is blasphemous to represent the similarity as a mere analogy. The similitude is a similitude of proper nature and equality. The conclusion of the argument is that the word óuotovatos, if understood, leads us to the word ouoovσtos which helps to guard it, and that it does not imply any separation between the Persons of the Trinity. The saint now turns to the Eastern bishops, a small number of whom still remained faithful. He bestows upon them titles of praise, and expresses his joy at the decisions they had made, and at the Emperor's repudiation of his former mistake. With Pauline fervour Hilary exclaims that he would remain in exile all his life, if only truth might be preached. Then, in a chapter which displays alike his knowledge of the Bible and his power of refined sarcasm, he unveils his suspicions concerning Valens and Ursacius. He doubts whether they could have been so inexperienced as to be ignorant of the meaning of the word óμoovσion when they signed the third Sirmian Creed. Furthermore he is obliged to point out a defect in the letter which the Oriental bishops wrote at the Synod of Ancyra. The word óμoovσtov is there rejected. The three grounds for such rejection could only be that the word was thought to imply a prior substance, or the teaching of Paul of Samosata, or that the word was not in Scripture. The first two grounds were only illusions, the third was equally fatal to the word ὁμοιούσιον. Those who intelligibly maintained ὁμοούσιον or ὁμοιούσιον, meant the same thing and condemned the same impiety (c. 82). Why should any one wish to decline the word which the Council of Nicea had used for an end which was unquestionably good? The argument is enforced by the insertion of the Nicene Creed in full. True, the word poovator is quite capable of misconstruction. But the application of this test to the difficult passages in the Bible would lead to the chaos of all belief. The possible abuse of the word does not abolish its use. The authority of the eighty bishops who condemned the Samosatene abuse of it does not affect the authority of the three hundred and eighteen who ratified its Nicene meaning. Hilary adds a statement of great importance. Before he was acquainted with the term he had personally believed what it implied. The term has merely invigorated his previous faith (c. 88, cf. c. 91). In other words, Hilary tells his contemporaries and tells posterity that the word ouoourtov is Scripture because it is the sense of Scripture, and is truly conservative because it alone adequately preserves the faith of the fathers. The argument is interwoven with a spirited appeal to the Eastern bishops to return to that faith as expressed at Nicæa. The last chapter (c. 92) is addressed to the Western bishops. It modestly defends the action of Hilary in writing, and urges a corresponding energy on the part of his readers. The whole concludes with a devout prayer. The Liber de Synodis, like other works in which Catholicism has endeavoured to be conciliatory, did not pass unchallenged. It satisfied neither the genuine Arian nor the violently. orthodox. The notes or fragments which we call Hilary's Apology throw light upon the latter fact. Hilary has to explain that he had not meant that the Eastern bishops had stated the true faith at Ancyra, and tells his Lord and brother Lucifer that it was against his will that he had mentioned the word ópotovσior. We must ourselves confess that Hilary puts an interpretation on the meaning of the Eastern formulæ which would have been impossible if he had written after the Synod of Ariminum. Speaking when he did, his arguments were not only pardonable but right. ON THE COUNCILS, OR, THE FAITH OF THE EASTERNS. To the most dearly loved and blessed bre- any execrable heresy, and that you were united thren our fellow-bishops of the province with me in faith and spirit, and so were parof Germania Prima and Germania Se- takers of that exile into which Saturninus, fearcunda, Belgica Prima and Belgica Se- ing his own conscience, had thrust me after cunda, Lugdunensis Prima and Lugdu- beguiling the Emperor, and after that you had nensis Secunda, and the province of Aqui- denied him communion for the whole three tania, and the province of Novempopulana, years ago until now. I equally rejoiced that and to the laity and clergy of Tolosa in the impious and infidel creed which was sent the Provincia Narbonensis, and to the straightway to you from Sirmium was not only bishops of the provinces of Britain, Hilary not accepted by you, but condemned as soon the servant of Christ, eternal salvation in as reported and notified. I felt that it was God our Lord. now binding on me as a religious duty to write I had determined, beloved brethren, to send sound and faithful words to you as my fellowno letter to you concerning the affairs of the bishops, who communicate with me in Christ. Church in consequence of your prolonged I, who through fear of what might have been silence. For when I had by writing from could at one time only rejoice with my own several cities of the Roman world frequently conscience that I was free from all these errors, was now bound to express delight at the informed you of the faith and efforts of our religious brethren, the bishops of the East, and purity of our common faith. Praise God for how the Evil One profiting by the discords the unshaken stability of your noble hearts, for of the times had with envenomed lips and your firm house built on the foundation of the faithful rock, for the undefiled and unswerving tongue hissed out his deadly doctrine, I was afraid. I feared lest while so many bishops late! For since the good profession at the constancy of a will that has proved immacuwere involved in the serious danger of disCouncil of Biterræ, where I denounced the astrous sin or disastrous mistake, you were holding your peace because a defiled and sin-ringleaders of this heresy with some of you for stained conscience tempted you to despair. my witnesses, it has remained and still continues to remain, pure, unspotted and scruIgnorance I could not attribute to you; you had been too often warned. I judged there- pulous. 