Council of Antioch against Eustathius
| Reference | Dok. 35.2 |
| Incipit | Καὶ Εὐστάθιος μὲν ὁ Ἀντιοχείας |
| Date | 327 |
| Ancient source | Socrates, H.E. 1.23.8-24.9 |
| Modern editions | Hanson, GCS N.F. 1 (1995): 70-71. |
This is part of Socrates description of the events surrounding the 327 Council of Antioch. Opitz did not include it among his Urkunden.
The Greek text of this account was preserved by Socrates, H.E. 1.23.8-24.9. The text below is that of Hansen. (GCS N.F. 5; Berlin, New York: De Gruyter, 1995), 108. The English translation was produced for FCC by Glen Thompson, adapted from the translation of A. Zenos (NPNF2 2:27).
Click here to access a downloadable pdf of this document.
This work is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
| 23.8. Καὶ Εὐστάθιος μὲν ὁ Ἀντιοχείας ἐπίσκοπος διασύρει τὸν Παμφίλου Εὐσέβιον ὡς τὴν ἐν Νικαίᾳ πίστιν , Εὐσέβιος δὲ τὴν μὲν ἐν Νικαίᾳ πίστιν οὔ φησιν παραβαίνειν, διαβάλλει δὲ Εὐστάθιον ὡς τὴν Σαβελλίου δόξαν εἰσάγοντα. Διὰ ταῦτα ἕκαστοι ὡς κατὰ ἀντιπάλων τοὺς λόγους συνέγραφον, ἀμφότεροί τε λέγοντες ἐνυπόστατόν τε καὶ ἐνυπάρχοντα τὸν υἱὸν εἶναι τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἕνα τε Θεὸν ἐν τρισὶν ὑποστάσεσιν εἶναι ὁμολογοῦντες, ἀλλήλοις οὐκ οἶδ’ ὅπως συμφωνῆσαι οὐκ ἴσχυον, καὶ διὰ ταῦτα ἡσυχάζειν οὐδενὶ τρόπῳ ἠνείχοντο. | 23.8 Eustathius, bishop of Antioch, accuses Eusebius Pamphilus of perverting the Nicene Creed; but Eusebius again denies that he is transgressing the creed of Nicaea, and pushes back, saying that Eustathius was introducing the viewpoint of Sabellius. As a result, they each wrote tracts as if fighting against adversaries: and although both sides admitted that the Son of God is a distinct person and existence, and all confessed that there is one God in three Persons; yet, although I cannot say why, they were unable to agree with each other, and therefore there was no way they could come to a truce. |
| 24.1. Σύνοδον οὖν ἐν Ἀντιοχείᾳ ποιήσαντες καθαιροῦσιν Εὐστάθιον ὡς τὰ Σαβελλίου μᾶλλον φρονοῦντα ἢ ἅπερ ἡ ἐν Νικαίᾳ σύνοδος ἐδογμάτισεν, ὡς μὲν οὖν τινές φασιν, <καὶ> δι’ ἄλλας οὐκ ἀγαθὰς αἰτίας· φανερῶς γὰρ οὐκ εἰρήκασιν. Τοῦτο δὲ ἐπὶ πάντων εἰώθασι τῶν καθαιρουμένων ποιεῖν οἱ ἐπίσκοποι, κακηγοροῦντες μὲν καὶ ἀσεβεῖν λέγοντες, τὰς δὲ αἰτίας τῆς ἀσεβείας οὐ προστιθέντες. | 23.9 When a counsil was then convened at Antioch, it deposed Eustathius, as having Sabellian sentiments rather than those which the council at Nicaea had formulated, as some say, while others affirm this was done because of other unsatisfactory accusations. Though nothing was stated publicly. This is how bishops usually act toward everyone who is deposed, accusing them and calling them impious without laying out the occasions for the charges of impiety. |
| 24.2. Ὅτι μέντοι ὡς σαβελλίζοντα καθεῖλον Εὐστάθιον, Κύρου τοῦ Βεροίας ἐπισκόπου κατηγοροῦντος αὐτοῦ, Γεώργιος ὁ Λαοδικείας τῆς ἐν Συρίᾳ ἐπίσκοπος, εἷς ὢν τῶν μισούντων τὸ ὁμοούσιον, ἐν τῷ ἐγκωμίῳ, ὃ εἰς Εὐσέβιον τὸν Ἐμισηνὸν ἔγραψεν, εἴρηκεν. | 24. 2 When writing a panegyric for Eusebius of Emesa, George, the bishop of Laodicea in Syria, one of the men who hated the term homoousios, stated, that they deposed Eustathius as favoring Sabellianism, on the accusations of Cyrus, bishop of Beroea. |
