonissa or Witch of Endor, published by Leo Allatius, with a curious Dissertation, and reprinted in the eighth tome of the Critici Sacri. In it the author undertakes to prove against Origen that this witch neither did nor could call up the soul of Samuel, but only a spectre or devil representing Samuel, in order to deceive Saul. He clearly teaches that before the coming of Christ the souls of the just rested in Abraham’s bosom; and that none could enter heaven before Christ had opened it; but that Christians enjoy an advantage above the patriarchs and prophets, in being united with Christ immediately after their death if they have lived well. This treatise is well written, and justifies the commendations which the ancients give to this great prelate and eloquent orator. Sozomen justly calls his writings admirable, as well for the purity of his style as for the sublimity of thought, the beauty of the expression, or the curious choice of the matter. Nothing more enhances his virtue, than the invincible constancy and patience with which he suffered the most reproachful accusation with which his enemies charged him, and the unjust deposition and banishment which were inflicted on him.

[187] Gr. 22, p. 548.

[188] “Qui sunt libri quos adoratis, legentes? Speratus respondit: Quatuor evangelia Domini nostri Jesu Christi, et epistolas S. Pauli apostoli, et omnem divinitus inspiratam scripturam.” Acta apud Ruinart, p. 78, et Baron. ad an. 202.

[189] “Consummati sunt Christi martyres mense Julio, et intercedunt pro nobis ad Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum, cui honor et gloria cum Patre et Spiritu Sancto in sæcula sæculorum.” Acta apud Baronium, ad an. 202.

[190] Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus is commonly known by the last name. His father was a centurion in the proconsular troops of Africa, and he was born at Carthage about the year 160. He confesses that before his conversion to the Christian faith he, in his merry fits, pointed his keenest satire against it (Apol., c. 18), had been an adulterer (De Resur. c. 59), had taken a cruel pleasure in the bloody entertainments of the amphitheatre (De Spectac. c. 19), attained to a distinguishing eminency in vice (De Pœnit. c. 4), “Ego præstantiam in delictis meam agnosco,” and was an accomplished sinner in all respects, (ib. c. 12. “Peccator omnium notarum cum sim,”) yet having his head marvellously well turned for science, he applied himself from his cradle to the study of every branch of good literature, poetry, philosophy, geometry, physic, and oratory; he dived into the principles of each sect, and both into the fabulous and into the real or historical part of mythology. His comprehensive genius led him through the whole circle of profane sciences; above the rest, as Eusebius tells us, he was profoundly versed in the Roman laws. He had a surprising vivacity and keenness of wit, and an uncommon stock of natural fire which rendered him exceeding hot and impatient, as himself complains (l. de Patient. in init.) His other passions he restrained after his conversion to Christianity; but this vehemence of temper he seems never to have sufficiently checked. The motives which engaged him to embrace the gospel seem those upon which he most triumphantly insists in his works; as the antiquity of the Mosaic writings, the mighty works and wisdom of the divine lawgiver, the continued chain of prophecy and wonders conducting the attentive inquirer to Christ, the evidence of the miracles of Christ and his apostles, the excellency of the law of the gospel, and its amazing influence upon the lives of men; the power which every Christian then exercised over evil spirits, and the testimony of the very devils themselves whom the infidels worshipped for gods, and who turned preachers of Christ, howling, and confessing themselves devils in the presence of their own votaries, (Apol. c. 19, 20, 23, &c. &c.) also the constancy and patience of the martyrs (l. ad Scapul. c. ult.) &c.

