First Synod of Tyre

Last updated

Athanasius was elected bishop or Patriarch of Alexandria in 328. (Hanson, p. 246) However, seven years later, at the First Synod of Tyre or the Council of Tyre (335 AD), a gathering of bishops called together by Emperor Constantine I to evaluate charges brought against him, he was found guilty of barbaric violence against the Melitians, deposed from being archbishop of Alexandria, and excommunicated.

Contents

Background

We must distinguish the ‘Melitian Schism’ early in the fourth century from the ‘Meletian Schism’ later in that century. The latter was a dispute between two pro-Nicene groups in Antioch, primarily about the number of hypostases in God. In contrast, the Melitians were the brave Christians in Egypt who, during the Great Persecution at the beginning of the fourth century, following Bishop Melitius of Lycopolis, refused to hide from that persecution. However, the Melitians also refused to receive back into communion the Christians who had denied their faith during that persecution. They objected to the terms laid down by Peter, the bishop of Alexandria, for the readmission of 'lapsed' Christians. This caused division in the church but the Nicene Council of 325 made arrangements about the Melitians.

Alexander died in 328 and Athanasius was elected as bishop or patriarch of Alexandria. A few years later, the Melitians appealed to the emperor for protection against Athanasius. [1] They accused him of preventing people from entering church buildings, burning of churches, imprisonments, beatings, and even of murder. [2]

But their appeal failed. Eusebius of Nicomedia was one of Arius’ supporters who were exiled after Nicaea but who were re-admitted within a few years and who became influential with the emperor and the royal family. In the year 333 or 334, [3] five years after Athanasius had become bishop of Alexandria and after the Melitians’ failed appeal, Eusebius approached them and negotiated an alliance with them [4] [5] : Eusebius “promised that he would obtain for them an audience with the Emperor if they would receive and champion Arius.”

In 334, Eusebius called a council to evaluate Athanasius' conduct but Athanasius refused to attend. [6] [7]

The Synod

In 335. the emperor Constantine had ordered a Synod of bishops to be present at the consecration of the church which he had erected at Jerusalem (the precursor to the Holy Sepulchre). He directed that, as a secondary matter, they should on their way first assemble at Tyre, to examine charges that had been brought against Athanasius. [8] The emperor forced Athanasius to attend this council. [9] Emperor sent a letter to Athanasius, making clear that if he did not attend voluntarily, he would be brought to the Synod forcibly. "It was not a vast assemblage, there were only about sixty bishops present, but it held a wide representation." [10] Eusebius of Nicomedia played a major role in the council and, according to Epiphanius of Salamis, presided over the assembly. [11]

After the Council had sent a commission to Egypt, [12] it excommunicated Athanasius for indefensible violence in the administration of his see and deposed him from being archbishop of Alexandria. [13]

“It must have been clear to everybody that he had been for some time using indefensible violence in the administration of his see, even though it was not easy to bring him to book on exact charges.” (Hanson, p. 262)

"Even if some of the proceedings of the Council of Tyre were high-handed, it was beyond doubt that Athanasius had behaved with violence against the Melitians and evinced in his general conduct an authoritarian character determined to exploit the influence of his see." [14] For Hanson, the most important evidence was in papyrus letters discovered in the sands of Egypt during the 20th century. [15] [ better source needed ]

Athanasius' Response

Athanasius claimed that the allegations were false. Traditionally, the church had accepted his explanation. Some of the accusations were indeed proven to be false. [16] However, papyrus letters discovered during the 20th century, which we cannot possibly dismiss as inventions, exaggerations, or propaganda, describe the barbaric treatment Athanasius had been dealing out. [17] [18] [19] Therefore, “he had been justly convicted of disgraceful behaviour in his see.” (Hanson, p. 254-5) [20]

"His conviction had nothing to do with doctrinal issues." "We can now see why, for at least twenty years after 335, no Eastern bishops would communicate with Athanasius. He had been justly convicted of disgraceful behaviour in his see." [21]

