27 September 359 A.D. Council of Seleucia
27 September 359 A.D.
Council of Seleucia
Council of Seleucia
From
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
See also: Council of Rimini and First Council of Constantinople
(360) not to be confused with the Council of Seleucia-Ctesiphon of 410.
The Council of Seleucia was an early
Christian church synod at Seleucia Isauria (now Silifke, Turkey).
In 358, the Roman Emperor Constantius II requested two councils, one of the western bishops at Ariminum and one of the eastern bishops at Nicomedia to resolve the Arian controversy over the nature of the divinity of Jesus Christ, which
divided the 4th-century church.[1]
An earthquake struck Nicomedia, killing the bishop Cecropius of Nicomedia, among others, and on September 27, 359 the eastern
council (of about 160 bishops) met at Seleucia instead. The council was bitterly divided, and procedurally irregular, and
the two parties met separately and reached opposing decisions.[2][3]
Basil of Ancyra, Macedonius I of Constantinople, and Patrophilus, afraid the council would depose them, had delayed their arrival; Cyril
of Jerusalem and Eustathius of Sebaste also faced unresolved charges.[4]
On the first day, Acacius
of Caesarea, George of Alexandria, Uranius of Tyre, and Eudoxius
of Antioch, among others, wished to
resolve the charges against these bishops, and the challenges to their
credentials, before voting on theological matters. George
of Laodicea, Sophronius of Pompeiopolis, and Eleusius of Cyzicus, among others, wished to vote on theological matters
first, and won the first procedural votes.[5]
On the second day, George of Laodicea opened the council
to Basil and the other disputed bishops from their party, ignoring the charges,
and closed the council to Acacius and the opposing bishops. They reaffirmed an
Creed of Antioch from 341 which declared that the Son was of similar substance
to the Father.[6]
On the following days, however, to reach broader
agreement, Basil and the disputed bishops did not attend, while Acacius and the
others did. Acacius proposed a new creed, with notes stating that the Son was
like the Father, compromising between the controversial language of Nicaea and Antioch, and condemning Anomoeanism.[7]
In the end, the council divided again. Basil, George of
Laodicea, and their party deposed or excommunicated their opponents, including
Acacius, George of Alexandria, Uranius, Theodulus of Chaeretapa, Theodosius of Philadelphia, Evagrius of Mytilene, Leontius of Tripolis, Eudoxius
of Antioch, Asterius, Eusebius, Abgarus, Basilicus, Phoebus, Fidelis[disambiguation needed], Eutychius[disambiguation needed], Magnus, and Eustathius, as well as one of those who had already faced charges, Patrophilus.
Acacius and his party challenged the decisions, as did the Anomoeans.[8][9]
Later that year, Constantius called for a council in
Constantinople to consider the decision at Ariminum and resolve the split at
Seleucia.[10][11]
Acacius' proposed creed
Acacius' proposed creed read, including its preface:[12]
We having yesterday assembled by the emperor's command at
Seleucia, a city of Isauria, on the 27th day of September, exerted ourselves to
the utmost, with all moderation, to preserve the peace of the church, and to
determine doctrinal questions on prophetic and evangelical authority, so as to
sanction nothing in the ecclesiastic confession of faith at variance with the
sacred Scriptures, as our Emperor Constantius most beloved of God has ordered.
But inasmuch as certain individuals in the Synod have acted injuriously toward
several of us, preventing some from expressing their sentiments, and excluding
others from the council against their wills; and at the same time have
introduced such as have been deposed, and persons who were ordained contrary to
the ecclesiastical canon, so that the Synod has presented a scene of tumult and
disorder, of which the most illustrious Leonas, the Comes, and the most eminent
Lauricius, governor of the province, have been eye-witnesses, we are therefore
under the necessity of making this declaration. That we do not repudiate the
faith which was ratified at the consecration of the church at Antioch; [423]
for we give it our decided preference, because it received the concurrence of
our fathers who were assembled there to consider some controverted points.
Since, however, the terms homoousion and homoiousion have in time past troubled
the minds of many, and still continue to disquiet them; and moreover that a new
term has recently been coined by some who assert the anomoion of the Son to the
Father: we reject the first two, as expressions which are not found in the
Scriptures; but we utterly anathematize the last, and regard such as
countenance its use, as alienated from the church. We distinctly acknowledge
the homoion of the Son to the Father, in accordance with what the apostle has
declared concerning him, [424] "Who is the image of the invisible
God."
We confess then, and believe in one God the Father
Almighty, the Maker of heaven and earth, and of things visible and invisible.
We believe also in his Son our Lord Jesus Christ, who was begotten of him
without passion before all ages, God the Word, the only-begotten of God, the
Light, the Life, the Truth, the Wisdom: through whom all things were made which
are in the heavens and upon the earth, whether visible or invisible. We believe
that he took flesh of the holy Virgin Mary, at the end of the ages, in order to
abolish sin; that he was made man, suffered for our sin, and rose again, and
was taken up into the heavens, to sit at the right hand of the Father, whence
he will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead. We believe also
in the Holy Spirit, whom our Lord and Saviour has denominated the Comforter,
and whom he sent to his disciples after his departure, according to his promise:
by whom also he sanctifies all believers in the church, who are baptized in the
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Those who preach
anything contrary to this creed, we regard as aliens from the catholic church.
References
1.
Jump up ^ Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome of the Ecclesiastical History of
Philostorgius, book 4, chapter 10.
2.
Jump up ^ Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome
of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 4, chapter 11.
8.
Jump up ^ Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome
of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 4, chapter 11.
10.
Jump up ^ Philostorgius, in Photius, Epitome
of the Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, book 4, chapter 11.
12.
Jump up ^ Zenos' translated edition of
Socrates Scholasticus, Church History, book 2, chapter 40.
Comments
Post a Comment