Liberius was chosen on the 22d of May 352. in the room of
Julius[717]. He had trampled under-foot (to use his own Terms)
all worldly things, to observe the Gospel, and obey the Dictates of
his Faith. He had been employed, before his Election, in several
Ecclesiastical Ministries, and discharged them with Reputation, though
he was not conscious to himself of having ever done the least Thing
for the sake of Praise and Glory. He was at last raised to the Episcopal
Dignity, but much against his Will, as he calls God and the
Church to witness. He protests, that it was his ardent and only Wish,
that he might keep himself pure and undefiled in the Administration
of his new Dignity, that he might inviolably maintain and defend
the Faith, which he had received from his illustrious Predecessors,
among whom were many Martyrs[718]. |No easy Matter to
form a true Idea of
his Character.| Were we to judge of his Conduct
from his Words, we should equal him to the best of his Predecessors;
but there appears, throughout his whole Administration,
such an odd Mixture of opposite Qualities, that it is no easy Matter
to form a true Idea of his Character: at one time we shall find him
bold, intrepid, and inflexible; at another timorous, faint-hearted, and
compliant; insomuch that one can hardly conceive him to be the
same Man. The latter Qualities he betrayed in the very Beginning of
his Pontificate, by separating himself from the Communion of Athanasius.
Constans, the great Support of the Orthodox Party, being
murdered, and Constantius upon the Point of becoming Master of
Rome, by a complete Victory he had gained over the Two Brothers
Magnentius and Decentius, the Eusebians thought this a proper
Juncture to try whether the Fear of that Prince had not rendered
Julius somewhat more tractable. For Constantius was more incensed
than ever against Athanasius, being assured by the Eusebians, to
whom he gave an intire Credit, that he had influenced his Brother
to threaten him with a Civil War[719]. |The Eusebians write
a second Letter to
Julius against
Athanasius:| They writ therefore to Julius
a second Letter, filled with new Complaints and Calumnies
against Athanasius; but Julius dying in the mean time, their Letter,
together with another to the same Purpose from the Arians of Alexandria,
was delivered to Liberius, who caused them both to be
publicly read in a full Assembly of the People, and in the Council,
which was then sitting at Rome[720]. |which is answered
by Liberius:| His Answer to these Letters has not reached our Times; but a Copy of the Letter, which he writ
on that Occasion to Athanasius, has, to his eternal Disgrace, been
transmitted to us, among the Fragments of Hilarius Bishop of Poitiers.
|who summons
Athanasius to Rome.| In that Letter he summons him to appear forthwith at Rome,
to clear himself there of the heavy Accusations brought against him;
and threatens to cut him off from the Communion of that Church,
if he refused to comply with the Summons[721]. With this Letter he
dispatched Three of his Presbyters, Lucius, Paulus, and Ælianus;
strictly injoining them, by all means, to prevail upon Athanasius to
repair, without Delay, to Rome[722]. This Conduct, so very different
from that of his Predecessor, was, no doubt, owing to the Dread he
was in of the Emperor Constantius, by this Time probably Master
of Rome, and all Italy; for what else could tempt or induce him
to act so preposterously? Be that as it will, Athanasius was greatly
surprised and concerned to find himself so unworthily treated and
threatened by the Bishop of Rome; but did not think himself, on
that Account, obliged to abandon his Flock. He remained therefore
in Alexandria; but begged his Collegues in Egypt to write in his
Favour to the Pope; which they did accordingly. |Liberius commun-
icates with the Arians,
and excommunicates
Athanasius.| But Liberius wanted
to ingratiate himself with the Arians, and, by their means, with
the Emperor; and therefore, without any Regard to the Testimony
of the Orthodox Bishops, or the known Innocence of the oppressed
Athanasius, he writ to the Eusebians, acquainting them, that he
communicated with them; but, as to Athanasius, he had cut him off
from his Communion, and from that of his Church[723]. |His Letter to them
not supposititious.| Baronius[724],
and after him the Benedictines, in their last Edition of the Works of
Hilarius and Athanasius[725], maintain this Letter of Liberius to have
been forged by the Arians, and inserted into the Works of Hilarius.
But they allege no convincing Reason why the other Pieces,
among which it has been conveyed to us, should be admitted as genuine,
and this alone rejected as supposititious. Athanasius, indeed,
never reproached the Bishop of Rome with his scandalous Conduct,
as they observe; but may not that be ascribed to his Moderation?
