Ecclesiastical History — Source paragraphs and footnotes

1892 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

The twelve dioceses of the Empire, as constituted under Diocletian, were (1) Oxiens; (2) Pontica; (3) Asiana; (4) Thracia; (5) Mœsia; (6) Pannonia; (7) Britanniæ; (8) Galliæ; (9) Viennensis; (10) Italiciana; (11) Hispaniæ; (12) Africa.

Editorial footnote · Ecclesiastical History, Chapter VII.—Letters of the Emperors Valentinianus and Valens, written to the dioceseof Asia about the Homoüsion, on hearing that some men in Asia and in Phrygia were in dispute about the divine decree.; original source section: Chapter 7, editorial note cite_note-1 · Original source

1892 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

Under Constantine Illyricum Occidentale included Dalmatia, Pannonia, Noricum, and Savia; Illyricum Orientale, Dacia, Mœsia, Macedonia and Thrace.

Editorial footnote · Ecclesiastical History, Chapter VII.—Letters of the Emperors Valentinianus and Valens, written to the dioceseof Asia about the Homoüsion, on hearing that some men in Asia and in Phrygia were in dispute about the divine decree.; original source section: Chapter 7, editorial note cite_note-2 · Original source

1892 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

Eldest son of Valentinian I. Born a.d. 359. Named Augustus 367. Succeeded his father 375; his uncle Valens 378. Murdered 383. The synod was convoked in the year of Valentinian’s death.

Editorial footnote · Ecclesiastical History, Chapter VII.—Letters of the Emperors Valentinianus and Valens, written to the dioceseof Asia about the Homoüsion, on hearing that some men in Asia and in Phrygia were in dispute about the divine decree.; original source section: Chapter 7, editorial note cite_note-3 · Original source

1892 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

Phrygia Pacatiana was the name given in the fourth century to the province extending from Bithynia to Pamphylia. “Cum in veterum libris non nisi duæ Phrygiæ occurrant, Pacatiana et salutaris, mavult Valesius h. l. scribere, καριας φρυγίας πακατιανῆς. Sed consentientibus in vulgata lectione omnibus libris mallem servare καραφρυγίας πακατιανῆς, quam Pacatianam καροφρυγίαν dictam esse putaverim quod Cariæ proxime adhæresceret.” Schulze.

Editorial footnote · Ecclesiastical History, Chapter VII.—Letters of the Emperors Valentinianus and Valens, written to the dioceseof Asia about the Homoüsion, on hearing that some men in Asia and in Phrygia were in dispute about the divine decree.; original source section: Chapter 7, editorial note cite_note-4 · Original source

1892 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

The date of this Council is disputed. “Pagi contending for 373, others for 375, Cave for 367.” Dict. Ch. Ant. i. 813.

Editorial footnote · Ecclesiastical History, Chapter VII.—Letters of the Emperors Valentinianus and Valens, written to the dioceseof Asia about the Homoüsion, on hearing that some men in Asia and in Phrygia were in dispute about the divine decree.; original source section: Chapter 7, editorial note cite_note-5 · Original source

1892 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

ἡμεις ἐχρησάμεθα τῷ ἅλφα ἕως τοῦ ὠ ὑμεῖς δὲ ἑαυτοὺς ἀπεδώκατε The passage is obscure and perhaps corrupt. Schulze’s note is “Nisi mendosus sit locus, quod quidem suspicabatur Camerarius, sensus talis esse videtur: ‘Nos quidem primis usi sumus ad extrema,’ h.e. omnia adhibuimus et tentavimus ad pacem restituendam et cohibendas vexationes, ‘vos vero impotentiæ obsecuti estis.’ Alias interpretationes collegit suamque addidit Valesius.” The note of Valesius is as follows: hic locus valde obscurus est. Et Epiphanius quidem scholasticus ita eum vertit: et nos quidem subjicimur ei qui primus est et novissimus: vos autem vobismet arrogatis. Quæ interpretatio, meo quidem iudicio, ferri non potest. Camerarius vero sic interpretatur: nos quidem ordine a primo ad ultimum processimus tractatione nostra: ipsi vero vosmet ipsos abalienastis. At Christophersonus ita vertit: nos patientia semper a principio usque ad finem usi sumus: vos contra animi vestri impotentiæ obsecuti estis…mihi videtur verbum χρῆσθαι hoc loco idem significari quod communicare et commercium habere. Cujus modi est illud in Evangelio: non coütuntur Judæi Samaritanis. (Johon IV. 9.)

