ON SAINT DEMETRIA
VIRGIN MARTYR AT ROME.
Her death, from the Acts of her Sister S. Bibiana; cultus from the Martyrologies.
YEAR CCCLXII.
CommentaryDemetria, Virgin Martyr at Rome (S.)
G. H.
Illustrious was the family at Rome of SS. Bibiana and Demetria, Sisters Virgins, and of their parents who begot them to the world SS. Flavian and Dafrosa who all together with S. Pigmenius the Presbyter, Holy family, under the impious Julian the apostate, obtained the glorious crown; but that the Acts of martyrdom were
greatly depraved, we have indicated both on day IV January, at the Natalis of S. Dafrosa the mother; and on XXIII March, where we treated of S. Pigmenius the Presbyter; the final examination of all difficulties we leave to posterity, about to illustrate the memory of S. Bibiana on day 11 December, on which she has the most solemn veneration in the whole Church, on account of her own little church at Rome, dedicated under the name of S. Bibiana, which Urban VIII restored, with the bodies of Saints Bibiana, Demetria and Dafrosa found in it, and placed under the high altar; as on the said day at the end of the sixth lesson are recited annually in the Ecclesiastical Office. S. Flavian, father of the Virgins, is venerated XXII December; Demetria's martyrdom After whose death in exile, says Ferrari in the Catalogue of Saints of Italy on this XXI June, the Prefect Apronianus when he had ordered Dafrosa, unwilling to worship the gods, after not many days to be struck with the head, commands the sisters Demetria and Bibiana to be brought to him: who when by neither blandishments, nor threats could they be deterred, but in the confession of faith were found most constantly; in the very confession of faith Demetria about to respond, gave up her spirit to God on the XII Kalends of July: whose body was buried with the mother by John the Presbyter. Thus there. About this Saint on this XXI June Usuard wrote thus: At Rome of S. Demetria Virgin. She when she was being brought before the impious Julian for the faith of Christ, gave up her spirit in confession. cultus. But that was done under Apronianus the Prefect of Julian, and is wrongly attributed to Julian himself. Meanwhile the same have Ado, Notker, Bellinus and other more recent ones. In the Roman Martyrology in the first place the Saint herself is indicated in these words: At Rome of S. Demetria Virgin, who under Julian the apostate was crowned with martyrdom. Masinus in Bononia perlustrata referred the same, on account of some of her Relics with the Theatine Fathers, in the church of S. Gabriel near the gate Ravegnata, preserved.
ON THE VENERABLE EUSEBIUS,
BISHOP OF CAESAREA IN CAPPADOCIA.
YEAR CCCLXX.
Why is he referred to by us on this day and place?
Venerable Eusebius Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia
BY D. P.
Although among the copies of the Hieronymian Martyrology, hitherto found, the most ancient altogether is the Epternach one, which to the holy founder of that monastery Willibrord was in use, Although in a more sincere copy of the Hieronymian Mrlgy. or at least from such which he himself used was with the most entire faith described almost nine hundred years ago, it is manifest; not however therefore is it to be preferred to the much more recent Lucca one, from the comparison of both with each other Henschen has pronounced; and more accurately also having scrutinized both Francis Maria Florentini, detected, with Gallican Saints several times added it seems to have been augmented in Gaul, and so brought to England, whence either it or its older exemplar into Belgium brought S. Willibrord. Rightly therefore the same Florentini notes, that in his Lucca copy this alone about Eusebius is read, Caesarea would be simply named, In Caesarea the deposition of S. Eusebius the Bishop: this also in his Martyrology Notker followed and he who wrote the Supplements to the genuine Bede Martyrology vacant on this day in the Barberini Ms. at Rome. And truly it is credible that nothing further was written in the first original; then, since there were two Caesareas, more than other cities of the same name famous, the one in Cappadocia, the other in Palestine; and in both was a Bishop Eusebius, both of great name, the one ordainer and predecessor of S. Basil; the other writer of Ecclesiastical history; began to be disputed, which of them was here designated.
[2] For the Cappadocian voted the Corbey monks and the Dionysians in Gaul whose Consuetudines with Martynae prescribe to him a feast of three Lessons; others added of their own, in Cappadocia; which would that we might obtain elsewhere, about to declare more certainly what I have said. Them perhaps followed many others, unknown to us; abominating namely the memory of the Palestinian Eusebius, manifestly censured by S. Jerome, as before the Nicene Synod Arian, after it however never seriously execrating the heresy; as he who openly retracting subterfuging the badly asserted alone tried to excuse himself to the Church, as if the opinion of the heretics he himself had never held, but had drawn the Synod into his Ὁμοιουσίας sense through which the Ὁμούσιον for peace's sake should be passed over in silence. Favored meanwhile, also in his history, everywhere the Arians; and them as much as possible he strove to excuse as Florentini illustriously demonstrates, among the Annotations to the Letters preliminary to the Hieronymian Martyrology, with a twin Exercitation: of which one is, Whether Eusebius of Caesarea is to be stripped of the title of sanctity with which he is signed by some; the other against Hadrian Valesius the most recent interpreter and commentator of Eusebius, is undertaken, For the sentence of S. Jerome, against Eusebius of Caesarea, accused of Arianism. So in the Corbey copy it is read thus. In Caesarea of Cappadocia the deposition of S. Eusebius the Bishop.
[3] On the contrary the Epternach Ms. says: At Caesarea of Palestine, of Eusebius Bishop and Historiographer. Florus also of Lyons, who supplied many days vacant in Bede, in the Atrebatense, others, in Palestine: Tornacense and Laetiense Mss. speaks thus. At Caesarea of Palestine, the deposition of S. Eusebius the Confessor, who in divine scriptures most studious, and of the divine library with Pamphilus the Martyr most diligent investigator was. Ado is silent, nor do I know who of the more recent ones were striving to draw him into this opinion, indicated without name by Florentini. Usuard accustomed to restrict the longer elogia of Bede and Florus, prescribed to be read thus: Caesarea of Palestine, of S. Eusebius Bishop and Confessor, a most excellent man and Historiographer. Since however the Martyrology of Usuard, beyond all others, pleased the Gallican Churches, as one everywhere of one form, and not too brief obscure, or with unequal prolixity of certain parts molestful; also its use was gradually taken up by all the other Churches of the West, and by the Roman herself; and so the Caesarean Eusebius everywhere began to be commemorated, as a Saint; and gradually into souls crept the opinion of his serious and entire penitence before death, by no other solid argument proved hitherto, with Florentini as judge, after weighing all those authorities, which in his favor Valesius brings forth.
