the name of CHRIST. In this way he ordained him Deacon, A. D. 392. notwithstanding his great unwillingness, and the protestations which he made of his unworthiness; he obliged him to perform the duties of his office, endeavouring to persuade him by passages from Scripture, and through fear of the judgments of God. Afterwards, as he served at the Holy Sacrifice, St. Epiphanius ordained him Priest with the same difficulty, causing his mouth to be stopped; and he then made use of the same arguments to oblige him to take his seat among the Priests. After this he wrote to the Priests and other Monks of this community, reproving them for not having written to ask for the ordination of Paulinianus; especially since it was now more than a year since several had complained to him of having no one among them to celebrate the Holy Mysteries; and that all desired the ordination of Paulinianus, for the advantage of the monastery. Paulinianus followed St. Epiphanius into Cyprus, and continued subject to him as being one of his Clergy; only going sometimes to visit his brother in Palestine'. 1 S. Hier. Ep. 61. [38. p. 332. c. 3.ad Pamm. 2 [39.p.337.] ad Theoph, John of Jerusalem was extremely angry at this ordination3. He complained loudly of it, and threatened to write concerning Ep. 62. it to the whole world. He alleged that St. Epiphanius had no jurisdiction over Paulinianus, nor in Palestine, which he claimed as his province. He said moreover that Paulinianus was too young to be a Priest, though he was thirty years of age. He added certain personal reproaches against St. Epiphanius, and amongst others, that in the prayers of the Holy Sacrifice he said: "Lord! grant unto John to believe "aright;" thus accusing him of heresy. It is true that "ap. S.Hier. St. Epiphanius accused John of holding the errors attributed to Origen, and this was the chief cause of their division. John pretended' that they had reproached him with this only since he had complained of the ordination of Paulinianus. But St. Epiphanius and St. Jerome maintained on the contrary, that John complained of this ordination only through revenge, because they had found fault with his doctrine. p. 824.] Ep. 61. [38. p.311.] C. 4. XLIV. to John of St. Epiphanius having been informed of the complaints and Letter of St. menaces of John of Jerusalem, wrote a letter to him, in which Epiphanius he gave an account of the manner in which he had performed Jerusalem. 5 Apud. the ordination, and said: "You ought to rejoice, knowing s.Hier. Ep 60. [110. p. 822.] A. D. 392." that the fear of God obliged me to do it; especially considering that there is no difference in the Priesthood' of God, "when regard is had to the good of the Church. For though "the Bishops have every one his church, of which he takes "care, and though none may encroach upon what belongs to [1 sacerdotio.] 16. 66 2 Cor. 10. "another', yet the love of CHRIST, which is without dissimu[3 p. 823.] lation, is to be preferred to every thing." And afterwards3: "O how truly commendable is the meekness and goodness of "the Bishops of Cyprus; and how worthy of the mercy of "GOD is our rusticity as you would term it! For many Bishops of our communion have ordained as Priests in our province, some whom we were unable to secure, and have "sent us Deacons and Subdeacons, whom we gladly received. I, myself, exhorted Bishop Philo of blessed memory and "holy Theoprobus, to ordain Priests in certain churches of "Cyprus, which were near them, because my diocese, in "which they are situated, extends so far. Why therefore are you so angry on account of a work of GOD, which was "done not for the destruction but for the edification of the "brethren?" He afterwards answers the personal reproaches; and protests that he never spoke of John in the public prayers, any otherwise than of the rest of the Bishops, saying; "Lord! preserve him that preacheth the Truth;" or else, "Grant, "Lord, that he may preach the Word of Truth;" using one or other of these expressions according to the occasion or the [p. 824.] sequence of the discourse'. This shews that in the prayers invariable forms were not yet usede. 