Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 5.djvu/441

 ELIAS

385

ELIE

(Rome, 1759), 155 and Supplem^ntum, ed. Nardecchia (Rome, 1908). 240; Panfilo, Storia Compendiosa (Rome, 1874), I, 510-37; CmsTOFAXi, Delle Slorie d'Assisi (3rd ed., Assisi, 1902), 93-97; Con bo\1ch, Biblioteca bio-bibUografica, I (Quaracchi, 1906), 106-117; Sabatier, Eiamen de la vie de Fnre Elie in Optuicules de critique historique, fasc. XI (Paris, 1904); Van Ortroy in Anal. Bolland., XXII (1903), 195, 202; Macdoneu.^ Frale Elia in Sons of Francis (London, 1902), 138-88.

P.\scHAL Robinson.

Elias of Jerusalem, d. 518, one of the two Catholic bishops (with Flavian of Antioch) who resisted the attempt of the Emperor Anastasius I (491-518) to abolish the Council of Chalcedon (451). Anastasius spent the greater part of his reign in a vain attempt to impose Monophysitism on his subjects. Unlike his predecessors, who favoiu-ed Monophysitism merely as a political expedient whereby to conciliate EgTr-pt and the great number of Monophysites in SjTia, Anasta- sius carried on his propaganda apparently from re- ligious conviction. His chief adviser, Marinus, a Syrian, was also a convinced Jlonophysite. At first the emperor tried to arrange a compromise. The population of Constantinople and nearly all the Euro- pean provinces were too Chalcedonian for an open at- tack on that council to be safe. Macedonius II, Pa- triarch of Constantinople (4G9-511), submitted so far as to sign Zeno's Henotikon (482), but refused to con- demn the council. Flavian of Antioch also for a time approved of a policy of compromise. The Acacian schism (484-519) still continued during the reign of Anastasius, but the emperor and his patriarch made advances to the Roman See — advances that came to nothing, since the pope always insisted on the le- moval of the names of former schismatics from the Byzantine diptychs. Gradually Anastasius went over completely to the Monophysites. Severus of Sozo- polis, Xenaias of Tahal in Persia, and a great crowd of Syrian and Egj-ptian Monophysi'.e monks over- whelmed him with petitions to have the courage of his convictions and to break openly with the Dj'ophy- sites. In the emperor's chapel the Trisagion was svmg with the famous Monophysite addition ("who was crucified for us"). Macedonius of Constantinople was deposed (511), and an open Monophysite, Timothy I (511-518), took his place. Timothy began a fierce persecution of Catholics. Then the Government sum- moned a synod at Sidon in 512 that was to condemn the Council of Chalcedon. It was chiefly Elias of Jeru- salem who prevented this result.

Elias was an Arab, by birth, who had been educated in a monastery in Egj^jt. In 457 he was driven out by the Monophysite Patriarch of Alexandria, Tim- othy the Cat. He then came to Palestine and found- ed a laura at Jericho. Anastasius of Jerusalem or- dained him priest. In 494 Elias succeeded Sallustius as Bishop of Jerusalem and governed the see until 513. He acknowledged Euphemius of Constantinople (see EuPHEMius) and refused the communion of Macedo- nius, the intruder. About 509 the Monophysite Xenaias of Hierapolis tried to make Elias sign a Mono- physite formula, and the emperor ordered him to sum- mon a synod that should condemn the Council of Chalcedon. Instead, Elias sent the emperor a Catho- lic profession that his enemies seem to have falsified on the way. E vagrius says : " He when he had written it sent it to the Emperor by the hands of Dios- corus' followers" (Monophysites). " And the profes- sion that they then showed contained an anathe- ma against those who speak of two natures in Christ. But the Bishop of Jerusalem, saying that it had been tampered with, sent another without that anathema. Nor is this surprising. For they often corrupted works of the holy Fathers" (H. E., Ill, xxxi). The Synod of Sidon in 512 was to condemn Chalcedon and depose Elias and Flavian. But they succeeded in persuading the Fathers to do neither (Labbe, Concil., IV, 1414). The Monophysites went v.— 23

on accusing these two of Nestorianism, and Anasta- sius deposed them, in spite of the protest of Elias' legate, Sabas. Flavian was deposetl first and Seve- rus, an open Monophysite, was intruded in his place. With this person Elias and the monks of Palestine would have no communion (Evagr., H. E., Ill, xxxiii). Then the Count of Palestine, Olympus, arrived at Jeru- salem and offered Elias his choice of signing a Mono- physite formula or being deposed. Elias refused to sign and was banished to Aila on the Red Sea (513). His monks remained faithful to him to the end.

Elias of Jerusalem was the founder of many monas- teries in his patriarchate. The common presentation of him as a compromiser is unjust. He was stead- fastly Catholic throughout and protested at once against the heretical formula brought to the emperor in his name. The SjTian Uniat Church keeps his feast, with St. Flavian of Antioch, on 18 Feb. (Xilles, Kalend. Man., I, 471). These two are named in the Roman Martyrology on 4 July.

AcJa SS., July, II, 22-28; Nicephoros calustos, XVI, 26; LiBERATTJs, Brev. cous. Nest. et Eutych., XlX; Evagrius, H. £'., Ill, xxx-xxxiii.

Adrian Fortescue.

Elie de Beaumont, Jean-Baptiste-Armand-Louis- Leonce, geologist, b. at Canon (Dep. Calvados), near Caen, France, 25 Sept., 1798; d. at Canon, 21 Sept., 1874. He made his preliminary studies at the Seminaire Henri IV in Paris, and after successfully completing the course at the Ecole Polj'technique de- voted himself in 1819 to mineralogy at the Ecole des Mines. His professor of geologj\ Brochant de Vil- liers, in 1822, chose him and his fellow-student Du- fr^noy as companions on a tour to England, to study the mines of the country and to become acquainted with the British methods of geological surveying. After their return, Elie de Beaumont published a se- ries of papers in conjunction with Dufrenoy in the "Annales des Mines" (1824-18.30) which were after- wards repuljlished under the title "Voyage metallur- gique en Angleterre", 2 vols. (Paris, 1837-39). In 1825 the two young geologists began the preparation of a geological map of France. This great work, car- ried on, first under the direction of de \illiers and after- wards independently, required eighteen years for its completion. Its publication was an event of much importance in the development of geology in France and established the reputation of its authors. Later and more complete editions were afterwards issued and Elie de Beaumont continued to direct the work of the special geological survey until his death.

In 1827 he was elected professor of geology at the Ecole des Mines and in 1832 was appointed to the same chair in the College de France. In 1833 he be- came chief engineer of mines and some years later succeeded de Villiers as general inspector of mines. He received many honours during his long career in recognition of his scientific achievements. He was admitted to the Academic des Sciences in 1835 and succeeded Arago in 1853 as its perpetual secretary. He served as President of the Geological Society of France and in 1861 became Vice-President of the Conseil General des Mines. He was made a Senator of France in 1852 and during the Second Empire a Grand Officer of the Legion of Honour.

His fame extended throughout Europe. His ex- tensive field observations, in connexion with his sur- veys and his epoch-making work on the age and origin of mountain systems, constitute his chief contribu- tions to geology. A paper published by him, as early as 1829, in the "Annales" of the Academy, may be regarded as the starting-point of modern views on mountain structure. His observations and theories on the subject are developed in detail in his "Notice sur les syst^mes des montagnes", 3 vols. (1852). Elie de Beaumont was a man of ardent faith and great integrity of life. In all his official positions he wa.s