The more, as he was sensible, that Liberius acted thus not out of Ill-will,
but Fear. As to the want of Connexion between that Letter and
the Pieces preceding and following it, I should not have expected such
an Objection from any who had ever perused the Fragments of that
Writer, which every one knows to have been patched together without
any Regard to Time or Order[N14].
N14. Thus the very Letter of Liberius is put in the Place where the Letter of the Council of Sardica to the Emperor Constantius ought to have been, as is manifest from what is said immediately before it. A few Lines after, instead of the Letter from the Council of Egypt to Liberius, which Hilarius promises, we find one from Liberius to the Bishops of Italy, written after the Death of Constantius upon a quite different Subject. What comes immediately after the Letter of Liberius to the Eusebians, ought, in all Likelihood, to have been placed after the above-mentioned Letter of the Council of Sardica to Constantius: for to me it appears no less improbable than it does or can do to Baronius[1], that Hilarius, a most zealous Stickler for the Orthodox Faith, should approve of the Pope’s scandalous Letter, tending utterly to subvert it, and express his Approbation in these Terms; What is there in this Letter that is not holy? What is there that does not proceed from the Fear of God? However, I cannot conclude, and much less demonstratively, with the Annalist, that the Letter has been forged by the Arians. All I think can be inferred from thence is, that the Letters, like most other Pieces there, have been misplaced; and that the above-mentioned Words of Hilarius ought to be put after the Letter of the Council to Constantius, and not after that of Liberius to the Arians.
1. Bar. ad ann. 352. n. 13.
In the mean time Constantius, now in quiet Possession of the whole Empire by the Death of Magnentius, who, after his Defeat, had laid violent Hands on himself, summoned a Council to meet at Arles. At this Council Liberius did not assist in Person, but by his Legates, Vincentius Bishop of Capua, and Marcellus Bishop of Campania, who, together with some others, had been sent by Liberius some time before to meet the Emperor at Arles, and beg him in the Pope’s Name to assemble a Council at Aquileia[726]. As the Bishop of Capua was a Man of great Parts, and long Experience, Liberius reposed an intire Confidence in him, not doubting but he would maintain the Dignity of his Legation, and support the Innocency of Athanasius with that Firmness which he had shewn on several other Occasions [N15].
N15. For Liberius, ashamed of what he had done against Athanasius, not only readmitted him soon after to his own Communion, but with great Zeal undertook his Defence.
As the Council consisted chiefly of Arians, their great Point in
view was, to extort from the Italian Bishops a solemn Condemnation
of Athanasius. |The Emperor’s Edict.| This therefore was in the first place proposed in the
Council; and, because the orthodox Bishops would not consent to it,
an Edict was issued by the Emperor, sentencing all those to Exile who
should refuse to sign the Condemnation of Athanasius[727]. |The Pope’s Legates
sign the Condem-
nation of Athanasius.| The boasted
Firmness and Constancy of Vincentius were not Proof against such a
Trial. He did all that lay in his Power to divert the Emperor from
the Execution of a Decree utterly inconsistent with the Liberty of a
Council; but finding him deaf to all Remonstrances, he began to
capitulate, offering to sign the Condemnation of Athanasius, on condition
the Eusebians signed that of Arius, and publicly abjured his
Doctrine. This he thought would be some Alleviation of his Guilt,
and therefore the Proposal which he had made by Word of Mouth he
gave in Writing to the Heads of the Arian Faction, signed by himself
and his Fellow-legates. But the Arians, too well acquainted with their
Weakness to grant them any Terms, peremptorily insisted upon their
condemning Athanasius, and referring the Cause and Doctrine of
Arius to a more proper Juncture. Vincentius and his Collegues, finding
the Enemies of Athanasius thus inflexible, and, on the other hand,
determined at all Events to keep their Bishopricks, and avoid the Hardships
of a painful Exile, complied at last, and yielded to the troublesome
Times, to use their softening Expression[728]. They were the more
inexcuseable, as they had before their Eyes the Example of a great
Prelate, whose Constancy was proof against all the Threats and
Menaces of a provoked Prince. This was the celebrated Paulinus
Bishop of Treves, who, after perusing the Formulary, drawn up by
the Eusebians, to be signed by him and the other Bishops, rejected it
with the utmost Indignation, declaring that nothing they could do
should ever induce him to betray the Truth, and his own Conscience,
by setting his Hand to such a scandalous Piece. The Eusebians left
no Art unattempted to gain him, as they had done the Pope’s Legates,
but finding he was a Man of a quite different Disposition, and despairing
of being ever able to prevail upon him either by Hopes or Fear,
they at last had recourse to the Emperor, who, putting his Decree in
Execution, sent him into Exile; and in order to tire out his Patience,
ordered him to be constantly conveyed from one inhospitable Place to
another. |The glorious Behaviour
of Paulinus.| But in every Place Paulinus was the same, the Conscience
of his suffering for the sake of Justice enabling him to bear, not only
with Patience, but Chearfulness, the inexpressible Hardships he underwent[729].
