ST. ALEXANDER succeeded St. Achillas in the see of Alexandria, in 313.
He was a man of apostolic doctrine and life, mild, affable, exceeding
charitable to the poor, and full of faith, zeal, and fervor. He assumed
to the sacred ministry chiefly those who had first sanctified themselves
in holy solitude, and was happy in the choice of bishops throughout all
Egypt. The devil, enraged to see the havoc made in his usurped empire
over mankind, by the disrepute idolatry was generally fallen into, used
his utmost endeavors to repair the loss to his infernal kingdom, by
procuring the establishment of a most impious heresy. Arius, a priest of
Alexandria, was his {471} principal instrument for that purpose. This
heresiarch was well versed in profane literature, was a subtle
dialectician, had an exterior show of virtue, and an insinuating
behavior; but was a monster of pride, vain-glory, ambition, envy, and
jealousy. Under an affected modesty he concealed a soul full of deceit,
and capable of all crimes. He joined Meletius, the bishop of Lycopolis,
in the beginning of his schism against St. Peter, our saint's
predecessor, in 300; but quitting that party after some time, St. Peter
was so well satisfied of the sincerity of his repentance, that he
ordained him deacon. Soon after Arius discovered his turbulent spirit,
in accusing his archbishop, and raising disturbances in favor of the
Meletians. This obliged St. Peter to excommunicate him, nor could he
ever be induced to revoke that sentence. But his successor, St.
Achillas, upon his repentance, admitted him to his communion, ordained
him priest, and made him curate of the church of Baucales, one of the
quarters of Alexandria. Giving way to spite and envy, on seeing St.
Alexander preferred before him to the see of Alexandria,[1] he became
his mortal enemy: and as the saint's life and conduct were
irreproachable, all his endeavors to oppose him were levelled at his
doctrine, in opposition to which the heresiarch denied the divinity of
Christ. This error he at first taught only in private; but having, about
the year 319, gained followers to support him, he boldly advanced his
blasphemies in his sermons, affirming, with Ebion, Artemas, and
Theodotus, that Christ was not truly God; adding, what no heretic had
before asserted in such a manner, that the Son was a creature, and made
out of nothing; that there was a time when he did not exist, and that he
was capable of sinning, with other such impieties. St. Athanasius
informs us,[2] that he also held that Christ had no other soul than his
created divinity, or spiritual substance, made before the world:
consequently, that it truly suffered on the cross, descended into hell,
and rose again from the dead. Arius engaged in his errors two other
curates of the city, a great many virgins, twelve deacons, seven
priests, and two bishops.
One Colluthus, another curate of Alexandria, and many others, declaimed
loudly against these blasphemies. The heretics were called Arians, and
these called the Catholics Colluthians. St. Alexander, who was one of
the mildest of men, first made use of soft and gentle methods to recover
Arius to the truth, and endeavored to gain him by sweetness and
exhortations. Several were offended at his lenity, and Colluthus carried
his resentment so far as to commence a schism; but this was soon at an
end, and the author of it returned to the Catholic communion. But St.
Alexander, finding Arius's party increase, and all his endeavors to
reclaim him ineffectual, he summoned him to appear in an assembly of his
clergy, where, being found obstinate and incorrigible, he was
excommunicated, together with his adherents. This sentence of
excommunication the saint confirmed soon after, about the end of the
year 320, in a council at Alexandria, at the head of near one hundred
bishops, at which Arius was also present, who, repeating his former
blasphemies, and adding still more horrible ones was unanimously
condemned by the synod, which loaded him and all his followers with
anathemas. Arius lay hid for some time after this in Alexandria, but
being discovered, went into Palestine, and found means to gain over to
his party Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea, also Theognis of Nice, and
Eusebius of Nicomedia, which last was, of all others, his most declared
protector, and had great authority with the emperor Constantine, who
resided even at Nicomedia, or rather with his sister Constantia. Yet it
is clear, from Constantine himself, that he was a wicked, proud,
ambitious, intriguing man. {472} It is no wonder, after his other
crimes, that he became an heresiarch, and that he should have an
ascendant over many weak, but well-meaning men, on account of his high
credit and reputation at court. After several letters that had passed
between these two serpents, Arius retired to him at Nicomedia, and there
composed his Thalia, a poem stuffed with his own praises, and his
impious heresies.