[4] So now commonly received into the Fasti he held the place, until Gregory XIII, Baronius with Caesarea expunged, gave the Martyrology of the Roman Church, or rather Usuard's adapted to its custom, to be reformed to certain erudite men, and namely to Caesar Baronius afterwards made Cardinal. He intent on composing ecclesiastical Annals, since on the one hand he was less affected by Eusebius the Cappadocian, on account of that controversy which once he had with S. Basil; on the other hand the Palestinian among the Saints he could not sustain; he had learned however from the Menologium of Sirleti, that on the next day by the Greeks was venerated a notable champion of Christ, substitutes S. Eusebius of Samosata from day 22; S. Eusebius Bishop of Samosata in Syria, he persuaded his colleagues in that work, that with both of those rejected, they should believe an originary defect lay hidden in the name of the city, by which, for Samosata, Caesarea had crept in to the first composer of the Martyrology; who however likely was Jerome, certainly it is established to be most ancient. Therefore in the Notes to the so reformed Martyrology, as if boastfully he exhorts, that we should welcome the notable Martyr returning to the Martyrology as if by postliminy, venerating him with deserved preconia also with worthy honor.
[5] I indeed acknowledge that the writers of Martyrologies often through inadvertence brought it about, that Saints from one to another, but how easily two adjacent days could have been interchanged, especially the next day they should transfer; but as much as this for various causes could easily have happened; so little it is prone to suspect, that names were exchanged among themselves through some inadvertence, especially most disparate as are Caesarea and Samosata. Altogether therefore to be retained I think Caesarea, from the mind of the Author: and since it is less likely that he wished to patronize a man, everywhere accused of Arianism; I incline to the aforesaid Cappadocian, by Basil himself notably and several times praised. Him in the treatise of Basil we have shown ordained Bishop of his Caesarea in the year CCCLXII, died about CCCLXX; nor is there reason why we should fear to suspect, that he died holily, and the anniversary was celebrated at Caesarea on this very day. For that in the present rituals of the Greeks nowhere is found ascribed this holy Bishop, not so the most dissimilar names of cities. will seem less wonderful to one considering, that those books farther from Cappadocia, by SS. Saba and Damascene in Palestine restored, scarcely are had other than supplied and ordered for the use of the Constantinopolitan Patriarchate; whose supreme jurisdiction over the Cappadocians first began in the Council of Chalcedon in the year CCCCLI.
[6] Nor is it new to us to find some Fathers of the Eastern Church, of whom no memory exists in the Menaea of the Greeks, inscribed in the Fasti of the Latins Wherefore here the Cappadocian is retained with the title of Venerable.; not only more recent, which Baronius liberally filled with new Saints thence received; but also more ancient ones, suppose SS. Gregory and Nonna, Gorgonia and Caesarius, of the Nazianzene; Peter of Sebaste and Macrina, parents and germans of Basil. Because however not the same is permitted to me in this kind, which was permitted to Baronius; in referring here Eusebius the Cappadocian I have only used the title Venerable. I shall use also that Exercitation, which to his Notes on this day the aforepraised Florentini inserted, as one eruditely embracing all those things, which for asserting his sanctity could sometime be called back to the balance; and by the judgment of the Roman Church (if it should so seem to those to whom that province has been entrusted) could be approved or refuted. Nothing through this shall depart from the Samosatensian, since we leave him on the very day on which the Greeks have always venerated him, as more proper. That the two Holy Martyrs Albani, one in Germany, the other in Britain, consecrated two consecutive days by their triumph, does not seem incredible; why for the same days does it seem incredible, that two Holy Eusebii and these most friendly between them, died in different years so, that their natales mutually cohere in the Fasti? For this also happened to my Predecessors Bolland and Henschen, of whom this one on XI, that on XII September died. From such an arrangement of ours however the cause of Eusebius the Historiographer is not altered, for whose Arianism on the one hand, orthodoxy on the other, recently sharply disputed has been between two erudite heterodox, one in England, the other in Holland, of whom this Author of the universal Bibliotheca Tome X against Eusebius, the other in the literary History of Ecclesiastical writers for him makes: let those approach these for whom the authors alleged on either side do not suffice.
EXERCITATION
OF FRANCIS MARIA FLORENTINI OF LUCCA
In what opinion of sanctity with the contemporary Fathers this Eusebius was.
Venerable Eusebius Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia
BY FLORENTINI
§. I. Eusebius's election to the Episcopate approved by Gregory of Nazianzus father and son.
[1] That he might extol with praises Basil the Great, light of the universal Church, The Author proposes against Baronius, the Nazianzene; and Gregory his Father, whom in oratorical style he was lamenting, fittingly should praise; perfunctorily indeed about Eusebius, Bishop of the Caesarean Church before Basil,
he treated; but not so obscurely, that the merits and characters of that blessed man he would not express. Of most acute judgment the man Cardinal Baronius, every right inclined toward the holy Doctors of the Church, noticing that between this Eusebius and S. Basil some quarrels intervened, while every cause of dissent he turns back upon Eusebius, not only did he not refer the same into the class of holy Bishops, nor adorn with his own pen with praises in custom; but rather, lest posterity should somehow esteem him great, at the year 362, num. 63, he showed that he received the admonitions of the Nazianzene in the worse part. It is not of our exiguity to fight with so great a Man, nor to assert sanctity to anyone. But since another Bishop of Caesarea of Cappadocia by name Eusebius has not occurred to us, thus to act for Eusebius the Cappadocian, not foreign to our institution we have thought, for Eusebius predecessor of Magnus Basil, faithfully to adduce those things, which in the older Martyrology could persuade that a place was once assigned to him. Therefore when in the time of Julian the Apostate and Valens the Arian, Eusebius of Caesarea, a man of exquisite piety, by S. Gregory the Theologian, and synchronous writer I saw named; and in the most atrocious persecution of Julian and Valens to have held the unpolluted orthodox faith, so that he does not anticipate the judgment of the Church. and many things strongly to have sustained, with the same holy Doctor I noticed; that he should be decorated with the title of Confessor most strictly called also with him could be gathered occurred to me. While however I weave the gleanings of Eusebius and of his life, I do not assume the judgment of sanctity: but I profess to leave it altogether to the holy Roman Church.
[2] Eusebius, an Illustrious man, and decorated with the ornament of secular doctrine, and from the orations of S. Gregory of Nazianzus endowed with exquisite probity, Gregory of Nazianzus narrates of him, not yet washed with the salutary Baptism, refusing and forced ascended the highest Chair of Cappadocia: and although through the voices of the tumultuous people and force, in that way in which also Magnus Basil the same successor, that See afterwards received, the Nazianzene did not doubt to affirm that he was a catholic and truly elected Bishop; just as Gregory the elder, and father of Gregory the Theologian, tenaciously thought. He as a saint venerated by the Greeks on the Kal. of January, not only present consented to the election of Eusebius, but with his forces against the Prefect of Julian the Apostate's persecutor in his name, and against those, who under the title of religion attempted to drive Eusebius from his See, [contended strenuously. The whole matter pursues S. Gregory of Nazianzus the son, both in Oration 27 on his Father's funeral, and in the funeral laudation of S. Basil, in which the entrance of Eusebius to the Caesarean cathedra, with James Billius as interpreter thus begins. The Citizens of Caesarea were factionally contending among themselves about the creation of the Archbishop (for one had secretly withdrawn, the other was sought) and there was sharp sedition, by no means easy to suppress and remove. Besides the same that in this matter, especially on account of the fervor of faith, by its nature prone to exciting tumults is that city. The splendor of that Chair moreover (for fifty cities under the Caesarean Metropolis the same Nazianzene elsewhere noted) and glory of greater contention afforded a cause.