He died in Phrygia in the Fifth Year of his Exile[730], that is,
in 358. But his Body is supposed to have been discovered in a Church
of his Name at Treves, in the Year 1071[731]. How and when it was
conveyed thither, let those inquire who adore it.
To return to Liberius, he was so sensibly affected with the Fall of
Vincentius and his Collegues, that he wished for an Opportunity of
losing his Life in so good a Cause, and washing out with his Blood the
Stain which the scandalous Conduct of his Legates had brought upon
his Character[732]. Thus he expresses himself in the Letter, which he
writ on that Occasion to the great Friend of his See Osius[733]. However,
in the Height of his Affliction, he found great Relief in the
Courage and Steadiness of Cæcilianus Bishop of Spoleto, of Eusebius
Bishop of Vercelli, and of Lucifer Bishop of Cagliari in Sardinia.
The latter advised the Pope to demand of the Emperor another Council,
and generously took upon himself to go to Arles, where Constantius
then was, and make that Demand. Liberius readily accepted
his Offer, and named Pancratius and Hilarius for his Collegues, the
one a Presbyter, the other a Deacon of the Church of Rome. |Liberius writes to
the Emperor for an-
other Council;| By
these he writ an excellent Letter to the Emperor, wherein, with the
Liberty that became a Catholic Bishop, but at the same time with all
the Respect that is due from a Subject to his Sovereign, he justifies his
Conduct in the Defence of Athanasius, lays open the Arts and Views
of the adverse Party, and begs that a new Council might be assembled,
there being no other Means to put a Stop to so many Evils, and restore
Peace and Tranquillity to the Catholic Church[734]. At the same time
Liberius writ to Eusebius Bishop of Vercelli, and Fortunatianus
Bishop of Aquileia, intreating them to assist his Legates with their
Advice, and even with their Presence, should it be thought necessary.
The Three Legates, on their Arrival at Vercelli, in their Way to Arles,
were not only kindly received, but joined by Eusebius, who repaired
with them to the Emperor. |which is granted,
and assembles at Milan.| As the Arians were no-ways averse to
the Proposal, nay, had even solicited the Emperor to convene a new
Council, the Request of the Legates met with no Difficulty; so that a
Council was appointed to meet at Milan, where it met accordingly in
the Beginning of the Year 355[735]. We are told, that it consisted of
Three hundred Western Bishops, and that from the East there came
but very few[736]. But Constantius and his Army may be said to have
supplied their room. For the Council no sooner met, than the Emperor
absolutely insisted upon their signing the Condemnation of Athænasius,
and an Edict, containing the chief Tenets of Arius, which had
been published in his Name. But in this Attempt he met with a
vigorous Opposition from Dionysius Bishop of Milan, Eusebius of
Vercelli, Lucifer of Cagliari, and the Two other Legates, Pancratius
and Hilarius; which provoked him to such a Degree, that he
was upon the Point of commanding them to be executed upon the
Spot as Rebels. |Some Bishops banished.| But, upon second Thoughts, he contented himself
with sending them into Exile, Dionysius into Cappadocia, or Armenia,
where he died a few Years after, Eusebius to Scythopolis in Palestine,
and Lucifer to Germanicia in Syria. To what Place Pancratius
and Hilarius were confined, we know not; but the latter was
most cruelly whipped before he was banished[737]. As for the other Bishops,
I shall only say, with Ruffinus[738], that, out of Three hundred, Dionysius,
Lucifer, and Eusebius, alone shewed a Firmness and Intrepidity
becoming Men of their Rank and Dignity. Among the rest
Fortunatianus Bishop of Aquileia signed the Condemnation of Athanasius;
which greatly added to the Grief and Concern of Liberius,
who, till that Time, had entertained the highest Opinion of him.