Alexander wrote to the pope, St. Sylvester, and, in a circular letter,
to the other bishops of the church, giving them an account of Arius's
heresy and condemnation. Arius, Eusebius, and many others, wrote to our
saint, begging that he would take off his censures. The emperor
Constantine also exhorted him by letter to a reconciliation with Arius,
and sent it by the great Osius to Alexandria, with express orders to
procure information of the state of the affair. The deputy returned to
the emperor better informed of the heresiarch's impiety and malice, and
the zeal, virtue, and prudence of St. Alexander: and having given him a
just and faithful account of the matter, convinced him of the necessity
of a general council, as the only remedy adequate to the growing evil,
and capable of restoring peace to the church. St. Alexander had already
sent him the same advice in several letters.[3] That prince,
accordingly, by letters of respect, invited the bishops to Nice, in
Bithynia, and defrayed their expenses. They assembled in the imperial
palace of Nice, on the 19th of June, in 325, being three hundred and
eighteen in number, the most illustrious prelates of the church, among
whom were many glorious confessors of the faith. The principal were our
saint, St. Eustathius, patriarch of Antioch, St. Macarius of Jerusalem,
Cecilian, archbishop of Carthage, St. Paphnutius, St. Potamon, St. Paul
of Neocesarea, St. James of Nisibis, &c. St. Sylvester could not come in
person, by reason of his great age; but he sent his legates, who
presided in his name.[4] The emperor Constantine entered the council
without guards, nor would he sit till he was desired by the bishops,
says Eusebius.[5] Theodoret says,[6] that he asked the bishops' leave
before he would enter.
The blasphemies of Arius, who was himself present, were canvassed for
several days. Marcellus of Ancyra, and St. Athanasius, whom St.
Alexander had brought with him, and whom he treated with the greatest
esteem, discovered all the impiety they contained, and confuted the
Arians with invincible strength. The heretics, fearing the indignation
of the council, used a great deal of dissimulation in admitting the
Catholic terms. The fathers, to exclude all their subtleties, declared
the Son consubstantial to the {473} Father, which they inserted in the
profession of their faith, called the Nicene creed, which was drawn up
by Osius, and to which all subscribed, except a small number of Arians.
At first they were seventeen, but Eusebius of Caesarea received the creed
the day following, as did all the others except five, namely, Eusebius
of Nicomedia, Theognis of Nice, Marie of Chalcedon, Theonas and Secundus
of Lybia, the two bishops who had first joined Arius. Of these also
Eusebius, Marie, and Theognis conformed through fear of banishment. The
Arian historian Philostorgius[7] pretends to excuse his heroes, Eusebius
of Nicomedia and Theognis, by saying they inserted an iota, and
signed[8] like in substance, instead of of the same substance;[9] a
fraud in religion which would no way have excused their hypocrisy.
Arius, Theonas, and Secundus, with some Egyptian priests, were banished
by the order of Constantine, and Illyricum was the place of their exile.
The council received Meletius and his schismatical adherents upon their
repentance; but they afterwards relapsed into their schism, and part of
them joined the Arians. The council added twenty canons of discipline,
and was closed about the 25th of August.[10] Constantine gave all the
prelates a magnificent entertainment, and dismissed them with great
presents to their respective sees. St. Alexander, after this triumph of
the faith, returned to Alexandria; where, after having recommended St.
Athanasius for his successor, he died in 326, on the 26th of February,
on which day he is mentioned in the Roman Martyrology.