[3] There were present some Bishops for the election of the new Bishop, but were split into the divergent eagernesses of the people: and the Bishops themselves disagreeing among themselves, for he had withdrawn himself, as may be conjectured, Basil already a presbyter of that Church, and who would please very many was sought, and was not found; as Baronius the most learned interprets at the year 362, num. 54. About Basil however and Eusebius these things are to be understood, of whom one had secretly seceded, the other had even hidden himself, beyond doubt seems. Finally, the Theologian subjoins, The whole plebs by one consent the man of the primary order (Eusebius namely) one, indeed endowed with exquisite probity of life, not yet however signed with the divine Baptism, unwilling and resisting they seizing, and together with military troops, which then had come into the city, bringing aid, in the sublime See placed. the plebs having seized Eusebius offered to them themselves; With the necessity of times compelling, and the swords of tyrants raging especially, a custom indeed in ancient times sometimes grew up, that as much Presbyters, as Bishops, with no Clerical institute observed, in heaps were consecrated into Presbyters or Bishops, as of Origen and Paulinus of Nola, among Presbyters openly; and of SS. Hilary of Poitiers and Ambrose of Milan, among Bishops, it is so established, that Baronius in Paulinus excused at the year 394, n. 90; and in Ambrose proved to have been approved by all the Bishops he taught at the year 375, num. 21.
[4] But what in the election of Eusebius the Cappadocian more similar to the Ambrosian could have happened? Eusebius was renowned in primary nobility, plainly as the Milanese with Ambrose. endowed with exquisite probity of morals, imbued with secular letters: equally he was refusing the offered duty, was hiding; unwilling and not yet washed by Baptism, in the Chair he was forced to sit. What then? Not at all was he so violently thrust in, that without the consent of the Bishops present, or connivance the matter was perfected. Nor truly does the Nazianzene accuse the popular attempt of impiety, or of altogether violence: for so he continues to narrate the people's ardor. They offered Eusebius to the Bishops, and asked from them, These when they had ordained him baptized; that they should bathe him with the salutary water, and name him Archbishop, mixing meanwhile force with suasion, not indeed too gravely and modestly, but very piously and ardently; nor did anyone's virtue or piety shine more clearly than at the offered occasion. He praises therefore rather, than condemns the people's attempt the Nazianzene, and the same force below he calls egregious and honest, those present rather and dissembling, and conniving some Bishops refuting, and so he continues Eusebius's election. The Bishops compelled with the purifying dew poured upon the man, declared him Bishop, placed him on the throne, but with hands rather than with will and sincere affection of soul.
[5] Less in this are some Bishops to be praised, because they did this neither refusing, nor sincerely perfecting it: for they could have (as the same Nazianzene subjoins) both have departed, and freely decreed. afterwards complained they did under compulsion, For as willingly and gladly they departed, and could freely decree what they wished; they enter counsel among themselves, I know not whether spiritual; but they enter, and all things, which had been done they decree to abrogate, and that institution, as less legitimately made for void to hold. They were saying that Eusebius had thrust himself in by force, when however he himself snatched to the throne, had sustained the violence brought, as expressly the Nazianzene subjoins, Bringing force against him, against whom no less force had been brought, and certain speeches, tried to invalidate what they had done: more petulantly than wisely, thrown out at that time pressing. Not all the Bishops were these, but some, whom the elder Gregory and father of the Theologian, a fair estimator of things, condemned; nor with those, who entered such counsel was he drawn, nor did he approve their opinion: but constant, and invincible remained, no less than if he had endured no force at all. The Bishops had not so resisted as if having suffered force, whence Gregory the elder rather urged that they were to be blamed, that they had been unwilling to undergo danger. Wherefore the younger Theologian their counsels, because from spiritual zeal he had not estimated to have proceeded, modestly above had said he did not know.
[6] The elder therefore when to both force had been brought, either they were to be accused in turn he said if they accused him; or to be loosed from blame, and this rightly blaming S. Gregory the father, if they should loose him from blame, or what was more just, not to be absolved either, although he himself were loosed from crime. Gregory had thought that in a most turbulent time, and when from Julian the Apostate's anger great evils were imminent upon the Caesareans, these were not to be ploughed up again. For far more honorable for them then would be to undergo danger, and by every reason to resist, than afterwards to contrive snares; especially in that time, in which old enmities rather were to be laid aside, than new ones to be devised. For so the matter held. There was present indeed the Emperor, raging against the Christians, and bearing this election with angry and hostile soul, and grave threats against him, praises the pious violence of the plebs, who had been instituted Archbishop, were thrown. Nothing more could express the sanctity of Eusebius, than that his election displeased Emperor Julian, most hostile to all orthodox and men of the highest piety; and perhaps among them had been Eusebius, of piety not once praised by the Nazianzene, who took care that the remaining temple of Fortuna from the pagans at Caesarea be overturned, while under the impious Emperor addicted to idols, Fortune smiled on paganism, as the same Nazianzene insinuates in the first oration against Julian. For the Apostate threatened not only on account of that deed to the Caesareans, but also because they had elected a Bishop.
[7] On the edge of a razor were the affairs of the city, whether from that day they ought to be in the nature of things, or be preserved, and obtain something of clemency for a man whom Julian was grieved had been elected, and humanity. For to that grief, which because of Fortune in the time of more fortunate fortune unfastened and overturned he was taking, this new and unusual election of the Prelate acceded, which he interpreted as a convulsion and oppression of public right. Burned also against Eusebius the elected, who defended the parts of the plebs committed to him the Prefect of the Province; and those by whom he had been elected, as future accusers of him by letters summoned; not now gently and remissly, but with certain threats also added, as if the Emperor demanded this. Resisted the Prefect Gregory the elder, praised by the younger, and to the received epistle wrote back: as an accomplice in overturning the temple of Fortuna: We, most excellent Prefect, of all things which are done have one censor and king, who now is besieged with arms. He both will weigh the present election, which we duly and legitimately and from his will made. Gregory therefore the Theologian, while he praises his Father, that the Prefect and other Bishops the election of Eusebius less canonically made from approving he resisted; and defends that it had been canonically proceeded. because not by the fault of the Elect refusing and rejecting, but of the plebs, piously and ardently a man endowed with exquisite probity of life, with some violence admitted demanding, the election had been made, now duly and legitimately to have been elected Eusebius he consents, because by Bishops not resisting he had been ordained from God's will.
§. II. Praise of his Episcopal administration, beclouded through the quarrel between Eusebius and Basil.