And now Constantius had the Satisfaction of seeing Athanasius
condemned by the far greater Part of the Western Bishops. But the
Bishop of Rome still declared openly in his Favour, and did all that lay
in his Power to gain others to his Party. |Constantius endeavours in
vain to gain Liber-
ius;| To deprive him therefore of
so powerful a Protector, the Emperor resolved to spare no Cost nor
Labour. With this View he dispatched to Rome the Eunuch Eusebius,
his great Chamberlain, with rich Presents in one Hand, and a threatening
Letter in the other: but with an invincible Firmness Liberius
withstood both; so that the Eunuch, who was himself a sworn Enemy
to Athanasius, returned to Court baffled and disappointed; and there,
by the Account he gave of his unsuccessful Embassy, added new Fuel
to the Fire, which burnt already with great Violence. The Emperor,
who pretended to govern the Church no less despotically than he did
the State, transported with Rage at the stout Opposition he met with
from the Bishop of Rome, immediately dispatched an Order to Leoncius,
Prefect of that City, injoining him to apprehend Liberius, and
send him under a strong Guard to Court. |who is sent Pris-
oner to Milan.| Pursuant to this Order, Liberius
was seized in the Night-time, lest the People, by whom he was
greatly beloved, should attempt his Rescue, and conveyed to Milan,
where the Court then resided[739]. Soon after his Arrival he was brought
before the Emperor, when, undaunted and unawed by the Presence
of so great a Prince, he spoke with all the Liberty of an Apostle, and
with all the Eloquence of a great Orator[740]. |His Interview with
the Emperor.| At this Interview were
present Eusebius the Eunuch, and Epictetus Bishop of Centumcellæ,
now Civita Vecchia, who, for his ready Compliance with the Emperor’s
Will, had been raised by him to great Preferments[741]. The latter
told Liberius, when he had ended the excellent Speech he made
before the Emperor, That he had indeed expressed great Zeal for the
Purity of the Faith, and the Liberty of Councils; but the Whole was
mere Mummery; and that he only wanted to be looked upon by his
Party as a Person of some Significancy, and to brag among the Senators,
on his Return to Rome, that he had had the Honour to dispute
with the Emperor[742]. The Eunuch too thought he must speak, but it
was only to betray his Ignorance; for he reproached Liberius with
defending Athanasius, who had been condemned, he said, as an Heretic,
by the Council of Nice[743]. As for Constantius, the only Reply
he made to the Reasons alleged by Liberius in favour of Athanasius,
and the Faith of Nice, was, That the wicked and impious Athanasius,
as he styled him, had been condemned by the whole World; that, by
his arrogant Conduct, he had provoked all Mankind, and himself in
particular, by constantly stirring up his Brother against him; that
therefore he looked upon the Defeat of Magnentius and Sylvanus,
who had attempted to bereave him of his Crown, as less important to
him than the deposing and condemning of a Man, by whom he had
been so highly injured[744]. In answer to this, Liberius begged, that,
of all Men, he would not chuse Bishops for the Instruments of his private
Revenge. Constantius made no Reply, but only told him, that
he must either sign the Condemnation of Athanasius, or be sent into
Exile; and that he allowed him Three Days to deliberate which of
the Two he would chuse. |His Steadiness.| Liberius answered, with great Intrepidity,
that he had already chosen, and was resolved; that in Three Days he
should not change his Resolution; and therefore the Emperor might
send him that Minute to what Place soever he pleased[745]. The Three
Days were not yet expired when the Emperor sent for him anew to
Court, hoping the Fear of Banishment had softened him, as it had
done most others, into a Compliance. But he found him unalterably
fixed in the same Resolution; and therefore, despairing of being ever
able to succeed in his Attempt, he ordered him to be conveyed forthwith
to Berœa in Thrace[746]. |He is banished to
Berœa in Thrace.| Liberius had not yet left the Palace,
when the Emperor sent him a Present of Five hundred Pieces of Gold
to defray his Charges: which he sent back by the same Person who
brought them, saying, that the Emperor might want Money to pay
his Troops. The like Sum was sent him by the Empress Eusebia;
which, with the same Answer, he desired might be conveyed to the
Emperor, adding, that if he knew not how to employ that Sum better,
he might bestow it on Epictetus, or Auxentius the Arian Bishop
of Milan, who would be very thankful for it[747]. He left Milan
Three Days after, and set out for the Place of his Exile. His Fate
was no sooner known at Rome, than the Clergy, assembling the
People, bound themselves by a solemn Oath, in their Presence, not
to acknowlege any other for their Bishop so long as Liberius
lived[748].