3. You awaited the noble triumph of a holy fore that I also ought to observe silence towards you, carefully remembering the Lord's and steadfast perseverance without yielding to saying, that those who after a first and second the threats, the powers and the assaults of entreaty, and in spite of the witness of the Saturninus: and when all the waves of awakenChurch, neglect to hear, are to be unto us as ing blasphemy struggled against God, you who still remain with me faithful in Christ did not heathen men and publicans'. 2. But when I received the letters that your heresy, and now by meeting that onset you give way when threatened with the onset of blessed faith inspired, and understood that their slow arrival and their paucity were due have broken all its violence. Yes, brethren, to the remoteness and secrecy of my place of you have conquered, to the abundant joy of exile, I rejoiced in the Lord that you had continued pure and undefiled by the contagion of ■ Matt. xiii. 15 ff. those who share your faith: and your unimpaired constancy gained the double glory of keeping a pure conscience and giving an authoritative example. For the fame of your unswerving and unshaken faith has moved cer- affectionately laid the additional burden upon tain Eastern bishops, late though it be, to me of indicating my sentiments on all their some shame for the heresy fostered and sup- decisions. I know that my skill and learning ported in those regions: and when they heard are inadequate, for I feel it most difficult to of the godless confession composed at Sir- express in words my own belief as I undermium, they contradicted its audacious authors stand it in my heart; far less easy must it be by passing certain decrees themselves. And to expound the statements of others. though they withstood them not without in their turn raising some scruples, and inflicting some wounds upon a sensitive piety, yet they withstood them so vigorously as to compel those who at Sirmium yielded to the views of Potamius and Hosius as accepting and confirming those views, to declare their ignorance and error in so doing; in fact they had to condemn in writing their own action. And they subscribed with the express purpose of condemning something else in advance 2. 6. Now I beseech you by the mercy of the Lord, that as I will in this letter according to your desire write to you of divine things and of the witness of a pure conscience to our faith, no one will think to judge me by the beginning of my letter before he has read the conclusion of my argument. For it is unfair before the complete argument has been grasped, to conceive a prejudice on account of initial statements, the reason of which is yet unknown, since it is not with imperfect statements before us that we must make a decision for the sake of investigation, but on the conclusion for the sake of knowledge. I have some fear, not about you, as God is wit 4. But your invincible faith keeps the honourable distinction of conscious worth, and content with repudiating crafty, vague, or hesitating action, safely abides in Christ, preserving the profession of its liberty. You ab-ness of my heart, but about some who in their stain from communion with those who oppose own esteem are very cautious and prudent their bishops with their blasphemies and keep but do not understand the blessed apostle's them in exile, and do not by assenting to any precept not to think of themselves more highly crafty subterfuge bring yourselves under a than they ought 3: for I am afraid that they charge of unrighteous judgment. For since are unwilling to know all those facts, the comwe all suffered deep and grievous pain at the plete account of which I will offer at the end, actions of the wicked against God, within our and at the same time they avoid drawing the boundaries alone is communion in Christ to true conclusion from the aforesaid facts. But be found from the time that the Church began whoever takes up these lines to read and to be harried by disturbances such as the examine them has only to be consistently expatriation of bishops, the deposition of patient with me and with himself and pepriests, the intimidation of the people, the ruse the whole to its completion. threatening of the faith, and the determination all this assertion of my faith will result of the meaning of Christ's doctrine by human in those who conceal their heresy being unable will and power. Your resolute faith does not to practise the deception they wish, and in pretend to be ignorant of these facts or profess true Catholics attaining the object which they that it can tolerate them, perceiving that by desire. the act of hypocritical assent it would bring itself before the bar of conscience. 