66 He afterwards comes to Origen's errors, which he affirms to be the true cause of John's animosity, and he refers them to eight heads. The first is, that the Son of GoD cannot see the Father, nor the Holy Ghost, the Son; the second, that bk.5.c.54. souls have been angels in heaven, and that for their sins they were sent here below and imprisoned in bodies; the third, c. 3. [p. that the devil will return to his former dignity and reign in 825.] heaven with the Saints; the fourth, that the garments of с 66 Though there was but one form "of worship throughout the whole "Church, as to what concerned the "substance of Christian worship: yet "every Bishop was at liberty to form "his own Liturgy in what method and "words he thought proper." Bingham 2. 6. 2. While the Unity of the Church was unbroken, individuals could be trusted with a liberty which would subsequently have been dangerous. skins, with which GoD clothed Adam and Eve, were their A. D. 392. bodies, and that they were incorporeal before they sinned; the fifth, that we shall not rise again with the same flesh; the sixth, that the terrestrial paradise is only an allegory of heaven; the seventh, that the waters which in Scripture are placed above the firmament, are the angels, and those beneath, the evil spirits; the eighth, that man by sin lost his resemblance to GOD. St. Epiphanius exhorts' John of Jerusalem ['p. 824, 826.] to renounce all these errors, of which he likewise accuses the Priest Ruffinus of Aquileia and Palladius' of Galatia. [ p. 829.] At the end of his letter are these words: "Moreover, ['p. 828.] "I have been informed, that some have murmured against (6 me, because when we were going to the holy place named "Bethel, in order to perform the Collect there with you; "on coming to the village Anablatha, and seeing there, as "I passed, a lamp lighted, I asked what place it was, and on being told that it was a church, I went in to pray accord"ingly. I found a curtain fastened to the door of this "church, upon which was painted a picture to represent "CHRIST or some Saint; for I do not perfectly remember "the subject. Having therefore seen the image of a man "exposed to view in the Church of CHRIST against the "authority of Scripture, I tore the curtain and advised those "who kept that place rather to wrap the dead body of some poor man in it, for his burial. They murmured and said; "If he must tear our curtain, he ought at least to give us "another in exchange.' When I heard this I promised to "do it, and accordingly I now send the best I could meet "with, and I beg you to order the Priests of the place to "receive it; and to forbid for the future the exhibition in "the Church of such curtains as are contrary to our religion; "it becomes you to remove this scandal." If this part of the letter was really' written by St. Epiphanius, it must be tion.] confessed that in this point he was more scrupulous than S. Greg. other Bishops. For the use of pictures in the churches was Theod. received both in the East and West, as appears from St. Gre- tom. 3. gory of Nyssa', from Prudentius, and from St. Paulinus', who prid. [of this there seems no ques Nyss. in p. 1011. D. Steph. 9. "assemble." Du Cange. For another v. 93. et use of the word, see Bingham, bk. 15. 11. v. 123. ch. 1. § 4. 7 Natal. 11. sub fin. [9. v. 511, &c. p. 611-3.] A. D. 392. wrote at the same time. And there is mention made of a similar picture upon a curtain in a church, in the book of the 1 lib. 2. c.4. miracles of St. Stephen', composed by the order of Evodius § 2. apud Aug.tom. Bishop of Uzala, St. Augustine's friend. However the cus7. Append. toms of the Churches might be different in this point, and p. 40. the great number of Jews who lived in Palestine might render it necessary to use images with more reserve, that they might not be offended, when there was no necessity for it. When persecution ceased, and Faith, from the more mixed character of its professors, needed externals to impress the senses, we first find the erection of magnificent churches and the introduction of various ornaments. Still the use of sacred images was long excluded in consequence of the abhorrence of Pagan idols. Not that symbols on signet-rings were unknown (Clem. Alex. A.D. 192. Pædag. 3. p. 289. Potter.), or on cups (Tert. de Pudic. c. 7.), or embroidered on garments. (Asterii Hom. in Div. et Laz. A. D. 400.) Of these two last, however, Tertullian (c. 10.) seems to disapprove the former and Asterius (who was Bishop of Amasea) dissuades his hearers from the latter. Eusebius rebuked Constantia when she applied to him for a picture of the LORD (Conc. Nicæn. II. Mans. tom. 13. p. 314.), and Conc. Elib. A. D. 305. c. 36. disallowed any pictures in churches. Eusebius (Hist. 7. 