Liberius being thus driven from his See, another was placed on it in
his room; and the Person, whom the Emperor and the Arian Faction
pitched upon, was one Felix, then only Deacon of the Church of
Rome[749]. But the Clergy could not proceed to a new Election, without
an open Violation of the Oath they had taken; the People began
to mutiny, and, assembling in Crouds, would suffer none of the Arian
Faction to enter their Churches. The Imperial Palace therefore served
instead of a Church; Three of the Emperor’s Eunuchs represented the
People; and Three Bishops, Slaves of the Court, viz. Epictetus of
Centumcellæ, Acacius of Cæsarea, and Basilius of Ancyra, ordained
the new-elected Bishop[750]. Thus was Felix chosen, and thus ordained.
As Liberius was greatly beloved by the People, chiefly on account of
his vigorous Opposition to Constantius, the Intrusion of Felix occasioned
a great Sedition, in which many lost their Lives[751]. The Clergy
were not so zealous in the Cause as the People; for great Numbers of
them, unmindful of the Oath they had taken, were by degrees reconciled
to Felix, and communicated with him[752]; whereas the People
continued to abhor and avoid him at least till the Year 357. When Constantius
came to Rome[753]. |Constantius goes
to Rome.| For that Prince, being desirous to see the
Metropolis of his Empire, undertook a Journey to Rome in the above-mentioned
Year, and entered it in Triumph on the 28th of April[754].
During his short Stay in that City, the Roman Ladies gave a signal Instance
of the Zeal and Affection they still retained for their exiled Bishop.
They thought a more favourable Opportunity could never offer
to solicit the Emperor for his Return; and therefore, by a private
Agreement among themselves, they pressed their Husbands, with great
Earnestness, to lay hold of it, threatening to abandon them, if they
did not, and repairing to their Bishop to share with him the Hardships
of his Exile. The Husbands, unmoved by such Menaces, which they
well knew would never take place, answered, that by such an Application
they might incur the Displeasure of the Prince, which would
prove fatal to them, as well as to the Person in whose Behalf they
interposed; whereas, should they themselves take such a pious and
commendable Office upon them, the Respect due to their Sex would,
in all Likelihood, extort from the Prince the desired Favour, at least
it would restrain his Resentment, and stifle all Thoughts of Revenge.
The Proposal was universally applauded by the Ladies, unwilling to
expose their Husbands to the dire Effects of the Emperor’s Indignation.
|The Roman Ladies
intercede for Liberius.|
On an appointed Day therefore, attiring themselves in an Apparel suitable
to their Rank, that the Emperor in seeing them might know
who they were, and treat them accordingly, they repaired to Court;
and being immediately admitted to the Prince’s Presence, they conjured
him, with Tears in their Eyes, to take Pity of that great City,
of that numerous Flock, bereft of its Pastor, and, in his Absence,
devoured by ravenous Wolves. This was not at all a courtly Language:
however, Constantius, without betraying the least Emotion,
said, I thought you had a Pastor. Is not Felix as capable of discharging
the Pastoral Office as any other? Felix, replied they, is
detested, and avoided by all. |The Emperor promises
to recall him.| At these Words the Emperor first looked
grave; but, immediately changing his Gravity into a Smile, If so, said
he, with great Complaisance, you must have Liberius again: I shall,
without Delay, dispatch the proper Orders for his Return. An
Edict was accordingly issued the very next Day, recalling Liberius to
govern the Church jointly with Felix; for Constantius thought it inconsistent
with his Honour, and the Imperial Dignity, to drive Felix
from the See, on which he himself had placed him.
When this Edict was read, in the Presence of the Emperor, to the
People assembled in the Circus, they applauded it at first, by way of
Raillery, saying, That since the Spectators, at the public Sports, were
divided into Two Parties, it was just and reasonable there should be
Two Bishops to head them. The Multitude, not satisfied with thus
pleasantly expressing their Dissatisfaction, cried out, immediately after,
with one Voice, There is but One God, One Christ, One Bishop[755].