Since the Eusebians allied with the Melitians, Athanasius claimed that he was being persecuted for his theology and that these accusations were formulated by ‘Arians’ to eliminate him as their theological opponent. However, “his conviction had nothing to do with doctrinal issues.” (Hanson, p. 255) [22] The so-called Arians allied with the Melitians only after the Melitians already had unsuccessfully appealed to the emperor. [23] Athanasius' aggression was not aimed at 'Arians.' [24] The fundamental cause of Athanasius' aggression is that he did not accept the arrangement made about the Melitians at Nicaea. [25]

Athanasius defends by slandering his opponents. “He represents the Council of Tyre, which was a properly constituted and entirely respectable gathering of churchmen, some of whom had been confessors in the Great Persecution, as a gang of disreputable conspirators, and brands all his opponents as favourers of heresy.” (Hanson, p. 262)

Aftermath

"Athanasius ... fled to Constantinople to press his case directly before the Emperor." "But when his enemies also charged him with interrupting the grain supply from Egypt Constantine turned against him: Athanasius was exiled to Trier," [26] then part of the Gallic prefecture of Rome (in present-day Germany).

Athanasius did not return from exile until the death of Constantine in 337, when all exiles were allowed to return. However, after he returned, the "East" instituted new charges against Athanasius. [27]

After Constantine death, his sons divided the empire between them. This allowed the churches in the West and East to develop in different directions. After Athanasius was exiled in 335, he formed an alliance with the Sabellian Marcellus. With his support, Athanasius developed his polemical strategy which claims that all opponents of Nicaea are followers of Arius and that he himself had been exiled for his support for Nicaea. In 340, he appealed to the West and in 341, at the Council of Rome, the Western church evaluated Athanasius and Marcellus and declared them orthodox.

In the 340's the empire remained divided. In response to the West's acceptance of Athanasius and Marcellus, the East issued the Dedication Creed in 341 which primarily opposed Sabellianism. At the failed Council at Serdica, the West issued an explicit one-hypostasis creed. The East responded with the Macrostich in 344. See Arian Creeds. In this period, Athanasius became very powerful, both politically and theologically. He was the “paragon” of the West (Hanson, p. 304) [28]

In the early 350s, the empire united again under Constantius. he attempted (and succeeded to a great extent) to convince the West to accept the Homoian Creeds of the East, but his main enemy was Athanasius.

See also

Related Research Articles

Arianism is a Christological doctrine considered heretical by all mainstream branches of Christianity. It is first attributed to Arius, a Christian presbyter who preached and studied in Alexandria, Egypt. Arian theology holds that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, who was begotten by God the Father with the difference that the Son of God did not always exist but was begotten/made before time by God the Father; therefore, Jesus was not coeternal with God the Father, but nonetheless Jesus began to exist outside time.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Athanasius of Alexandria</span> Pope of Alexandria from 328 to 373

Athanasius I of Alexandria, also called Athanasius the Great, Athanasius the Confessor, or, among Coptic Christians, Athanasius the Apostolic, was a Christian theologian and the 20th pope of Alexandria. His intermittent episcopacy spanned 45 years, of which over 17 encompassed five exiles, when he was replaced on the order of four different Roman emperors. Athanasius was a Church Father, the chief proponent of Nicene theology against the anti-Nicenes, and a noted Egyptian Christian leader of the fourth century.

Eusebius of Nicomedia was an Arian priest who baptized Constantine the Great on his deathbed in 337. A fifth-century legend evolved that Pope Sylvester I was the one to baptize Constantine, but this is dismissed by scholars as a forgery 'to amend the historical memory of the Arian baptism that the emperor received at the end of his life, and instead to attribute an unequivocally orthodox baptism to him.' He was a bishop of Berytus in Phoenicia. He was later made the bishop of Nicomedia, where the Imperial court resided. He lived finally in Constantinople from 338 up to his death.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">First Council of Nicaea</span> Council of Christian bishops in Nicaea, 325

The First Council of Nicaea was a council of Christian bishops convened in the Bithynian city of Nicaea by the Roman Emperor Constantine I. The Council of Nicaea met from May until the end of July 325.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Arius</span> Cyrenaic presbyter and founder of Arianism (died 336)