18.) tells us of a supposed statue of CHRIST at Cæsarea Philippi, raised by the woman whose issue of blood was healed (cf. Gieseler. vol. 1. § 24. note 4.), and incidentally mentions that pictures of CHRIST and the Apostles were used by Christians. Philostorgius (7. 3.) relates the same history, and says it was placed in the Sacristy (διακονικὸν) where it was much visited and respect was shewn to it (τà πρéποντα ἐθεράπευον) in memory of Him Whom it represented, but no adoration (σέβοντες ἢ προσκυνοῦντες οὐδαμῶς). St. Augustine condemns the adoratores of pictures (de Mor. Eccles. c. 34. tom. 1.) and those who derived their knowledge of the history of our LORD and His Apostles from them instead of the New Testament. De Cons. Evang. 1. 10. He elsewhere speaks of pictures of the Sacrifice of Isaac. (c. Faust. 22. 73.) "At first historical pictures, the "subjects of which were taken from the "Scriptures or from the History of the 66 Martyrs were allowed in the churches; "of these the earliest instances are men"tioned by St. Gregory of Nyssa in "the East, and Paulinus Bishop of "Nola in the West." (A.D. 409-431.) See Gieseler, vol. 1. § 97. ad finem. St. Gregory the Great approves their use as instructing the illiterate and kindling the devotion of all, and while he commends Serenus, Bishop of Marseilles for his indignation at seeing certain images adored, he condemns his inconsiderateness in destroying them. He He The Emperor Leo III., Isauricus (A.D.716-741.), was led, from the gross abuses into which the use of images had fallen among the uninstructed, to pursue the same conduct as Serenus. was resisted by Germanus, Patriarch of Constantinople, whom he deposed. In A. D. 730, he commanded the pictures to be removed from the churches. was disregarded both at Rome by Pope Gregory II. and in the East (now overrun by the Saracens). Under his successor, Constantine Copronymus, a Council at Constantinople condemned the practice A.D. 754, and the laws against images were still enforced by the next Emperor, Leo IV. (775-780.) His widow Irene, who governed under the name of her infant son, Constantine VI., summoned in conjunction with Tarasius, the new Patriarch, the seventh (so called) general Council at Nicæa, which sanctioned the use of images (see Gieseler, vol. 2. § 1.), allowing poσKνησις to them but only honorary (τιμηTIK). (Defin. Syn. II. Nic. Mans. tom. 13. p. 377. Cf. Supr. ch. 31. note k.) Theod. in A.D. 842, celebrated the conclusion of the Iconoclast controversy by instituting a yearly festival (ἡ κυριακὴ τῆς ἀρ eodogías). The Gallican Church at a council held at Frankfort (A.D. 794.) expressed its disapprobation of the adoration of images. With respect to the Reformation, Henry VIII. “ had Letters of interpr. St. Epiphanius sent this letter to John by one of his Clerks A. D. 393. and urged him to reply to it. Meanwhile copies of it were XLV. circulated in Palestine. St. Jerome translated it into Latin St. Jerome against at the request of Eusebius of Cremona, who was in his mo- John. nastery and was desirous of reading a letter, which he heard so much praised, but which was written in a language he did not understand. St. Jerome sent for a short-hand writer' and S. Hier. Ep. 101. at once dictated the translation, which he gave Eusebius with [33.] de the request not to let it get abroad, but which was notwith- opt. gen. standing afterwards published, and it is in this shape only [Ser. A.D. 396.p.248.] that the letter of St. Epiphanius has come down to us. Instead of answering it, John wrote an Apology, addressed to Theophilus of Alexandria, but really a circular letter to all the Ibid. Ep. 61. [38. Bishops. This he sent to the West and to many other A. D. 397. provinces; copies of it as well as of St. Epiphanius' letter P. 309.] were spread at Rome, and Pammachius in consequence wrote to St. Jerome and begged him to explain and make known to the world the real state of the question. St. Jerome acquiesced and wrote a long letter to Pammachius in the year 393, as appears by the mention of a solar eclipse; the quarrel had now lasted three years since the time that Epiphanius, at Jerusalem, had accused John of Origenism, which is related by St. Jerome, who addresses John, in the following way: 66 never was the meaning of the Queen c. 16. [p. 333.] |