5. And although in all your actions, past and present, you bear witness to the uninterrupted independence and security of your faith; yet in particular you prove your warmth and fervour of spirit by the fact that some of you whose letters have succeeded in reaching me have expressed a wish that I, unfit as I am, should notify to you what the Easterns have since said in their confessions of faith. They stantine to Alexandria at the outbreak of the Arian controversy. Hosius, bishop of Cordova in Spain, had been sent by ConHe had presided at the Council of Nicea in 325, and had taken part in the Council of Sardica in 343, when the Nicene Creed to accept this extreme Arian Creed drawn up at the third Council of Sirmium in the summer of 357. This is what is stated by Socrates, and it is corroborated by Athanasius, Hist. Arian, c. 45, where it is added that he anathematized Arianism before dying. Hilary certainly does Hosius an injustice in declaring him to be a joint-author of the 'blasphemous' creed. was reaffirmed. In his extreme old age he was forced with blows Perchance 7. Therefore I comply with your affectionate and urgent wish, and I have set down all the creeds which have been promulgated at different times and places since the holy Council of Nicæa, with my appended ́ex planations of all the phrases and even words employed. If they be thought to contain anything faulty, no one can impute the fault to me: for I am only a reporter, as you wished me to be, and not an author. But if anything is found to be laid down in right and apostolic fashion, no one can doubt that it is no credit to the interpreter but to the originator. In any case I have sent you a faithful account of these transactions: it is for you to determine by the decision your faith inspires whether their spirit is Catholic or heretical. 8. For although it was necessary to reply to 3 Rom. xii. 3. 4 copy of the Blasphemia composed at Sirmium by Osius and Polamius. your letters, in which you offered me Christian able, we were commanded by this Compulsory communion with your faith, (and, moreover, Ignorance Act not to know that He is of God: certain of your number who were summoned just as if it could be commanded or decreed to the Council which seemed pending in that a man should know what in future he Bithynia did refuse with firm consistency of is to be ignorant of, or be ignorant of what faith to hold communion with any but myself he already knows. I have subjoined in full outside Gaul), it also seemed fit to use my this pestilent and godless blasphemy, though episcopal office and authority, when heresy against my will, to facilitate a more complete was so rife, in submitting to you by letter some knowledge of the worth and reason of the godly and faithful counsel. For the word of replies made on the opposite side by those God cannot be exiled as our bodies are, or so Easterns who endeavoured to counteract all chained and bound that it cannot be imparted the wiles of the heretics according to their to you in any place. But when I had learnt understanding and comprehension. that synods were to meet in Ancyra and Ariminum, and that one or two bishops from each province in Gaul would assemble there, I thought it especially needful that I, who am 11. Since there appeared to be some misconfined in the East, should explain and make understanding respecting the faith, all points known to you the grounds of those mutual have been carefully investigated and discussed. suspicions which exist between us and the at Sirmium in the presence of our most reverEastern bishops, though some of you know end brothers and fellow-bishops, Valens, Urthose grounds; in order that whereas you had sacius and Germinius. condemned and they had anathematized this It is evident that there is one God, the heresy that spreads from Sirmium, you might Father Almighty, according as it is believed nevertheless know with what confession of throughout the whole world; and His only faith the Eastern bishops had come to the Son Jesus Christ our Saviour, begotten of Him same result that you had come to, and that before the ages. But we cannot and ought I might prevent you, whom I hope to see as not to say that there are two Gods, for the shining lights in future Councils, differing, Lord Himself said, I will go unto My Father through a mistake about words, even a hair's- and your Father, unto My God and your God⋆. breadth from pure Catholic belief, when your So there is one God over all, as the Apostle interpretation of the apostolic faith is identi- hath taught us, Is He the God of the Jews only? cally the same and you are Catholics at heart. Is He not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the 9. Now it seems to me right and appro- Gentiles also: seeing it is one God, which shall priate, before I begin my argument about sus- justify the circumcision by faith, and the uncirpicions and dissensions as to words, to give cumcision through faith. And in all other things as complete an account as possible of the they agreed thereto, nor would they allow any decisions of the Eastern bishops adverse to difference. the heresy compiled at Sirmium. Others But since some or many persons were dishave published all these transactions very plainly, but much obscurity is caused by a translation from Greek into Latin, and to be absolutely literal is to be sometimes partly unintelligible. σ : 10. You remember that in the Blasphemia, lately written at Sirmium, the object of the authors was to proclaim the Father to be the one and only God of all things, and deny the Son to be God and while they determined that men should hold their peace about ópooúoor and potovator, they determined that God the Son should be asserted to be born not of God the Father, but of nothing, as the first creatures were, or of another essence than God, as the later creatures. And further that in saying the Father was greater in honour, dignity, splendour and majesty, they implied that the Son lacked those things which constitute the Father's superiority. Lastly, that while it is affirmed that His birth is unknow turbed by questions concerning substance, called in Greek ovoía, that is, to make it understood more exactly, as to oμoorov, or what is