Being by his lively and comprehensive genius excellently formed for controversy, he immediately set himself to write in defence of religion, which was then attacked by the Heathens and Jews on one side, and on the other corrupted by heretics. He successfully employed his pen against all these enemies to truth, and first against the Pagans. The persecution which began to rage gave occasion to his Apologetic, which is not only his masterpiece, but indisputably one of the best among all the works of Christian antiquity. This piece was not addressed to the Roman senate, as Baronius and several others thought, but to the proconsul and other magistrates of Africa, and perhaps to all the governors of provinces and magistrates of the empire, among whom he might also comprise the Roman senators; for the title of Presidents only, agreed to these provincial governors, and he names the proconsuls; (ch. 45) speaks of Rome as at a distance: (c. 9, 21, 24, 35, 45) says they practised at home (at Carthage), the bloody religious rites of the Scythians; (c. 9) and by those words, “in ipso fere vertice civitatis præsidentes,” he seems to mean the _Byrsa_ of Carthage; certainly not Rome, which he always calls _Urbs_, not _civitas_.

In the first part of this work he clears Christians from the calumnies of incest and murder thrown upon them, and demonstrates the injustice of punishing them merely for a name, and exposes the absurdity of Trajan’s order commanding them to be punished if impeached, yet not to be sought after. He mentions that Tiberius, and after his miraculous victory, Marcus Aurelius, were favorable to the Christian religion. He then proceeds to confute idolatry; asks, if Bacchus was made a god for planting vines, why did not Lucullus attain to the same honor, because he first brought cherry-trees from Pontus to Rome? Why Aristides the Just, Socrates, Crœsus, Demosthenes, and so many others who had been most eminent, were not admitted to share divine honors with Jupiter, Venus, &c.? He explains the chief articles of our faith, and speaking of the origin and false worship of the demons he inserts the most daring challenge, which Saint Cyprian (ep. ad Demetrianum), Lactantius (De Just. l. 5, c. 21) and other primitive fathers repeat with the same assurance,--“Let a demoniac be brought into court,” says Tertullian, “and the evil spirit that possesses him be commanded by any Christian to declare what he is, he shall confess himself as truly to be a devil as he did falsely before declare himself a god. In like manner let them bring any of those who are thought to be inspired by some god, as Æsculapius, &c. If all these do not declare themselves in court to be devils, not daring to lie to a Christian, do you instantly put that rash Christian to death.”

The apologist mentions the submission of Christians to the emperors, their love of their enemies, and their mutual charity, horror of all vice, and constancy in suffering death and all manner of torments for the sake of virtue. The heathens called them in derision Sarmentitians and Semaxians, because they were fastened to trunks of trees, and stuck about with faggots to be set on fire. But Tertullian answers them: “Thus dressed about with fire, we are in our most illustrious apparel. These are our triumphal robes embroidered with palm-branches in token of victory (such the Roman generals wore in their solemn triumphs), and mounted upon the pile we look upon ourselves as in our triumphal chariot. Who ever looked well into our religion but he came over to it? and who ever came over to it but was ready to suffer for it? We thank you for condemning us, because there is such a blessed discord between the divine and human judgment, that when you condemn us upon earth, God absolveth us in heaven.”

Tertullian wrote about the same time his two books Against the Gentiles, in the first confuting their slanders, in the second attacking their false gods. An accidental disputation of a Christian with a Jewish proselyte engaged him to show the triumph of the faith over that obstinate race, who seemed deaf to all arguments. His book Against the Jews is just, solid, and well supported, a model of theological controversy, which wants but a little clearness of diction to be a very finished piece. Hermogenes, a Stoic philosopher, and a Christian, broached a new heresy in Africa, teaching matter to be eternal. Tertullian shows it to have been created by God with the world, and unravels the sophistry of that heresiarch in its book Against Hermogenes. That Against the Valentinians is rather a satire and raillery, than a serious confutation of the extravagant sentiments of those heretics. His excellent book Of Prescription against Heretics was certainly written before his fall; for in it he lays great stress on his communion with all the apostolic churches, especially that of Rome, and confutes by general principles all heresies that can arise.