[8] What kind afterwards Bishop Eusebius turned out, and how illustrious Confessor, neither Gregory the Theologian, Praises the Episcopal administration of Eusebius the Nazianzene, nor any other whom I have seen written, through acts or laudations completed by study has left; but since not for a long time in the Episcopate he lived, while a similar tumult excited in the election of Basil the same Gregory narrates, a very brief indeed, but illustrious and clear epitaph about Eusebius he wrote in the same Orat. 27 on his father's funeral. Again the same city (namely the Caesarean) for the same cause was laboring in sedition; that, namely, he who by honest and notable force had been drawn to the Episcopate (Eusebius indeed) by a swift death seized, and to God for whose cause in persecutions strongly and strenuously he had contended, had set out. This altogether
elogium about Eusebius made me bolder, so that I should esteem him the Caesarean Cappadocian, not incongruously to have been venerated among Saints. Nor did I think these praises of the Theologian to be made of the least account, since with Basil present he said them, who about all most fully knowing could not be deceived; that they receive weight hence also no less, than from the sanctity of Gregory, rejecting falsehood.
[9] Nor did I see Nicephorus to have dissimilar things about him, who in book 11 chapter 18 his virtue with these words through the interpreter adorned: likewise Nicephorus: Now Eusebius was in other matters (he excepts the dissension with Basil, of which below) a great man, both for the contests and dangers undergone for piety especially distinguished, and which the persecution of his time declared. With Julian therefore angry against Eusebius in that persecution (which the same Nazianzene many times called the most foul of all, and therefore the more atrocious, because the traitor deceitfully, hiding his hatred against Christians, and envying the glory of martyrdom, meanwhile exercised butchery) how much Eusebius suffered, of which, he weighs the persecutions tolerated, while he strenuously fought for God S. Gregory the same testifies, can indeed be conjectured, but to affirm in the silence of all is not permitted. There was not one persecution for him, since in persecutions he strongly fought; For he came to the time of Valens the Arian Emperor; who having seized the occasion of the disagreement between Eusebius the Archbishop and Basil the Presbyter, against the Catholic flock of Eusebius undertook an expedition, not to tear apart the city, but the souls. In this storm no less how Eusebius bore himself, and how strenuously he resisted, the same Nazianzene, intent on the praises of Basil, suggests rather than narrates in Orat. 30.
[10] Basil had withdrawn into Pontus on account of the dissension, when suddenly there pressed a cloud, full of hail and perniciously shrieking, which all Churches, with Basil absent, into which it fell, prostrated; and whatever the Emperor invaded (Valens I say, most stubborn Arian) most loving of gold, and most hostile enemy of Christ, and laboring with these two most grave diseases, namely insatiable avarice and blasphemy after the persecutor a persecutor, not indeed an Apostate, but nevertheless not better presenting himself to Christians. This man the Nazianzene continues to narrate to have undertaken an expedition against the Caesarean Church, not the city, not houses, and with Valens the Emperor attempting the orthodox at Caesarea. which again could be built, to take, but the very immortal souls to drag away. He made the impetus with him an army worthy of it, nefarious Prelates of Churches, savage Tetrarchs of that orb, who were subject to his command and dominion. These came to Caesarea, to receive that Church into surrender. In such great perturbation of affairs to be explained the Nazianzene, that Basil afterwards the defender of that Church, hastening more eagerly (as was fitting) to Eusebius's aid, might praise; certain things which in Eusebius then seemed to be wanting he touches on.
[11] Some of these from inexperience in ecclesiastical matters, some that he did not have as assistant Basil, he estimated to have happened: for he says, To these Eusebius not sufficiently instructed Great therefore contest was proposed; not even slothful was the alacrity of many, but the battle-line was weak, as lacking a defender and skilled artificer, both in the faculty of doctrine and of spirit. Therefore Basil called, inflamed with love of God, came immediately he adds, into whose praises he was declaiming. While indeed how opportune his coming to Caesarea was, to narrate the Theologian undertakes; and these he added about Eusebius and Basil. Basil came summoned to aid: He was leading the plebs (namely Eusebius) this man (namely Basil) the leader; and as a certain trainer of lions, the most powerful skillfully tamed. For as recently constituted in the sublime Chair, and still breathing somewhat of the earthly, and not yet in those things which were of the spirit absolved in all numbers, with great waves growing strong and the enemies of the Church pressing in, he had need of a man, who would lead him by hand and prop him up.
[12] From these words I think the most learned Baronius received a handle, of not thinking so well about Eusebius. About to supply the defect of a Bishop. And, to speak candidly, it ought also to be remembered, that the Nazianzene did not desire virtue of soul in the recent Bishop Eusebius, but Ecclesiastical doctrine and knowledge of spiritual matters. For with heretics, not with gentiles, the fight then grew strong: and although generous in defending, and instructed in secular doctrines Eusebius was, and endowed with natural candor and perspicacity, and most adverse to lies (as in ep. 20 the same Nazianzene paints him) suddenly however snatched to the infulae, he did not yet have skill of spiritual armor and doctrine, that in such great turmoil of the Churches, he could put together and defend all to the precise mark. Two things therefore by the beginnings of the Episcopate in Eusebius could seem to be wanting, which worthy of rebuke had Gregory noticed. Namely the dissension with Basil, in which perhaps he was not without fault; then greater experience in divine matters. But by the people too ardently to ascend the Chair compelled, and by Bishops not resisting consecrated, he could be excused in this; not so concerning the conceived and nurtured quarrel with Basil whom, by knowledge most apt for dissolving the snares of heretics, he was sustaining to be too far away, and was not recalling; and in this something human Eusebius suffered, Nazianzene affirms.
[13] Indeed in this a little I see we must dwell, That dissension, and explain, whether in it anything blameworthy appeared; and how in reconciliation he bore himself, or in what ways with truth recognized he purged himself, and did not delay penance; then how great labors afterwards undergone, in the brief remaining course of his life, the contest of the second persecution he most strongly completed. Therefore the Nazianzene, running through the praises of Basil, discusses this dissension: With Basil a certain quarrel he who was nearest before him presided over the Church was exercising: but for what causes, or how is better to pass over; he was exercising it however; a man for the rest indeed not ungenerous and endowed with exquisite piety, as the persecution then arisen, and the sharp contention undertaken against him perspicuously declared; but yet in Basil suffered something human. For not only vile and plebeian, but even the most preeminent men Momus attacks; so that it is of God alone to be free from every sin and perturbation of soul.
