Constantine the Great: The reorganization of the Empire and the triumph of the ChurchFirth, John B. (John Benjamin)
History
Constantine the Great: The reorganization of the Empire and the triumph of the Church
Firth, John B. (John Benjamin)
Church history -- Primitive and early church, ca. 30-600; Constantine I, Emperor of Rome, -337
“As I was returning on horseback to the city which bears my name,
Athanasius, the Bishop, presented himself so unexpectedly in the
middle of the highway, with certain individuals who accompanied him,
that I felt exceedingly surprised on beholding him. God, who sees all,
is my witness that at first I did not know who he was, but some of my
attendants, having ascertained this and the subject of his complaint,
gave me the necessary information. I did not accord him an interview,
but he persevered in requesting an audience, and, although I refused
him and was on the point of ordering that he should be removed from my
presence, he told me, with greater boldness than he had previously
manifested, that he sought no other favour of me than that I should
summon you hither, in order that he might, in your presence, complain
of the injustice that had been done to him.”
-----
Footnote 123:
Sozomen II., 28.
-----
Such boldness had the success it deserved. Constantine evidently made
enquires from Count Dionysius, and, discovering that the Council at Tyre
was a mere travesty of justice, ordered the bishops to come forthwith to
Constantinople. But before these instructions reached them they had
received the report of the Egyptian commissioners, and, on the strength
of it, had condemned Athanasius by a majority of votes, recognised the
Meletians as orthodox, and, adjourning to Jerusalem for the dedication
of the new church, had there pronounced Arius to be a true Catholic and
in full communion with the Church. The Emperor’s letter, which began
with a reference to the “tumults and disorders” which had marked their
sessions, was a plain intimation that he disapproved of their
proceedings, and only six bishops, the two Eusebii and four others,
travelled up to Constantinople. Arrived there, they changed their
tactics, and recognising that the old charges against Athanasius had
fallen helplessly to the ground, they invented another which was much
more likely to have weight with the Emperor. They accused him of seeking
to prevent the Alexandrian corn ships from sailing to Constantinople.
Egypt was the granary of the new Rome as well as of the old, and upon
the regular arrival of the Egyptian wheat cargoes the tranquillity of
Constantinople largely depended. Athanasius protested that he had
entertained no such designs. He was, he said, simply a bishop of the
Church, a poor man with no political ambition or taste for intrigue. His
enemies retorted that he was not poor, but wealthy, and that he had
gained a dangerous ascendency over the turbulent people of Alexandria.
Constantine abruptly ended the dispute by banishing Athanasius to
Treves, and the Patriarch had no choice but to obey. He arrived at his
city of exile in 336, and was received with all honour by the Emperor’s
son Constantine, then installed in the Gallic capital as the Cæsar of
the West. This is tolerably certain proof that the Emperor did not
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account