Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924079583468 ..CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 3 1924 079 583' 468 TO THE MOST REVEREND FATHER IN GOD WILLIAM LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, PRIMATE OF ALL ENGLAND, FORMERLY REGIUS PROFESSOR OK DIVINITY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD, THIS LIBRARY OF ANCIENT BISHOPS, FATHERS, DOCTORS, MARTYRS, CONFESSORS, OF CHRIST'S HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH, is WITH HIS GRACE'S PERMISSION RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED, IN TOKEN OF REVERENCE FOR HIS PERSON AND SACRED OFFICE, AND OF GRATITUDE FOR HIS EPISCOPAL KINDNESS. THE CATECHETICAL LECTURES OP S. CYBIL, ARCHBISHOP OF JERUSALEM. THE CATECHETICAL LECTURES OF S. CYRIL, ARCHBISHOP OF JERUSALEM, TBANSLATED, WITH NOTES AND INDICES. OXFORD, JOHN HENRY PARKER] F. AND J. RIVINGTON, LONDON. MDCCCXLV. BAXTER, PRINTER, OXFORD. PREFACE. S. Cyril, the author of the Catechetical Lectures which follow, was born in an age ill adapted for the comfort or satisfaction of persons distinguished by his peculiar character of mind, anj&in consequence did not receive that justice from contemporaries which the Church Catholic has since rendered to his memory. The Churches of Palestine, apparently his native country, were the first to give reception to Arius on his expulsion from Alexandria, and without adopting his heresy, affected to mediate and hold the balance between him and his accusers. They were followed in this line of conduct by the provinces of Syria and Asia Minor, till the whole of the East, as far as it was Grecian, became more or less a large party, enduring to be headed by men who went the whole length of Arianism, from a fear of being considered Alexandrians or Athanasians, and a notion, for one reason or other, that it was thus pursuing a moderate course, and avoiding ex- tremes. What were the motives which led to this perverted view of its duty to Catholic truth, then so seriously en- dangered, and what the palliations in the case of indi- viduals, need not be minutely considered here. Suffice it to say, that between the Churches of Asia and the metropolis of Egypt there had been distinctions, not to say differences and jealousies of long standing; to which was added this great and real difficulty, that a Council held at Antioch about sixty years before had condemned the very term, Homoiision, which was the symbol received at Nica?a, and maintained by the Alexandrians. The latter were in close agreement with the b ii PREFACE. Latin Church, especially with Rome; and thus two great confederacies, as they may be called, were matured at this distressing era, which outlived the controversy forming them, the Roman, including the West and Egypt, and the Asiatic, extending from Constantinople to Jerusalem. Of the Roman party, viewed at and after the Arian period, were Alexander, Athanasius, Eustathius, Marcellus, Julius, Ambrose, and Jerome; of the Asiatic, Eusebius of Csesarea, Cyril, Meletius, Eusebius of Samosata, Basil of Caesarea (the Great), Basil of Ancyra, Eustathius of Sebaste, and Flavian. Of the latter, some were Semi-arian ; of the former, one at least was Sabellian; while the majority of both were, to say the least, strictly orthodox ; some of the latter indeed acquiescing with more or less of cordiality in the expediency of adopting the important Symbol of the Nicene Council, but others, it need scarcely be said, on both sides, being pillars of the Church in their day, as they have been her lights since. Such was the general position of the Church ; and it is only confessing that the early Bishops and Divines were men " of like passions with" ourselves, to add, that some of them sometimes misunderstood or were prejudiced against others, and have left on record reports, for the truth of which they trusted perhaps too much to their antecedent persuasions, or the representations of their own friends. When Arianism ceased to be supported by the civil power, the controversy between East and West died; and peace was easily effected. And the terms of effecting it were these : — the reception of the Homoiision by the Asiatics, and on that reception their recognition, in spite of their past scruples, by the Alexandrians and Latins. In this sketch the main out- lines of S. Cyril's history will be found to be contained ; he seems to have been afraid of the term Homoiision , to have been disinclined both to the friends of Athanasius and to the Arians ", to have allowed the tyranny of the latter, to have shared in the general reconciliation, and at length both in life and death to have received honours from the a v. Bened. note iv. 1. xvi. 23. b Leot. iv. 8. xi. 12, 16, 17. xv. 9. PREFACE. iii Church, which, in spite of whatever objections may be made to them, appear, on a closer examination of his history, not to be undeserved. Cybil is said to have been the son of Christian parents, but the date and place of his birth is unknown. He was born in the first years of the fourth century, and at least was brought up in Jerusalem. He was ordained Deacon probably by Macarius, and Priest by Maximus, the Bishops of Jerusalem ; the latter of whom he succeeded A. D. 349, or 350. Shortly before this, (A. D. 347, or 348,) during his Priesthood, he had delivered the Catechetical Lectures which have come down to us. With his Episcopate commence the historical diffi- culties under which his memory labours. It can scarcely be doubted that one of his consecrators was Acacius of Csesarea , the leader of Arianism in the East, who had just before (A. D. 347,) been deposed by the Council of Sardica; yet, as the after history shews, Cyril was no friend of the Arians or of Acacius d . He was canonically consecrated by the Bishops of his province, and as Acacius was still in possession of the principal see, he was compelled to a recognition which he might have wished to dispense with. He seems to have been a lover of peace ; the Council of Sardica was at first as little acknowledged by his own party as by the Arians; and Acacius, being even beyond other Arians skilful and subtle in argu- ment, and admitting the special formula of Cyril on the doctrine in controversy, probably succeeded in disguising his heresy from him. A more painful account, however, of his consecration is given by S. Jerome f , supported in the main by other writers, which can only be explained by supposing that Father to be misled by the information or involved in the prejudices of Cyril's enemies. He relates, that upon Maximus's death, the c v. Diss. Bened. p. xviii. sq. iv. 7. xi. 4. 9. 18. d Theod. ii. 26. f Jer. Chron. Socr. ii. 38. Sozom. « The xara