[14] There had erupted against Eusebius the storm of some Bishops, arisen from Eusebius's suspicion of Basil opposing him, as we have seen; who although they had washed him still Catechumen with Baptism, and ordained him Bishop, however had repented; it is uncertain, as we have said, whether by divine or human zeal. Hence in the clergy, and the plebs arose a division, especially with the Arians fostering the cleavage. That Eusebius stood for the orthodox cannot be doubted, so many times praised by Nazianzene in persecution; and who according to Sozomen book 6, c. 12, under Jovian the Catholic prince at Antioch with others had established that the Omousion was to be held, and in the Tyanensian council, under Valentinian and Valens, had agreed with the Westerners and the Roman Pontiff: and yet the cleavage was great. For although by flight Basil had slipped away, since however at the same time, at which Eusebius was ordained, he himself also had been sought for the infulae, he innocently in a certain manner fostered the disturbances. The Nazarees indeed, so Gregory calls the Monks, of whom the prince Basil himself, Monks zealous for Basil nurtured, now a Presbyter and famous in doctrine was reckoned, were tumultuating; as those who judged it shameful and unworthy, of their prince's contumely and of repulse the injury to bear with dissimulation; or that in the election Basil rejected by Eusebius seemed to be less esteemed, and by Synods and other gatherings of the Church to be rejected. Perhaps also, because Basil himself, famous in the Caesarean Presbytery and doctrine, while he did not so submissively bear himself toward the new Bishop, nor perhaps without some fault of Basil; of some stubbornness was accused, as the Nazianzene himself obscurely indicated, when refusing the honor he insinuates of himself, says about him, And by some, who were ignorant of his reasons, of arrogance he preferred to be accused, than to do anything, which to his reasons and counsels would be adverse. Whence the Abbot of Ursperg in his Chronicle (as is the custom of schismatics openly to bark against the Saints) seized a handle of saying, that Basil from the opinion of some labored with the vice of pride, as also Bilius notes in the scholion of this Oration.
[15] To the same also Sozomen seems to take aim, not so sincere a writer, who in book 6, ch. 15, as it is rendered in Latin; whose flight made Eusebius suspect to the people. Basil he says, for no other cause had given himself in the monastery of Pontus to a quiet life, than that the Church, which otherwise was severely agitated by the rebellion of the Arians, also for his cause might receive some damage. He had narrated before that between Basil and Eusebius enmities had been undertaken, and from his secession into Pontus the people, and especially those who excelled in magnitude of soul and wisdom, had Eusebius suspect, as the cause from which Basil, a man for his pious life and singular eloquence praised by all with full mouth, would flee. Who however were excited against Eusebius, and who fostered civil contention, so in the same Orat. 30 notes the Nazianzene. And against him (Eusebius namely) is roused the more select and wiser part of the Church; if indeed these are to be held more wise, than the remaining vulgar of mortals, who separated themselves from the consortium of the world, and consecrated their life to God (I mean our Nazarees) and into things of this kind especially with the greatest exertion of soul applying themselves: who judging it shameful and unworthy with dissimulation to bear the contumely of their prince and the injury of repulse, attempt a most dangerous deed. From the great body of the Church, free from sedition, to defect and to break themselves they determined.
[16] But that no one might doubt that another some Prince of the same Monks, from the first order of Clerics, besides Basil, as is gathered from Nazianzene; who had suffered repulse; let the same Nazianzene be heard, while bringing the moments of reasons about that schism, of Basil thereafter he did not silence, and about the Nazarees or Monks so to narrate he continues, after the words brought in the last place; And not a small multitude also into his part cutting off, as much of those who were censured in the plebeian order, as of those who held magistracies. That however from three causes, and these most firm, was perfectly easy. First indeed Basil was in such veneration with all, as I know not, whether anyone of the philosophers of our age; and had such force, that to his cohort if he had willed he could bring soul and confidence. That certainly Basil did not provide, but rather thought of flight and seceded into Pontus. But because the throngs were now excited, and from his repulse and great estimation with all by no means was it difficult for suspicions to be excited in Eusebius, that Basil was fostering the same; especially while his rivals (for more there were also after the Bishop's death lucidly elsewhere narrates Nazianzene) by false rumors and calumnies with Eusebius, already turned into suspicion, were trying to traduce him.
[17] Eusebius still was breathing, as from the same Nazianzene we have said, somewhat of secular generosity;
and by nature magnanimous, although in Eusebius too there was some fault: and angers not easily as a lion compressing, against Basil he was borne, whom dissensions to nourish against himself, from his (as the Nazianzene calls) cohort not entirely rashly he was suspecting. He could indeed Basil, a man irreprehensible and in ecclesiastical doctrine in those calamitous times eminently illustrious and opportune, of greater esteem, to himself to attract, to synods to call, that he might resist the Arians with greater power: but having suffered something human, somewhat more slowly from Pontus called him back. which however he generously corrected. He called back however generously; or rather, by a notable example of Christian humility, not only first and so much superior in dignity, writing to Basil; but adorning a legation, while meanwhile with the title of defender of the Caesarean Church, together with Gregory of Nazianzus, he decorated him. But let us proceed first to relate the disturbances excited: soon glorious, both to himself and to Eusebius, Basil's return we shall complete.
[18] Basil could, as already from the words of the Theologian we have seen, in the schism against Eusebius firm his cohorts, but did not wish; nor however had it been difficult; for those who were making business for the Bishop, [The dissent augmented by SS. Eusebius of Vercelli and Lucifer of Cagliari badly in concord,] boasted this, that Eusebius, on account of the tumult in his election arisen suspect to the city, had obtained the Prefecture not more duly and legitimately, than tyrannically. Another cause also the Nazianzene touches of that dissension or schism; namely certain western Bishops, who all orthodox to their parts drew. These Bilius thinks in the scholion num. 53, were Lucifer of Cagliari and Eusebius of Vercelli, sent from Rome to Caesarea to tranquilize that Church. Indeed these now were divided between themselves: for Lucifer, whatever cause of dissension with Eusebius of Vercelli there was, now had separated himself from his communion and church with Julian commanding; and although the Luciferians offered themselves as Catholic, the truly Catholic part consented with S. Eusebius of Vercelli, as Baronius at year 362 more amply discusses. The sect of the Luciferians not yet however detected, while each was held for Catholic, and each tried to draw the orthodox to himself, also the Caesarean cleavage was fostered. of whom this one stood for the Caesarean: Nor difficult would I think that S. Eusebius of Vercelli, fought for Eusebius the Caesarean, because altogether the Caesarean was held for Catholic; not only because in several Synods against the Arians he stood, as from Sozomen we have said; but because Catholic always, both by Basil returning, and by Gregory the elder and the Theologian was held. Easily therefore is it to believe, that the Apostolic legate Eusebius of Vercelli, held the Caesarean election ratified, since about his legitimate election neither the Nazianzene, nor Basil from what is to be said below ever doubted.
[19] While therefore that Church labored with internal evil, and part Basil now Bishop, but the danger was driven away by Basil seceding into Pontus, part Basil having suffered repulse looked upon; shone forth Basil's virtue from these things, which the Nazianzene continues to weave to the above words. What then, that illustrious and disciple of the Peaceful (for to those who were inflicting similar things on himself, or who were fighting for his parts to resist he could not; nor was it his to fight, or to lacerate the body of the Church, otherwise also vexed by war, and by heretics (with whom, then the highest of affairs was) brought into danger, at the same time also using us as consultors and sincere admonitors in that matter) with us thence setting out into Pontus he secedes. By a laudable example indeed, lest he augment Eusebius's suspicions, or in any way foster the schism, Basil seceded; but Gregory of Nazianzus, who by the bond of most familiar necessity was connected with him, and was not hateful to Eusebius, and could to the now imminent storm of Valens oppose himself as a wall, and act as mediator with Eusebius; by Gregory the elder and Father is not permitted longer to delay, but is so difficultly called back, that scarcely allowing himself to be drawn away he confesses in the same oration 27 on his Father's funeral: and yet, whom Nazianzene followed there. at the demand of the Nazianzene people, ordained Priest by the father, that he might be opposed to the Arians, he narrates, whom he adds the father restrained. Both through himself, and through us also perhaps, whom as not slothful and degenerate pups, against those as against most savage beasts he sent. That at Caesarea, which was the Metropolis even of the paternal Episcopate, nothing before with Eusebius the Theologian Gregory acted as mediator, while Basil still he was hostile, from what is to be said below will be established.