Arius was a Cyrenaic presbyter, ascetic, and priest. Traditionally, it was claimed that Arius was the founder of the doctrine of Arianism but, more recently, Rowan Williams stated that "Arius' role in 'Arianism' was not that of the founder of a sect. It was not his individual teaching that dominated the mid-century eastern Church."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Macarius of Jerusalem</span> 4th century Bishop of Jerusalem

Macarius I ; was Bishop of Jerusalem from 312 to shortly before 335, according to Sozomen. He is recognized as a saint within the Orthodox and Catholic churches.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Eustathius of Antioch</span>

Eustathius of Antioch, sometimes surnamed the Great, was a Christian bishop and archbishop of Antioch in the 4th century. His feast day in the Eastern Orthodox Church is February 21.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hosius of Corduba</span> Spanish bishop (256–359)

Hosius of Corduba, also known as Osius or Ossius, was a bishop of Corduba and an important and prominent advocate for Homoousion Christianity in the Arian controversy that divided the early Christianity.

The Acacians, or perhaps better described as the Homoians or Homoeans, were a non-Nicene branch of Christianity that dominated the church during much of the fourth-century Arian Controversy. They declared that the Son was similar to God the Father, without reference to substance (essence). Homoians played a major role in the Christianization of the Goths in the Danubian provinces of the Roman Empire.

In 294 AD, Sirmium was proclaimed one of four capitals of the Roman Empire. The Councils of Sirmium were the five episcopal councils held in Sirmium in 347, 351, 357, 358 and finally in 375 or 378. In the traditional account of the Arian Controversy, the Western Church always defended the Nicene Creed. However, at the third council in 357—the most important of these councils—the Western bishops of the Christian church produced an 'Arian' Creed, known as the Second Sirmian Creed. At least two of the other councils also dealt primarily with the Arian controversy. All of these councils were held under the rule of Constantius II, who was eager to unite the church within the framework of the Eusebian Homoianism that was so influential in the east.

Marcellus of Ancyra was a Bishop of Ancyra and one of the bishops present at the Council of Ancyra and the First Council of Nicaea. He was a strong opponent of Arianism, but was accused of adopting the opposite extreme of modified Sabellianism. He was condemned by a council of his enemies and expelled from his see, though he was able to return there to live quietly with a small congregation in the last years of his life. He is also said to have destroyed the temple of Zeus Belos at Apamea.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pope Alexander I of Alexandria</span> Head of the Coptic Church from 312 to 328

Alexander I of Alexandria was the 19th Pope and Patriarch of Alexandria. During his patriarchate, he dealt with a number of issues facing the Church in that day. These included the dating of Easter, the actions of Meletius of Lycopolis, and the issue of greatest substance, Arianism. He was the leader of the opposition to Arianism at the First Council of Nicaea. He also mentored his successor, Athanasius of Alexandria, who would become one of the Church Fathers.

The Council of Serdica, or Synod of Serdica, was a synod convened in 343 at Serdica in the civil diocese of Dacia, by Emperors Constans I, Augustus in the West, and Constantius II, Augustus in the East. It attempted to resolve "the tension between East and West in the Church." “The council was a disaster: the two sides, one from the west and the other from the east, never met as one.”

The Arian controversy was a series of Christian disputes about the nature of Christ that began with a dispute between Arius and Athanasius of Alexandria, two Christian theologians from Alexandria, Egypt. The most important of these controversies concerned the relationship between the substance of God the Father and the substance of His Son.

The Melitians, sometimes called the Church of the Martyrs, were an early Christian sect in Egypt. It was founded soon after the end of the Great Persecution (313) by Bishop Melitius of Lycopolis. It survived as a small group into the eighth century. The point on which they broke with the larger church was the same as that of the contemporary Donatists in the province of Africa: the ease with which lapsed Christians were received. The resultant division in the church of Egypt is known as the Melitian Schism, to be distinguished from the Meletian Schism later that same century.