His design in this little treatise is to show, that the appeal to scripture is very unjust in heretics, who have no claim or title to the scriptures. These were carefully committed in trust by the apostles to their successors, and he proves, that to whom the scriptures were intrusted, to them also was committed the interpretation of scripture. He promises that heresies are the very pest and destruction of faith, but no just cause of scandal or wonder, any more than fevers which consume the human body; for they were predicted by Christ, and the necessary consequence of criminal passions. He says, as if it had been to anticipate or remove the offence which he afterward gave by his fall: “What if a bishop, a deacon, a widow, a virgin, a teacher, or even a martyr, shall fall from the faith;--Do we judge of the faith by the persons or of persons by their faith? No man is wise who holds not the faith.” (c. 3.) He says: “We have no need of a nice inquiry after we have found Christ, or of any curious search after we have learned the gospel. If we believe we desire nothing further than to be believers.” (c. 7.) He adds, some heretics inculcate as a good reason for eternal scruple and searching, that it is written: _Seek and ye shall find_. But he takes notice those words only belonged to those Jews who had not yet found Christ, and cannot mean, that we must for ever seek on. But if we are to seek, it must not be from heretics who are estranged from the truth, who have no power to instruct, no inclination but to destroy, and whose very light is darkness. Christ laid down a rule of faith, about which there can be no cavils, no disputes but what are raised by heretics; and an obstinate opposition to this rule is what constitutes a heretic.

He inveighs against too curious searches in faith, as the source of heresies. Then coming close to the point, he will not have heretics admitted to dispute about the scriptures, to which they have no claim; and in such a scriptural disputation, the victory is precarious and very liable to uncertainty. All then is to be resolved into what the apostles have taught; which apostolical tradition is the demonstration of the truth, and the confutation of all error and heretical innovation. Our perfect agreement, and general consent and harmony with the apostolic churches which live in the unity of the same faith, is the most convincing proof of the truth, against which no just objection can possibly be formed. (c. 21, 22.) He urges that Marcion, Apelles, Valentinus, and Hermogenes were of too modern a date, and proved by their separation and pretended claim of what was ancient, that the Church was before them; they ought therefore to say, that Christ came down again from heaven and taught again upon earth, before they can commence apostles. “But,” says he, “if any of these heretics have the confidence to put in their claim to apostolic antiquity, let them show us the original of their churches, the order and succession of their bishops, so as to ascend up to an apostle,” &c. He is for having the heretics prove their mission by miracles, like the apostles. (c. 35.) He writes: “To these men the Church might thus fitly address herself: Who are ye? When, and from whence came ye? What do ye in my pastures, who are none of mine? By what authority do you, Marcion, break in upon my enclosures? Whence, O Apelles, is your power to remove my land-marks? This field is mine of right, why then do you at your pleasure sow and feed therein? It is my possession; I held it in times past; I first had it in my hands; my title to it is firm and indisputable, and derived from those persons whose it was, and to whom it properly belonged; I am the heir of the apostles; as they provided in their testament, as they committed and delivered to my trust, as they charged and ordered me, so I hold.” (c. 37.) He takes notice that in the Pagan superstitions the devil had imitated many ceremonies both of the Jewish and Christian religion; and that heretics in like manner were bad copies of the true Church. (c. 40.) He appeals to the manners and conversation of the heretics which are vain, earthly, without weight, without discipline, in every respect suitable to the faith they profess. (c. 41, 43.) “I am very much mistaken,” says he, “if they are governed by any rules, even of their own making, since every one models and adopts the doctrine he has received according to his fancy, as the first founder framed them to his, and to serve his own turn. The progress of every heresy was formed upon the footsteps of its first introducers; and the same liberty that was assumed by Valentinus and Marcion, was generally made use of by their followers. If you search into all sorts of heresies, you will find that they differ in many things from the first authors of their own sect. They have few of them in any Church; but without mother, without see, without the faith, they wander up and down like exiled men, entirely devoid of house and home.” (c. 42.)

Among his other works, the most useful is the book On Penance, the best polished of all his writings; in the first part, he treats of repentance at baptism; in the second, on that for sins committed after baptism. He teaches here that the Church hath power to remit even fornication, which he denied when a Montanist. He insists much on the laborious exercises of this penance after baptism.