And yet the Emperor was rather delighted than displeased with the
Humour of the People, and the Liberty they took; for to what happened
on this Occasion Ammianus Marcellinus probably alludes, where
he writes, that Constantius, in exhibiting public Sports at Rome, was
pleased with the Liberty they took to railly him, knowing it did not
proceed from Pride or Ill-nature[756]. Theodoret tells us, that to Acclamations
so worthy of the Roman Piety the Emperor granted the
Return of Liberius[757]; and with him agree Sulpitius Severus[758], and
Ruffinus[759]. But Sozomen[760], and all the Writers of those Times,
assure us, that his Return did not happen this, but the following
Year 358. when he bought it dear, by signing the Condemnation of
Athanasius, and the Symbol or Creed, composed by the Semi-Arians
at Sirmium, now Sirmish in Sclavonia. Constantius, at the Request
of the Roman Ladies and People, promised to recall him, as I have
related; but it was on Condition, says Sozomen[761], that he should
agree with the Bishops of the Court, that is, with the Semi-Arians.
The Firmness which Liberius had hitherto shewn, left no room to
doubt of his rejecting such a Proposal with the greatest Indignation.
But he now felt what before he had only beheld at a Distance: he
began to compare the Ease and Plenty in which he had lived at
Rome, with the Inconveniencies and Hardships of his present Exile.
Besides, from the Menaces thrown out against him by the Emperor’s
Officers, he apprehended his Life to be in Danger[762]. 'Tis true, he had
wished for an Opportunity of shedding his Blood in so good a Cause,
as I have related above. But who is not brave at a Distance from
Danger? The Jealousy he had of Felix, who, sitting in his Chair, acted
the High Pontiff at Rome, was the Dalila, says Baronius[763], speaking
of his signing the Condemnation of Athanasius, who bereft this
Samson of all his Strength and Courage. |Liberius signs the
Condemnation
of Athanasius, and
embraces the Doct-
rine of Sirmium.| However that be, it is
certain, that the Strength and Courage, which he had with great
Glory exerted on other Occasions, vanished at once. For he not
only signed the Condemnation of Athanasius, but moreover approved
and received as Catholic, the Confession or Symbol of Sirmium[764].
Thus, to ingratiate himself with the Emperor, and return
to Rome, did Liberius abandon, at last, his persecuted Friend, renounce
the Catholic Faith, and solemnly promise to maintain inviolable
the Doctrine of Sirmium[765]. As he was impatient to be reinstated
in his See, he took care immediately to acquaint the Emperor
with the Steps he had taken. With this Letter he dispatched
Fortunatianus Bishop of Aquileia, charging him to solicit Constantius
for his Return, since he had done all he had required of
him[766]. Constantius took no Notice of, nor returned any Answer to,
this Letter. On the other hand, Liberius was heartily sick of his
Exile, heartily sick of suffering for the sake of Justice. |His Letter to the
Eastern Bishops.| In Hopes
therefore of putting a speedy End to his Exile, and the Hardships
attending it, he writ in a most submissive and cringing Style to the
Eastern Bishops, assuring them, that it was merely out of Respect to
his Predecessor Julius, and to maintain his Judgment, that he had
undertaken the Defence of Athanasius; that as soon as it had pleased
God to open his Eyes, and discover to him how justly he had been
condemned, he had separated himself from his Communion, and
joined them; that all their Decrees concerning him should be inviolably
observed by the Apostolic See, as indeed they ought to be;
that he sincerely and willingly received the true Catholic and Orthodox
Faith, as it had been expounded and defined by several of his
Brethren and Collegues at Sirmium, and had been proposed to him
by his Collegue Demophilus; that he received every Article of that
Symbol, and had nothing to object against any. This remarkable
Letter he concludes thus: And now that I agree with you in every
Point, let me earnestly intreat your Holinesses to employ your joint
Interest in my Behalf, that I may be recalled from Banishment, and
suffered to return to the See, which God has been pleased to commit
to my Care[767]. |He is anathematized
by Hilarius. His Letter
to the Bishops at
Court;| This Letter has been conveyed to us by the great
Hilarius, Bishop of Poitiers, who, in relating it, not able to restrain
the just Indignation it kindled in his Breast, interrupts the Recital
Three times, to anathematize the Author of it, the prevaricating Liberius,
as he styles him[768]. He writ likewise to Ursacius, Valens,
and Germinius, who bore great Sway at Court, and were at the Head
of the Arian Faction in the West, to acquaint them, that he communicated
with them, and also with Auxentius and Epictetus, Two
of the most inveterate Enemies the Orthodox had; and that whoever
did not communicate with them, that is, every Catholic Bishop, was
cut off from his Communion. These Words Hilarius cannot repeat
without anathematizing anew Liberius, and all the Arians with him.