§ III. Notable modesty of Eusebius, in calling Basil back through Nazianzene.
[20] Meanwhile let us grant our Eusebius to have suffered something human against Basil; and to have erred, or too much addicted to suspicion, or to others' detractions too much leaning, However it be, Eusebius corrected, if he sinned in anything, which seems through Momus, the deity of envy or detraction, brought by the Nazianzene to be signified, either by not so greatly esteeming Basil, as was just in such a difficult tempest; nay even, as is elicited from the epistle of Gregory the Theologian to Eusebius himself, which of the Paris edition is twenty-ninth in order, by not calling him to Synods he affected him with a certain contumely; the error indeed afterwards he acknowledged, and so amended, that of Christian virtue not the least example he left.
[21] Nicephorus thinks in book II of the History already adduced, that Basil returned of his own accord, and offered auxiliary hands, not so much to Eusebius, as to the wavering Caesarean Church voluntarily; Basil whether of his own accord returned, while he attributes all the praise of reconciliation to Basil; and before him Sozomen, book 6, ch. 15, who about Basil's return writes, of his own accord he came to Caesarea. Nor does the Nazianzene seem to affirm otherwise, as I think from the abundance of oration flowing into Basil's praises. What then, he says about Basil, that generous and excelling in greatness of mind soul, and truly inflamed with the love of Christ? Not even a long oration was needed for this, that he should betake himself to us, and be a help to us. Truly as soon as he saw me discharging the legation (for it was common to each of us this contest, as those who were designated defenders and patrons of the faith) immediately he yielded to the legation: and with spiritual reasonings with himself most well and wisely distinguishing, another the time of quarrel was (if any indulgence were even owed to this affection) namely of peace and tranquility; another of equanimity, namely of necessity and dangers; this I say, reckoning with himself, immediately from Pontus with us departs, and toward endangered truth with zeal boils, and voluntarily brings us aid, and wholly hands himself over to Mother Church.
[22] From which narration about Basil's return some things seem can be elicited: first, although not a long, or so promptly as if not asked, oration however or suasive letter preceded, by which moved Basil, otherwise prone to gentleness, acquiesced to return. Then to him with a legation, by the name of Eusebius performed had been Gregory, at whose sight immediately Basil yielded, and to return gave assent. Third so eager and prompt was the return to his fatherland, so easy with Eusebius the reconciliation of Basil, that as if it were done spontaneously it seemed, and he voluntarily brought aid to endangered faith could be said. for bringing help against heretics: In this sense Nicephorus wrote, Valens and with him the Arian Bishops, that they might ruin the Caesarean Church, having found an opportune time came to Caesarea, that they might expel those thinking rightly from the churches, namely Eusebius, because Basil had seceded, and the people from hatred of Eusebius looked toward defection. Otherwise that counsel was in vain. For as soon as it was announced these had come to Caesarea, Basil, with farewell said to the monastic schools in Pontus, returns to Caesarea himself, and with Eusebius all other things put aside is reconciled; by which deed indeed the benevolence of his soul especially he showed. but truly that he returned asked.
[23] But the matter in another way, as to the spontaneous return of Basil, happened, than Nicephorus seems to narrate: and from the Epistles of the Nazianzene, what he himself did for the reconciliation, and what before Eusebius perfected, luminously appears: for these are Epistles, which without oratorical amplification are written, a great light of history with the erudite. Therefore from the Epistle, which in the work of Basil is 29, in that of Nazianzene 20, it is established that Gregory, writing back to Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea, first cast the seeds of bringing Basil back; while to him giving thanks, that he himself had praised him and called him to synods and spiritual conventions; appears from Nazianzene's Epistle to him, having seized the occasion, that he little esteemed his Basil, and did not call to such conventions, modestly chides, and asks that he call him, promising that Basil to the duties would respond, and both would follow him, as a shadow the body. What this Epistle, and other offices exhibited through friends performed, is had from another Epistle, namely 19 of Nazianzene written to Basil; which therefore from the interpretation of Bilius it has pleased to add, that thence may appear, no less Basil by the work of Gregory, than by Eusebius's own gentleness was summoned to Caesarea. conjoined with notable praise of Eusebius of Cappadocia,
[24] It is now time, he says, that we enter prudent counsel, and flower with the praise of tolerance; let us therefore prepare ourselves, that neither shall any greater in magnitude of soul appear than us, nor our many labors and sweats in a moment of time collapse and vanish. Why do I write these things you ask? Most dear to God our Bishop Eusebius (for so about him henceforth must we think and write) is in soul toward us most friendly, and to composing quarrels prone, and by time as iron by fire softened: deprecatory letters and recalling he is about to send to you, just as he himself signified to me, and many of him having his soul perspicuously known make us faith. Which let us anticipate, I beseech, either coming to him, or writing; or, what shall be more correct, first writing, and then betaking ourselves to him; lest perhaps we be ashamed, if we are conquered, when it would have been licit to conquer; namely splendidly and philosophically yielding, that which most demand from us. To me therefore obey, and come, both on account of this cause, and also on account of the time. Since heretics with conjured souls course through the Church, and some now are present and move disturbances, others (as fame boasts) will be present. And there is danger, lest the doctrine of truth shaken be torn apart; unless at the earliest time the spirit of Beseleel be excited, that is of such a wise Architect of disputations and dogmas. But if it seems to you worth the trouble, that I myself be present, and administer these, and join myself to you as a companion of the journey, not even this duty shall we shun.
[25] Most clearly as I think from this Epistle appears, with how great gentleness Eusebius with Basil, who first wrote to his own Presbyter. led by penitence of past things, acted. For what more could a Metropolitan, with a Presbyter of his Church, to the level of Christian perfection act, after nurtured quarrels, and these born from suspicions not so rashly; than to humility first to
compose himself, and in those duties, which (with Gregory the most friendly of Basil favoring) many thought more befitting Basil, the Archbishop so descended, that he yielded, that he himself to the presbyter deprecatory and recalling letters gave. Indeed, if something human suffering against Basil Eusebius erred, so he came to his senses, that from the subsequent gentleness toward the same rightly by right by Gregory he was called, Most dear to God Bishop, namely because to the level of the Evangelical law he accommodated himself. For neither only letters full of duty to have given to Basil to believe is fair, not only because he had promised this to Gregory, and many were interposing faith; but because as legate Gregory himself to Basil he sent, as from the above adduced in the Orat. on the praises of Basil the same Gregory most openly teaches.