The Councils of Alexandria started in 231 AD as a council of bishops and priests met at Alexandria, Egypt, called by Bishop Demetrius for the purpose of declaring Origen of Alexandria unworthy of the office of teacher, and of excommunicating him.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Christianity in the 4th century</span> Christianity-related events during the 4th century

Christianity in the 4th century was dominated in its early stage by Constantine the Great and the First Council of Nicaea of 325, which was the beginning of the period of the First seven Ecumenical Councils (325–787), and in its late stage by the Edict of Thessalonica of 380, which made Nicene Christianity the state church of the Roman Empire.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bishops of Rome under Constantine the Great</span>

Constantine the Great's (272–337) relationship with the four Bishops of Rome during his reign is an important component of the history of the Papacy, and more generally the history of the Catholic Church.

Arian creeds are the creeds of Arian Christians, developed mostly in the fourth century when Arianism was one of the main varieties of Christianity.

Theodotus was the bishop of Laodicea in Syria from the early 300s. He replaced Stephen, who apostasized during the Great Persecution (303–313). The exact year of his consecration cannot be fixed more precisely. He attended at least four church councils.

References

  1. ↑ “It is perhaps impossible to reconstruct the exact order of events, but the evidence seems to point clearly to the conclusion that several years must have elapsed between Athanasius succeeding to the see of Alexandria and the first moves of the Melitians against him.” (Hanson, p. 251)
  2. ↑ Sozomenus mentions: “Accusation made by Melitians (not Arians) to the Emperor against Athanasius, charging him with causing divisions and disturbances in his diocese, with preventing people from entering the church (i.e. the church building) and (charges made particularly by 'John', that is John Arcaph the Melitian leader, and the clergy associated with him) of murders and imprisonments and undeserved beatings and woundings and burning of churches.” (Hanson, p. 249-250)
  3. ↑ “In this year (333) or in the next the Melitians found an ally in the Eusebians.” (Hanson, p. 258)
  4. ↑ “Epiphanius goes on to say that the leaders of the Melitians were, after their discomfiture [their failed appeal to the emperor], near the court … and were at that point taken in hand by Eusebius of Nicomedia who promised that he would obtain for them an audience with the Emperor if they would receive and champion Arius, and, on their agreeing, the fusion of the causes of Arius and of Melitius took place.” (Hanson, p. 250)
  5. ↑ “The Melitians, harried unmercifully by Athanasius and unable at first to obtain help from the Emperor, turned to the only help available to them, that of the Eusebians.” (Hanson, p. 255)
  6. ↑ “In this year (333) or in the next the Melitians found an ally in the Eusebians. … But it was not till the next year, 334, that the fruit of this alliance appeared. A Council was called to Caesarea in Palestine … to examine the conduct, not the doctrine, of Athanasius.” (Hanson, p. 258)
  7. ↑ “Athanasius was summoned to it, but refused to attend.” (Hanson, p. 259)
  8. ↑ Socrates Scholasticus, "The Eccesiastical History, by Socrates Scholasticus," in Socrates, Sozomenus: Church Histories, ed. Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, trans. A. C. Zenos, vol. 2, A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, Second Series (New York: Christian Literature Company, 1890), p.30.
  9. ↑ “Next year, however, in the summer of 335, the Council of Caesarea was re-constituted or re-summoned in Tyre. And on this occasion Constantine showed openly his support of this move by appointing an imperial official, the consular Dionysius, to oversee it. It was not a vast assemblage, there were only about sixty bishops present, but it held a wide representation. … Athanasius was unwillingly compelled to attend by threats from Constantine. … He also knew that they had a strong case” (Hanson, p. 259)
  10. ↑ Hanson p. 259
  11. ↑ Philip Schaff and David Schley Schaff, History of the Christian Church, vol. 3 (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1910), p.874.
  12. ↑ “After some time the Council decided to send a Commission (to Egypt) … to collect evidence on the spot.” (Hanson, p. 260)
  13. ↑ “The result was that the Council of Tyre condemned Athanasius on a number of charges, deposed him from being archbishop of Alexandria, excommunicated him, and forbade him to return to his former see. Precisely what the charges upon which he was condemned is not altogether clear. … They had not convicted Athanasius of murdering Arsenius nor of any doctrinal error at all.” (Hanson, p. 261)