Editorial footnote · Ecclesiastical History, Chapter VII.—Letters of the Emperors Valentinianus and Valens, written to the dioceseof Asia about the Homoüsion, on hearing that some men in Asia and in Phrygia were in dispute about the divine decree.; original source section: Chapter 7, editorial note cite_note-8 · Original source

1892 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

The turning to the East is not mentioned in the Gospel of St. Matthew or in the Apocryphal Acts of Pilate; and the Imperial Decree seems here to import a Christian practice into the pagan Procurators tribunal. Orientation was sometimes observed in Pagan temples and the altar placed at the east end; perhaps in connexion with the ancient worship of the sun. cf. Æsch. Ag. 502; Paus. V. 23. i; Cic. Cat. iii. §43. In. Virg. Æn. viii. 68 Æneas turns to the East when he prays to the Tiber. cf. Liv 1. 18. But praying towards the East is specially a primitive Christian custom, among the earliest authorities being Tertullian (Apol. XVI.) and Clemens Al. (Stromat. VII. 7).

Editorial footnote · Ecclesiastical History, Chapter VII.—Letters of the Emperors Valentinianus and Valens, written to the dioceseof Asia about the Homoüsion, on hearing that some men in Asia and in Phrygia were in dispute about the divine decree.; original source section: Chapter 7, editorial note cite_note-9 · Original source

1892 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

Here for the first time in our author we meet with the word Hypostasis to denote each distinct person. Compare note on page 36. “Origen had already described Father, Son and Holy Spirit as three ὑποστάσεις or Beings, in opposition to the Monarchians, who saw in them only three modes of manifestation of one and the same Being. And as Sabellius had used the words τρία πρόσωπα for these modes of manifestation, this form of expression naturally fell into disfavour with the Catholics. But when Arius insisted on (virtually) three different hypostases in the Holy Trinity, Catholics began to avoid applying the word hypostases to the Persons of the Godhead. To this was added a difficulty arising from the fact, that the Eastern Church used Greek as the official language of its theology, while the Western Church used Latin, a language at that time much less well provided with abstract theological terms. Disputes were caused, says Gregory of Nazianzus (Orat. xxi. p. 395), διὰ στενότητα τῆς παρὰ τοῖς ᾽Ιτάλοις γλώττης καὶ ὀνομάτων πενίαν. (Compare Seneca Epist. 58.) The Latins used essentia and substantia as equivalent to the Greek οὐσία and ὑπόστασις, but interchanged them, as we have seen in the translation of the Nicene Creed with little scruple, regarding them as synonyms. They used both expressions to describe the Divine Nature common to the Three. It followed that they looked upon the expression “Three Hypostases” as implying a division of the substance of the Deity, and therefore as Arian. They preferred to speak of “tres Personæ.” Athanasius also spoke of τρία πρόσωπα, and thus the words πρόσωπα and Personæ became current among the Nicene party. But about the year 360, the Neo-Nicene party, or Meletians, as they are sometimes called, became scrupulous about the use of such an expression as τρία πρόσωπα, which seemed to them to savour of Sabellianism. Thus a difference arose between the old Athanasian party and the Meletians.” Archd. Cheetham in Dict. Christ. Biog. Art. “Trinity.”

Editorial footnote · Ecclesiastical History, Chapter VII.—Letters of the Emperors Valentinianus and Valens, written to the dioceseof Asia about the Homoüsion, on hearing that some men in Asia and in Phrygia were in dispute about the divine decree.; original source section: Chapter 7, editorial note cite_note-13 · Original source

1892 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain) | Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)

Compare note on page 72.

Editorial footnote · Ecclesiastical History, Chapter VII.—Letters of the Emperors Valentinianus and Valens, written to the dioceseof Asia about the Homoüsion, on hearing that some men in Asia and in Phrygia were in dispute about the divine decree.; original source section: Chapter 7, editorial note cite_note-14 · Original source

Date uncertain | Theodoret of Cyrus

In accordance with the great and orthodox synod we confess that the Son is of one substance with the Father. And we do not so understand the term ‘of one substance’ as some formerly interpreted it who signed their names with feigned adhesion; nor as some who now-a-days call the drafters of the old creed Fathers, but make the meaning of the word of no effect, following the authors of the statement that “of one substance” means “like,” with the understanding that since the Son is comparable to no one of the creatures made by Him, He is like to the Father alone. For those who thus think irreverently define the Son “as a special creation of the Father,” but we, with the present synods, both at Rome and in Gaul, hold that there is one and the same substance of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, in three persons, that is in three perfect essences. And we confess, according to the exposition of Nicæa, that the Son of God being of one substance, was made flesh of the Holy Virgin Mary, and hath tabernacled among men, and fulfilled all the economy for our sakes in birth, in passion, in resurrection, and in ascension into Heaven; and that He shall come again to render to us according to each man’s manner of life, in the day of judgment, being seen in the flesh, and showing forth His divine power, being God bearing flesh, and not man bearing Godhead.

Complete source paragraph · Ecclesiastical History, Chapter VII.—Letters of the Emperors Valentinianus and Valens, written to the dioceseof Asia about the Homoüsion, on hearing that some men in Asia and in Phrygia were in dispute about the divine decree.; original source section: Chapter 7, source paragraph 8 · Original source