In the same Letter he lets them know, that he has separated himself
from the Communion of Athanasius, late Bishop of Alexandria,
acknowleging him, by that Expression, lawfully deposed. He declares,
in the Beginning of his Letter, and calls God to witness, that it is
not by Compulsion, but merely for the sake of Peace and Charity, far
preferable to Martyrdom itself, that he writes to them. He conjures
them, by the omnipotent God, by his Son Jesus, by the Holy Ghost,
to intercede for him with the Emperor, that, by his Return, Peace
and Tranquillity may be restored to the Church committed to his Care;
assuring them, that the Zeal they exert in so pious, so just a Cause,
will meet with a proportionable Reward in Heaven[769].
As the Emperor had not yet taken the least Notice of his Letter;
as the Eastern Bishops, as well as the Bishops at Court, did not act,
as he thought, with all the Zeal and Expedition he expected, and
his ready Compliance well deserved; |and to Vincentius,
Bishop of Capua.| he writ a Third Letter, directed
to Vincentius, Bishop of Capua, acquainting him, that he had
abandoned the Defence of Athanasius, and desiring him to give Notice
thereof to all the Bishops of Campania; and, at the same time,
to use his utmost Endeavours to persuade them to dispatch some of
their Body with a Letter, in their common Name, to the Emperor,
begging Constantius to deliver him, without further Delay, from his
present most melancholy and deplorable Situation. To this Letter he
adds the following Paragraph, in his own Hand: We live in Peace
with all the Bishops of the East, and with you. As for me, I have
discharged my Conscience before God. Will you suffer me to perish in
my present Exile? The same God will judge us both[770]. The Bishop
of Capua had been formerly sent by Liberius to the Council of
Arles, with the Character of his Legate, as I have observed above,
and had there signed the Condemnation of Athanasius; on which
Occasion Liberius wished for an Opportunity of washing out, with
his own Blood, the Stain which the Conduct of his Legate had
brought upon his Character. But his only Wish now was to see himself
delivered from his painful Exile, and restored to his former State,
upon any Terms. Vincentius, touched with his Complaints, prevailed
upon the Bishops of Campania to send a solemn Deputation to
the Emperor in his Behalf; which Constantius complied with, so far
as to recall him from the Place of his Exile to Sirmium, where the
Court then was[771]. |He is recalled from
his Banishment to
Sirmium.| Upon his Arrival there, Constantius, who had
lately embraced the Doctrine of the Semi-Arians, taking Advantage
of his Weakness, and of the eager Desire he had betrayed of returning
to his See, obliged him, as well as the Bishops of the Court, and
Four African Bishops, who happened to be then at Sirmium, to sign
the same Doctrine[772]. |He signs the Doctrine
of the Semi-Arians.| Thus did the infallible Liberius sign, and embrace,
at least in Appearance, both the Arian and Semi-Arian Heresy;
the Arian at Berœa, the Place of his Exile, and the Semi-Arian
at Sirmium. That the Confession he signed at Berœa was
Arian, cannot be doubted; for it was the Second of Sirmium, which
all agree to have been Arian[N16]. Besides, it was proposed to him
by Demophilus Bishop of Berœa, who was a most zealous Stickler
for Arianism, and greatly attached to Ursacius and Valens, the Two
leading Men among the Arians in the West; and it is not at all probable,
that he would have required Liberius to sign a Doctrine different
from that which he himself held.
N16. Three Councils were held at Sirmium, one in 349. another in 352. and the Third in 357. In the First, Photinus, Bishop of that City, was condemned, for reviving the Heresy of Paul of Samosata. This Council was intirely composed of the Western Bishops, who attempted to depose Photinus, but were vigorously opposed by the People. The Second Council of Sirmium was convened by the Emperor Constantius, and consisted of the Eastern Bishops only, who condemned anew, and deposed Photinus. By this Council a Symbol, or Creed, was composed, which has been transmitted to us in Greek by St. Athanasius, and in Latin by St. Hilarius; and is intirely Orthodox. In the Third Council of Sirmium a new Creed was composed by Potamius Bishop of Lisbone, and signed by Ursacius, Valens, Germinius, and the other Bishops there present. This Creed was altogether Arian; for not only the Word Consubstantial was rejected by it, but the Son was declared to be unlike the Father in Essence, to be less than the Father, and to have had a Beginning. And it was this Second Symbol of Sirmium that Liberius signed at Berœa. Upon his Arrival at Sirmium he found there Basilius of Ancyra, Eleusius of Cyzicus, and the other Semi-Arian Bishops, who were lately come from the Council of Ancyra, where they had condemned the Doctrine of the Pure Arians, and established that of the Semi-Arians, holding the Son to be like the Father in Nature and Essence, but not Consubstantial, or of the same Substance. And this Doctrine Liberius signed out of Complaisance to the Emperor, that nothing might obstruct his Return to Rome. He signed it in a kind of Council, consisting of the Semi-Arian Bishops, whom I have mentioned above.