| 3. Καὶ περὶ μὲν τοῦ Ἐμεσηνοῦ Εὐσεβίου κατὰ χώραν ἐροῦμεν· Γεώργιος δὲ περὶ Εὐσταθίου <ἀπίθανα> γράφει. Φάσκων γὰρ Εὐστάθιον ὑπὸ Κύρου κατηγορεῖσθαι ὡς σαβελλίζοντα, αὖθις τὸν <αὐτὸν> Κῦρον ἐπὶ τοῖς αὐτοῖς ἁλόντα καθῃρῆσθαί φησιν. | 24.3 We will speak later of Eusebius of Emesa. But George wrote somewhat inconsistently about Eustathius. For after asserting that Eustathius was accused by Cyrus of Sabellianism, he tells us on the other hand that Cyrus himself was convicted and deposed for it. |
| 4. Καὶ πῶς οἷόν τε Κῦρον τὰ Σαβελλίου φρονοῦντα κατηγορεῖν Εὐσταθίου ὡς σαβελλίζοντος; Ἔοικεν οὖν Εὐστάθιος δι’ ἑτέρας καθῃρῆσθαι προφάσεις. | 24.4 Now how was it possible that Cyrus should accuse Eustathius as a Sabellian, when he inclined to Sabellianism himself? It appears likely therefore that Eustathius must have been condemned on other grounds. |
| 5. Τότε δὲ ἐν τῇ Ἀντιοχείᾳ δεινὴ στάσις ἐπὶ τῇ αὐτοῦ καθαιρέσει γεγένηται, καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα πολλάκις περὶ ἐπιλογῆς ἐπισκόπου τοσοῦτος ἐξήφθη πυρσός, ὡς μικροῦ δεῆσαι τὴν πᾶσαν <ἐκ βάθρων> ἀνατραπῆναι πόλιν, εἰς δύο τμήματα διαιρεθέντος <τοῦ τῆς ἐκκλησίας> λαοῦ, τῶν μὲν Εὐσέβιον τὸν Παμφίλου ἐκ τῆς ἐν Παλαιστίνῃ Καισαρείας μεταφέρειν φιλονεικούντων ἐπὶ τὴν Ἀντιόχειαν, τῶν δὲ σπευδόντων ἐπαναγαγεῖν Εὐστάθιον. | 24.5 At that time, because he [Eustathius] was deposed, dangerous unrest began at Antioch; for when they proceeded to elect a successor, it kindled such great dissension that the entire city was threatened with destruction. Two factions arose among the church laity—one energetically seeking that Eusebius Pamphilus move from Cæsarea in Palestine to Antioch, the other equally determined on having Eustathius reinstated. |
| 6. Συνελαμβάνετο δὲ ἑκατέρῳ μέρει καὶ τὸ κοινὸν τῆς πόλεως, καὶ στρατιωτικὴ χεὶρ ὡς κατὰ πολεμίων κεκίνητο, ὡς καὶ ξιφῶν μέλλειν ἅπτεσθαι, εἰ μὴ ὁ Θεός τε καὶ ὁ παρὰ τοῦ βασιλέως φόβος τὰς ὁρμὰς τοῦ πλήθους ἀνέστειλεν. | The city’s populace became infected with a partisan spirit in this quarrel among the Christians, with a military force arrayed on both sides with hostile intent. A bloody collision was about to take place, except that God and fear of the emperor repressed the violence of the crowds. |
| 7. Ὁ μὲν γὰρ βασιλεὺς δι’ ἐπιστολῶν τὴν γεγενημένην στάσιν κατέπαυσεν, Εὐσέβιος δὲ παραιτησάμενος· ἐφ’ ᾧ καὶ θαυμάσας αὐτὸν ὁ βασιλεὺς γράφει τε αὐτῷ καὶ τὴν πρόθεσιν αὐτοῦ ἐπαινέσας μακάριον ἀποκαλεῖ, ὅτι οὐ μιᾶς πόλεως, ἀλλὰ πάσης ἁπλῶς τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐπίσκοπος ἄξιος εἶναι ἐκρίθη. | For it was through the emperor’s letters and Eusebius’s refusal to accept the bishopric, that the riots were quelled. For this reason the emperor came to admire the bishop [Eusebius], and wrote to commend him for his prudent decision, and congratulating him as a person he considered worthy of being bishop of not just a single city but of almost the whole world. |
| 8. Ἐφεξῆς οὖν ἐπὶ ἔτη ὀκτὼ λέγεται τὸν ἐν Ἀντιοχείᾳ θρόνον τῆς ἐκκλησίας σχολάσαι· ὀψὲ δέ ποτε σπουδῇ τῶν τὴν ἐν Νικαίᾳ πίστιν παρατρέπειν σπουδαζόντων χειροτονεῖται Εὐφρόνιος. | Consequently it is said that the bishop’s chair of the church at Antioch remained vacant for eight consecutive years after this period. Eventially, through the efforts of those who were eager to subvert the Nicene creed, Euphronius was appointed. |
| 9. Τοσαῦτα μὲν {καὶ} περὶ τῆς συνόδου, ἣ κατὰ Ἀντιόχειαν δι’ Εὐστάθιον γέγονεν, ἱστορείσθω | This is all the information I have about the council held at Antioch concerning Eustathius. |
Back to Early Arian Documents.
Last updated 5/13/24
No Responses yet