* * * * *
A true disciple of Christ, by a sincere spirit of humility and distrust
in himself, is, as it were, naturally inclined to submission to all
authority appointed by God, in which he finds his peace, security, and
joy. This happy disposition of his soul is his secure fence against the
illusions of self-sufficiency and blind pride, which easily betrays men
into the most fatal errors. On the contrary, pride is a spirit of revolt
and independence: he who is possessed with this devil is fond of his own
conceits, self-confident, and obstinate. However strong the daylight of
evidence may be in itself, such a one will endeavor to shut up all the
avenues of light, though some beams force themselves into his soul to
disturb his repose, and strike deep the sting of remorse: jealousy and a
love of opposition foster the disorder, and render it incurable. This is
the true portraiture of Arius, and other heresiarchs and firebrands of
the universe. Can we sufficiently detest jealousy and pride, the fatal
source of so great evils? Do we not discover, by fatal symptoms, that we
ourselves harbor this monster in our breasts? Should the eye be jealous
that the ear hears, and disturb the functions of this or the other
senses, instead of regarding them as its own and enjoying their mutual
advantage and comfort, what confusion would ensue!
Footnotes:
1. Theodoret, l. 1, c. {}. Socrates, l. 1, c. 5.
2. L. de Adv. Chr., p. 635.
3. Rufinus (l. 1, Hist. c. 1) says, that the council was assembled by
the advice of the priests. Ex sacerdotum sententia. And the third
council of Constantinople attributes convocation to St. Sylvester as
much as to the emperor. Constantinus et Sylvester magnam in Nicea
synodum congregabant. Conc. Constantinopolitanum tertium, Act. 18,
p. 1049, t. 6. Conc.
4. This is acknowledged by the oriental bishops, assembled at
Constantinople, in 552, (t. 5, Conc. pp. 337, 338.) The legates were
Vito, or Victor, and Vincent, two Roman priests, to whom the pope
joined Osius, bishop of Cordova, as being the most renowned prelate
of the West, and highly esteemed by the emperor. Ipse etiam Osius ex
Hispanis nominis et famae celebritate insignis, qui Sylvestri
episcoli maximae Romae locum obtinebat, una cum Romanis presbyteris
Vitone et Vincentio adfuit; says Gelasius of Cyzicus. (Hist. Conc.
Nicen. l. 2, c. 5, t. 2. Conc, p. 155.) The same is affirmed by pope
Adrian, (t. 6, Conc. p. 1810.) In all the editions of this council,
Osius with the two priests. Vito and Vincent, is first named among
the subscribers. Socrates also names them first, and before the
patriarchs. Osius Episc. Cordubae, ita credo, ut sup. dictum est.
Vito et Vincentius presbyteri urbis Romae. Egypti Alexander Episc.
Antiochiae Eustathius, &c. (Socr. l. 1, c.13.) It is then false what
Blondel (de la primante de l'Eglise, p. 1195) pretends, that St.
Eustathius of Antioch presided. He is indeed called, by Facundus,
(l. 8, c. 1, & l. 11, c. 1.) the first of the council; and by
Nicephorus, (Chronol. p. 146,) the chief of the bishops, because he
was the first among the orientals; for St. Alexander of Egypt was
certainly before him in rank. Theodoret (l. 1, c. 6) says, he sat
the first on the right hand in the assembly. And it appears from
Eusebius, that the pope's legates and the patriarch of Alexandria
sat at the head on the left side. This might be the more honorable
on several accounts, as being on the right to those that came in. It
is certain that the pope's legate presided in the council of
Chalcedon where they, in the same manner, sat first on the left
above the patriarch of Alexandria, and the patriarch of Antioch was
placed on the right.
5. L. 3. de vit. Constant. c. 10.
6. L. 1, c. 7.
7. L. 1, c. 9.
8. [Greek: Homoiusios].
9. [Greek: Homousious].
10. The Arabic canons are falsely ascribed to the Nicene council, being
collected out of other ancient synods.