[26] From thence to Eusebius humbly adhered Basil. From Pontus therefore departing with himself Basil so Gregory paints, that of the old quarrel in his soul no embers at all to have remained he shows. Enmities, he says, he sets aside, as if somewhat before he himself too had suffered something human; advisedly he draws up the battle-line; scandals and offenses intermediate he removes; then how with Eusebius he bore himself adding, The nearest however, he says, to Basil this business and zeal was, to observe the Bishop, to extinguish suspicion (for from suspicions in Eusebius we have said the dissension was born) to persuade all mortals, that mourning by which he had been affected, a certain temptation and struggle of the perverse spirit had stood, envying honest and praiseworthy concord; for the rest he was not ignorant of, what the laws of obedience and spiritual order demanded, and after many things officiously and holily toward Eusebius by Basil shown and narrated, in one word he gathers, that he obtained as much benevolence of him, as before with him with hatred he was thought to burn; or (as after Bilius translates Bilibald Pirckheimer) Such was toward him (Eusebius namely) benevolence, as before was thought prone to enmities; not silent also on something, about the nurtured dissension with Eusebius, that Basil had heard ill with some. But with the clouds of quarrels removed, and Eusebius's notable piety known, when now Basil was under the law of obedience and the spiritual order, dies with praise of piety. about to expound at the order of Eusebius himself the book of Proverbs, no wonder if from these words he began. Let us obey therefore the good Father, proposing to us the rewards of contests from the oracles of the spirit, who us as hunters in pathless places as if by the indication of a certain hunting puppy of our course wishes to take experience. Homil. 12 init. Prov.
§. IV Holy and pious death of Eusebius: Baronian scruples discussed.
[27] How indeed with these ministering, Gregory I say the Theologian and Basil, Eusebius advanced, or how great increases of virtues he drew, would that someone had written, but very many things which the Theologian attributes to Basil cooperator of Eusebius, Concord restored, Eusebius proceeding egregiously, while into his praises on purpose he runs, to Eusebius I would scarcely doubt to have been common, at least that by permitting he helped, either in sustaining, or in driving away the storm of the heretics, or in soothing the famine that followed each expended his wealth. Not long thereafter Eusebius lived on the Theologian narrates, and while on account of such illustrious deeds done under him Basil into his place subrogated, in the same oration on the praises of Basil he uses these words. On account of these therefore, and so great (for why for recounting all, dies with praise of piety, is it necessary to draw a longer delay) when he who derived his name appositely from piety (Eusebius namely, in Latin Pius) had migrated from this life, and in his own hands had sweetly exhaled his soul, to the lofty See of the Episcopate he is elevated. The death likewise of Eusebius in orat. on the funeral of his Father Gregory refers as of the best Confessor, and that it had been swift he suggests, while again in the election of Basil that City was tumultuating. Again the same city for the same cause was laboring in sedition; namely, who by honest and notable force to the Episcopate had been drawn, by swift death snatched away, and to God, for whose cause in persecutions he had strongly and strenuously contended, set out.
[28] From swift however by Gregory called death of Eusebius, the most learned Baronius thinks, at year 369, num. 46, that he completed by sudden and violent illness from this life was taken away, most sweet, not violent death: but that most sweetly he exhaled his soul in the hands of Basil, either would signify a not so violent death he met, or that with the sleep of the holy he sweetly rested in the Lord in God, I say, for whose cause in persecutions he had strongly contended. Which words perhaps the most learned Baronius was silent about, because it had displeased him that through a certain violence Eusebius of Caesarea had been thrust into that Chair, when about him and Nectarius he wished to be understood, what the Nazianzene elsewhere had declaimed against the violent elections of Bishops of his time. But since about this honest toward Eusebius and notable force, something below to rub up again is necessary, now to have said suffices, about his blessed death and orthodoxy with the Nazianzene Basil himself consents, while to him writing Ep. 21, that he fears he confesses, lest from the death of Blessed Bishop Eusebius, Praised by Basil while alive, the Catholic Caesarean Church some from the heretics with tares fill; and the piety, in the souls of men with much labor sown, by their pernicious doctrines pull up by the roots. Nor elsewhere did Basil himself fear to call the most pious Bishop Eusebius, while to Meletius writing among his Epistles num. 78, thus he speaks: I have received letters from the most pious Bishop Eusebius, by which it is mandated, that to the Westerners again about certain Churches be written.
[29] But since the praises which after death are added are to be estimated of greater, although by holy men introduced laudation is always to be suspected, besides those things which about his death, and dead by Nazianzene, and strenuous fortitude in the time of persecutions adds after his death the Nazianzene, and we have referred above, there seems also another testimony to accede of the Nazianzene himself writing Ep. 33. to holy Eusebius of Samosata. Who when after the death of our Eusebius having set out to Caesarea in the election of the new and Catholic Bishop he newly was applying himself, so to await he says a new pastor worthy of the antecessor Bishops, the Nazianzene, that from the class of Holy men Leontius, Hermogenes, and others, Eusebius he did not except. After the reconciled however to himself Basil, not long Eusebius lived on, confirms also Gregory the Greek Presbyter, writer of the life of the Nazianzene interpreted by Bilius, who by the labor of the same Theologian called back from Pontus Basil narrates; with the still religious man Eusebius sitting at the helm of the metropolis; about whom a little below to Basil's return he adds, with not much time interposed the Bishop, whom we have said, to a better life was translated, no less so the swiftness of death to Basil's return conferring, than from the integrity of morals better attributing to the Bishop departed life.
[30] Before however we put a colophon to this exercise, a scruple is to be removed, by which perhaps moved the highest man Baronius, who elsewhere disapproving the promotions of Bishops by leap never extolled Eusebius with praises, that rather by violent death afflicted he seems somewhat obscurely to think; for it is a stumbling-block, that the Nazianzene in the same oration on the praises of Basil, while in the Ecclesiastical prefectures order to be observed by the example of the same Basil teaches, who through sacred Orders gradually to the Presbyteral and Episcopal grade came, the violent in a manner Eusebius's election seems to condemn, when these about the Divine providence over Basil he subjoins. In whom this reason he held, that he by no means suddenly to such a grade he advanced, nor at the same moment of time he with salutary water tinged and with wisdom instructed, just as happened to most of them, who now to prefectures with cupidity inflamed are snatched, bringing only will to that duty, but in order and by the law of spiritual progression with this honor he affected him. For neither to me is approved that perturbation and rashness, which with us sometimes, and in some holding primary Sees of the Church arises, and below; in one day we make Saints, and them order to be wise and erudite, who have learned nothing, nor to the Priesthood anything before brought except to wish. He continues, against these absurdities in oratorical style to declaim, that into Basil's praises differently elected he might deflect, and the most erudite Baronius thinks at year 362 n. 60, that the Nazianzene alludes to Eusebius, of whom recently, and to Nectarius, who likewise from a Catechumen to the Episcopate of the See of Constantinople afterwards was raised.