  14. ↑ Hanson, p272
  15. ↑ was justly deposed for violence against the Melitians
  16. ↑ One of the accusations was “that Athanasius had either murdered a bishop called Arsenius or … practised sorcery by using the severed hand of his corpse.” (Hanson, p. 256) However, “the agents of Athanasius discovered that Arsenius was alive and in possession of both his hands … and had him identified' before Paul, bishop of Tyre.” (Hanson, p. 257).
  17. ↑ “But, accidentally or providentially, we have available to us contemporary evidence which we cannot possibly dismiss as invention or exaggeration or propaganda, to decide this point.” (Hanson, p. 251-2) “This evidence consists of papyrus letters discovered by British archaeologists and published by H. I. Bell in his book Jews andChristians in Egypt. … They plunge us into the middle of the events which concerned Athanasius between the years 331 and 335.” (Hanson, p. 252) “It is a factual account written for people under persecution, a private missive not intended for publication nor propaganda, and therefore all the more damning.” (Hanson, p. 252) “It describes … the barbarous treatment which he (Athanasius) is meanwhile dealing out to those Melitians who have opposed him.” (Hanson, p. 252)
  18. ↑ The following is an example from those letters: “Isaac bishop of Leto came to Heraiscus (evidently an eminent Melitian bishop) in Alexandria, wanting to have supper with the bishop in the camp (near Alexandria, called Nicopolis). Some drunken adherents of Athanasius arrived at the 9th hour (3 p.m.), with soldiers. They shut the gates of the camp and began searching for Isaac and Heraiscus. Some soldiers in the camp had hidden them and when the Athanasian party could not find them, they attacked some Melitians whom they met coming into the camp and maltreated them and threw them out of Nicopolis. They then arrested five Melitians who were in a hostel imprisoned them for a time and then threw them too out of Nicopolis, and beat the keeper of the hostel for putting up Melitian monks. And they shut up somebody called Ammon in the camp because he welcomed Melitians into his house. So Callistus and his friends are afraid to visit Heraiscus in the camp.” (Hanson, p. 252-3)
  19. ↑ “We find Athanasius behaving like an employer of thugs hired to intimidate his enemies.” (RH 254)
  20. ↑ “The charge against him at Tyre was the unscrupulous use of strong-arm methods against his opponents, and that charge as a general accusation … was abundantly justified.” (Hanson, p. 255)
  21. ↑ Hanson, p254-5
  22. ↑ The alliance between the Eusebians and Melitians “gave Athanasius an opportunity of clouding the issue by ascribing all protest against his outrageous conduct to bias towards Arianism, an opportunity of which he strove earnestly to take advantage. But … Athanasius' offence had nothing to do with doctrine.” (Hanson, p. 255)
  23. ↑ “Athanasius in his account of the incidents leading up to Constantine's letter puts the blame on the Arians and gives the impression that by this time the Melitians and the Arians had formed a deliberate alliance against him. But it is very likely that this alliance had not yet been formed.” (Hanson, p. 250)
  24. ↑ “It seems clear also that Athanasius' first efforts at gangsterism in his diocese had nothing to do with difference of opinion on the subject of the Arian Controversy, but were directed against the Melitians.” (Hanson, p. 254)
  25. ↑ “He had not agreed with the arrangement made about the Melitians at Nicaea. Once he was in the saddle, he determined to suppress them with a strong hand, and was not at all scrupulous about the methods he used.” (Hanson, p. 254)
  26. ↑ Ayres, Lewis, Nicaea and its Legacy, An Approach to Fourth-Century Trinitarian Theology, 2004, pages 102-3
  27. ↑ The year 338 "was to see a renewal of the opposition to Athanasius on the part of Eusebius of Nicomedia and his party. After all, Athanasius had been formally deposed by a properly constituted synod on charges which could hardly be refuted. It was against all church order and tradition that he should be readmitted to his see on the bare word of an Emperor who did not even have any jurisdiction in Egypt." (Hanson. p. 266)
  28. ↑ "Towards the end of his life he had reached a position in which his power (in Egypt), not only ecclesiastical but also political, was virtually beyond challenge.” (Hanson, p. 421)

Wikisource-logo.svg This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain : Herbermann, Charles, ed. (1913). "Tyre". Catholic Encyclopedia . New York: Robert Appleton Company.

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.