The Advocates for the Pope’s Infallibility are here quite at a Loss
what to say in Defence of that Prerogative. That Liberius signed
the Condemnation of Athanasius, that he communicated with the
Arians, and, what above all galls them, that he received the Sirmian
Confession of Faith as Catholic and Orthodox, are undeniable
Matters of Fact. To reconcile them with Infallibility, is what they
have been long drudging at: and to what pitiful Shifts, what eluding
and unmeaning Distinctions, have they not been obliged to recur!
Like a Man struggling for Life in deep Water, and catching at
every Twig to save it, they flounce from Quibble to Quibble, from
one Subterfuge to another, but all in vain; sink they must, and their
Infallibility with them. To shew their Distress, I shall briefly transcribe
what I find offered on this Occasion, by the most learned among
them, in Defence of the Cause they have undertaken. |What alleged by
Baronius in his
Defence;| Baronius[773], after
relating and owning the above-mentioned Facts, addresses his Readers
thus: We have hitherto sailed among dangerous Rocks, among
treacherous Sholes; but fear not, I shall at last pilot you safe into
the Port of Truth. Then, dropping his Allegory, he makes a long
Descant to prove, that the Sirmian Confession of Faith, signed by
Liberius, was, in every Article, Catholic and Orthodox. A rare Pilot
indeed! If this (to pursue his Allegory) is the Port of Truth, who can
help pitying Jerom, Hilarius, Athanasius, and in short all the Antients?
for they certainly missed it, and, falling in among those dangerous
Rocks, those treacherous Sholes, which Baronius had the Skill
and good Luck to avoid, were there unfortunately shipwrecked. For
Jerom says, in express Terms, and in Two Places[774], that Liberius
signed an Heresy; Hilarius, that he approved of the Arian Perfidy[775];
Athanasius, that he joined the Arians[776]; and all the Antients, that
he apostatized from the Faith: nay, Liberius himself, in his Letter
to the Orientals, which is still to be seen, under his own Hand, in the
Vatican Library, gives them Notice, that in all things he agrees
with Demophilus, a most zealous Arian, and with them; which
Words Hilarius could not repeat without anathematizing him. It is
therefore manifest, beyond all Dispute, that the Confession of Faith,
signed by Liberius, was not Catholic, but Arian. Of this Baronius
himself was, without doubt, well apprised, and into this Port he had
piloted his Reader, had Truth alone been his Land-mark.
|and by Bellarmine.| Bellarmine,
the other great Stickler for Infallibility, pursues a different Method,
but with worse Success, in my Opinion, than his Fellow-Champion
Baronius; for, by striving to support that chimerical Prerogative,
he evidently oversets it. The Pope, according to him, may
sign and receive heretical Opinions, as Liberius did, without prejudicing
in the least his Infallibility, provided he does not internally
assent to them[777]; so that the so much boasted Infallibility is by him
reduced at last to this; that the Pope cannot internally assent to an
Error: which is confining his Infallibility to himself, and consequently
disqualifying him for the Office of a Teacher. Infallibility,
even thus curtailed, is, no doubt, a most valuable Treasure to the
Owner, but of no more Use to the rest of Mankind than a Treasure
concealed under-ground; and, on that very Account, it ought in
common Sense to be exploded. But it is scarce worth the while to
quarrel with Bellarmine about it, since he cannot be so unreasonable
as to require us, in virtue of such a Prerogative, to pay any Regard
to the Decisions of the Pope, till such time, at least, as we
know them to be agreeable to his private Opinion: and this is what
we can never know, since every Pope may, like Liberius, externally
admit an Opinion as true; and, at the same time, internally reject it as
false.