[31] But whatever about Nectarius, and others may be, through those calamitous times suddenly to the Episcopal see raised willing, cannot be reckoned to censure Eusebius, and desiring; these certainly about Eusebius to understand by no means the Nazianzene could; whom refusing, fleeing, resisting, and by notable and honest force snatched to the Episcopal See, in the funeral of his father before Basil himself he had taught. For so far is it that Eusebius desired the Chair, and sought by ambition, that with all study he declined. And although, with the storm of the Arians pressing on, greater with Basil absent experience and spiritual doctrine in Eusebius the Nazianzene would have wished; the same always for modesty, piety, whom he testifies snatched by honest force unwilling, and fortitude in persecution he praised; nor ever that grade he sought, even obscurely he brought forth. Indeed, immediately after those things which against the abuse of that age and city he had declaimed, of Eusebius establishing speech, of the dissension only with Basil, and lesser experience, not of ambition, somewhat the man, otherwise endowed with exquisite piety, he accused; because to the daring of the Heretics from that the spirit grew, and the way was open to the Caesarean Church to be devastated, by nothing perinde, as by the quarrel of the aforesaid men, (of the Caesarean Ecclesiastics namely, as already he had said) and of him, who then presided over us inexperience. But about this rather they were to be blamed, desiring only in him greater experience and doctrine. who had elected and ordained, than he who compelled had undertaken an unequal burden. Nor did the Nazianzene only against Laymen and Bishops, who immediately outside the ecclesiastical Order would be assumed declaim, but also other Fathers everywhere, and Jerome especially in ep. 83 to Oceanus; S. Gregory, to Brunichilda the Queen; Leo the first ep. 85: and yet, where the necessity of times exacts, and great merits shone in a Layman, the Church tolerated and approved, as happened in Ambrose and others.
[32] And these indeed from a contemporary and one engaged in the same Caesarean Church, Gregory I say the Theologian we have gathered. It is said he divinely knew and predicted There are also other testimonies of Eusebius's sanctity, which it also pleases to bring forth. There is extant the life of S. Basil written by Amphilochius, both among the lives of the Fathers of Rosweyd, and in the latest Cologne edition of Surius on the first day of January, in which some lights shine forth about Eusebius's sanctity. The writer of this although as Amphilochius contemporary with Basil the most learned Baronius denies to be, and would have to contain some things which need to be corrected, however to narrate true things also he does not deny at year 378 n. X. He therefore, whether Amphilochius, or another.
he left in writing, that to Basil and Eutulus his companion about to enter the city of the Caesareans, in a vision of night was revealed then to the Bishop of that City, Eusebius by name, the arrival of these; and that Basil would be his successor. that Basil would succeed him in the Episcopate, He adds however that with the Archdeacon and other more honorable Clerics sent, to meet Basil and his companion, when they entered, the most holy Bishop gazing on them and stupefied at the likeness of the vision, gave thanks to God. With the guests honorably received therefore, and with all the Clergy the vision shared, the Clerics with one voice said to Bishop Eusebius, Truly and this is worthy of your pure life, that there should be divinely revealed he who after you shall adorn the Pontifical throne; and he subjoins agreeing things with the writer of the life of S. Gregory of Nazianzus, that Eusebius namely at the coming of Basil not after much time died. And although in this narration, which whole I have not appended, that perhaps seems less congruous with truth, whence at least is proved the widespread opinion about his sanctity: that Eusebius did not recognize Basil except through a vision; which about such a great man best known at Caesarea, and with whom some quarrel had intervened, seems most difficult; one thing however I judged safely could be drawn, with the Greeks and Caesareans, that Eusebius was celebrated for the fame of sanctity and innocence of morals.
[33] Nothing therefore seems to me about Eusebius the Confessor (for this name in those times in use, even most strictly taken, nor to be blamed in anything, except in the quarrel with Basil; on account of unconquered strength of soul in persecutions to attribute to Eusebius I dare) of voluntary blemish to have inhered, besides the quarrel with Basil, nor of another crime can he be accused. This however, in a tumultuous city born from suspicions, S. Gregory did not condemn as criminal; only content after his death, with Basil himself most friendly and Archbishop present, to call it a human passion. For neither should anyone believe, all adverse things, whatever S. Basil grieves in his books, to have flowed from Eusebius, a holy and pious man, who neither imputed to him his adversities, but many in the cleavage of that Church from the factious, very many from the heretics with whom always he wrestled, to have happened, from his writings is convinced, especially from epistle 58 to Meletius the Bishop; in which now to most pious Eusebius, as is said there, joined, the snares against him at Antioch built he grieves, and that insidiously against him many things still are devised, which he prays to be anticipated. For neither if anything of calumny were spread upon him, nor would he have been silent about calumnies brought against him by him: was Basil silent, who was Presbyter and Prince of Monks; but he taught to be borne indeed with strong soul, not to be silent; and about him in Orat. X On hatred and envy, he says, To calumnies however it is not fitting to be silent; not that by contradicting we may defend ourselves, but lest we permit progress to a lie, and the surrounded suffer damage.
[34] While indeed Eusebius hence touched by human passion in the quarrel with Basil, and novice in spiritual doctrine, in the discipline of the Church less versed he indicates; meanwhile that blemish of his ought not be turned into contumely. thence he praises for morals and unconquered strength in persecutions; this seems Gregory to observe in Eusebius, what in Orat. 29 on S. Cyprian the magician he left written; Namely Holy men, while from some error to wholesome counsels they apply their soul, to raise themselves as a certain sign of good hope; and to be of altogether slothful and base soul, those who by the commemoration of less laudable matters to some Saint to bring contumely think. The Nazianzene indeed in Eusebius reprehends, Ep. 29 among the Basilian, that by not calling Basil the Caesarean Presbyter to councils and spiritual synods, on him he had brought contumely; but meanwhile Eusebius himself so praises, that the best of all whom he knew he did not doubt to affirm: that is; A Man and Priest, and so great, whom he says with life and doctrine, with white hair also of all whom we have known to be the best we know. Which through adulation to have been said, it is impious about the Nazianzene writing to suspect.
[35] Bilius, who from the Greek Scholia of Nonnus and Nicetas to have composed his profess, affirms Eusebius of Caesarea, Nazianzene did not write to him in exile. the Cappadocian Bishop, twice for the faith to have been in exile. But that to him in exile acting three Epistles the Nazianzene wrote, I fear lest he hallucinate, not noticing that they were not to the Caesarean, but to the Samosatensian written, who for the faith to have been in exile is openly known. To deny however I would not wish, the old Scholiasts from elsewhere could have excerpted, that exile for the faith Eusebius the Caesarean endured, that from the Nazianzene is certain, that he under the persecutors Julian and Valens, for the faith of Christ strenuously fought. Let be seen the Scholia of Bilius, both at the Oration on the praises of Basil, num. 51, and at the oration on the funeral of his father num. 34.
[36] These things for Eusebius the Caesarean Bishop, Cappadocian, not Palestinian it has pleased to heap up; not to assert his sanctity more certainly, Repeated protest of the Author. but to cleanse the amended quarrel with S. Basil, and to elucidate our older Martyrology, to confirm the Corbeiense; and the rest of the Hagiologia, which on this day venerate Eusebius, to vindicate from less pious interpolation.