called ópovolov, there ought to be no mention made of these at all. Nor ought any exposition to be made of them for the reason and consideration that they are not contained in the divine Scriptures, and that they are above man's understanding, nor can any man declare the birth of the Son, of whom it is written, Who shall declare His generations? For it is plain that only the Father knows how He begat the Son, and the Son how He was begotten of the Father. There is no question that the Father is greater. No one can doubt that the Father is greater than the Son in honour, dignity, splendour, majesty, and in the very name of Father, the Son Himself testifying, He that sent Me is greater than 16. And no one whom it is an image. So an image is the figured and indistinguishable likeness of one thing equated with another. Therefore the Father is, and the Son is, because the Son is the image of the Father: and he who is an image, if he is to be truly an image, must have in himself his original's species, nature and essence in virtue of the fact that he is an image. is ignorant that it is Catholic doctrine that 13. Hereby is excluded the assertion of there are two Persons of Father and Son; and those who wish to represent the relationship that the Father is greater, and that the Son of Father and Son as a matter of names, inis subordinated to the Father, together with asmuch as every image is similar in species all things which the Father has subordinated to that of which it is an image. For no one to Him, and that the Father has no beginning is himself his own image, but it is necessary and is invisible, immortal and impassible, but that the image should demonstrate him of that the Son has been begotten of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, and that the generation of this Son, as is aforesaid, no one knows but His Father. And that the Son of God Himself, our Lord and God, as we reid, took flesh, that is, a body, that is, man of the womb of the Virgin Mary, of the Angel announced. And as all the Scriptures teach, and especially the doctor of the Gentiles himself, He took of Mary the Virgin, man, through whom He suffered. And the whole faith is summed up and secured in this, that the Trinity must always be preserved, as we read in the Gospel, Go ye and baptize all nations in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost". Complete and perfect is the number of the Trinity. Now the Paraclete, the Spirit, is through the Son: Who was sent and came according to His promise in order to instruct, teach and sanctify the apostles and all believers. 12. After these many and most impious statements had been made, the Eastern bishops on their side again met together and composed definitions of their confession. Since, however, we have frequently to mention the words essence and substance, we must determine the meaning of essence, lest in discussing facts we prove ignorant of the signification of our words. Essence is a reality which is, or the reality of those things from which it is, and which subsists inasmuch as it is permanent. Now we can speak of the essence, or nature, or genus, or substance of anything. And the strict reason why the word essence is employed is because it is always. But this is identical with substance, because a thing which is, necessarily subsists in itself, and whatever thus subsists possesses unquestionably a permanent genus, nature or substance. When, therefore, we say that essence signifies nature, or genus, or substance, we mean the essence of that thing which permanently exists in the nature, genus, or substance. Now, therefore, let us review the definitions of faith drawn up by the Easterns. I. "If any one hearing that the Son is the image of the invisible God, says that the image of God is the same as the invisible God, as though refusing to confess that He is truly Son let him be anathema." 7 Matt. xxviii. 19. II. "And if any one hearing the Son say, As the Father hath life in Himself, so also hatk He given to the Son to have life in Himself, shall say that He who has received life from the Father, and who also declares, I live by the Father 9, is the same as He who gave life: let him be anathema.” 14. The person of the recipient and of the giver are distinguished so that the same should not be made one and sole. For since he is under anathema who has believed that, when recipient and giver are mentioned one solitary and unique person is implied, we may not suppose that the selfsame person who gave received from Himself. For He who lives and He through whom He lives are not identical, for one lives to Himself, the other declares that He lives through the Author of His life, and no one will declare that He who enjoys life and He through whom His life is caused are personally identical. III. "And if any one hearing that the Onlybegotten Son is like the invisible God, denies that the Son who is the image of the invisible God (whose image is understood to include essence) is Son in essence, as though denying His true Sonship: let him be anathema." For 15. It is here insisted that the nature is indistinguishable and entirely similar. since He is the Only-begotten Son of God and the image of the invisible God, it is necessary that He should be of an essence similar in species and nature. Or what distinction can be made between Father and Son affecting their nature with its similar genus, when the Son subsisting through the nature begotten in Him is invested with the properties of the Father, viz., glory, worth, power, invisibility, essence? And while these prerogatives of divinity are equal we neither understand the one to be less because He is Son, nor the other to be greater because |