Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 5.djvu/695

 EUSEBIUS

617

EUSEBIUS

garius who erroneously maintained that in the Holy- Eucharist the bread and the wine are merely a figure or a symbol of the Body and Blood of Christ. That he was a partisan of Berengarius, at least for a time, cannot be denied. In a letter written shortly after the councils of Rome and Vercelli (1050), in which Berengarius was condemned, he protested against the injustice done to his teacher and the archdeacon of his church. When King Henry I of France (1031-60) summoned the bishops of his realm to a synod held in Paris in 1051, both Eusebius and Berengarius absented themselves, through fear of condemnation. Two contemporary writers, Deoduinus, Bishop of Liege (P. L., CXLVI, 1439), and Durandus, Abbot of Troarn (P. L., C'XLIX, 1422), class Eusebius Bruno among the followers of Berengarius; the latter always claimed him as a partisan. It is not certain that he really appropriated in its entirety the teacliing of his master, though Deoduinus and Durandus affirm it. On the other hand, at the Council of Tours (1054), presided over by the papal legate Hildebrand, Euse- bius Bruno induced his friend Berengarius to declare, in writing and on oath, that after the Consecration the bread and the wine are the Body and Blood of CTirist. Moreover, at a synod of Angers '1062) at which the Count of Anjou, Geoffrey the Bearded, asked for an account of the teaching of Berengarius, Eusebius' defence of his master was somewhat weak. When, shortly afterwards, Berengarius complained to him of the opposition of a certain Geoffrey Martini to his teaching, Eusebius declared frankly in a letter to Berengarius (P. L., CXLVII, 1201), that the reality of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Holy Sacra- ment must be admitted, like other mysteries of faith, e. g. the Incarnation and the passing of Christ glori- fied through closed doors. These expressions indicate either a change of mind on the part of Eusebius, or, what is not urnikely, a misunderstanding, in the begin- ning, of the real import of the teachings of Berengarius. Streber in KirchenUx., s. v.; Hist. litt. de la France, VIII, 79-104; Deutsch in Rcalencyk. f. prot, ThcoL, s. v.; Chev.\- LIER, Hep, dts sources hist,, Bio-bibL, s. v.

Francis J. Schaeper.

Eusebius of Alexandria, ecclesiastical writer and author of a numl)er of homilies well known in the sixth and seventh centuries and of much ascetical and dogmatic value. There has been much dispute re- garding the details of his life and the age in which he lived. Galland (Vet. Patr. Biblioth., VIII, 23) saj;s, " De Eusebio qui vulgo dicitur episcopus Alexandrise incerta omnia" (Concerning Eusebius. commonly called Bishop of Alexandria, there is nothing sure). His writings have been attributed to Eusebius of Emesa, Eusebius of Ca'sarea, and others. According to an old biography said to have been written by his notary, the monk John, and discovered by Cardinal Mai, he lived in the fifth century and led a monastic life near Alexandria. The fame of his virtues at- tracted the attention of Cyril, Bishop of Alexandria, who visited him with his clergy, and in 444, when dy- ing, had him elected his successor and consecrated him bishop, though much against his will. Eusebius dis- played great zeal in the exercise of his office and did much good by his preaching. Among those whom he converted was a certain Alexander, a man of sena- torial rank. After having ruled his see for seven or, according to another account, for twenty years, he made .Alexander his successor and retired to the desert, whence Cyril had summoned him, and there died in the odour of sanctity.

While Mai seems to have established the existence of a Eusebius of .Alexandria who lived in the fifth cen- tury, it has been objected that neither the name of Eusebius, nor that of his successor Alexander, appears in the list of the occupants of that ancient see. Dios- curus is mentioned as the immediate successor of Cyril. Nor does the style of the homilies seem on the

whole in keeping with the age of Cyril. It may be noted, however, that the biographer of Eusebius ex- pressly states that the Cyril in question is the great opponent of Nestorius. Various solutions of the diffi- culty have been proposed. Thilo (Ueber die Schrif ten des Eusebius v. Alexandrien u. des Eusebius von Emesa, Halle, 1832) thinks that the authorship of the homilies is to be assigned either to a certain monk — one of four brothers — of the fifth century, or to a pres- byter and court chaplain of Justinian I, who took an active part in the theological strifes of the sixth cen- tury. Mai suggests that after the death of Cyril there were two bishops at Alexandria, Dioscurus, the Mono- physite leader, and Eusebius, the head of the Catholic party. The homilies cover a variety of subjects, and the author is one of the earliest patristic witnesses to the doctrine regarding the descent of Christ into Hell. A list of homilies with the complete text is given by Mai (Spicilegium Romanum, IX). They may also be found in Migne, P. G., LXXXVI. The "Sermo de Confusione Diaboli " was published with an introduc- tion by Rand in "Modern Philology", II, 261.

MAl,'Spicileaium Romanum, IX, 2 sq. (Rome. 1S43); MlGNE, P. G., LXXXVI, part I (Paris, 1S60); Streber in Kirchentex,,

H. M. Brock.

Eusebius of Csesarea (Eusebius Pamphili), Bishop of Cipsarea in Palestine, the " Father of Church History"; b. about 260; d. before 341.

Life. — It will save lengthy digression if we at once speak of a document which will often have to be re- ferred to on account of its biographical importance, viz., the letter written by Eusebius to his diocese in order to explain his subscription to the Creed pro- pounded by the Council of Niciea. After some pre- liminary remarks, the WTiter proceeds: " We first transmit to you the writing concerning the faith which was put forward by us, and then the second, which they have published after putting in additions to our expressions. Now the writing presented by us, which when read in the presence of our most religious emperor was declared to have a right and approved character was as follows: [The Faith put forward by us]. As we have received from the fiishops before us both in our first catechetical instruction and when we were baptized, and as we have learned from the Divine Scriptures, and as we have believed and taught in the presbyterate and in the office of bishop itself so now likewise believing we offer to you our faith and it is thus." Then follows a formal creed [Theodoret, Hist., I, 11; Socrates, Hist., I, 8; St. Athanasius, de Dec. Syn. Nic. (appendix) and elsewhere. Translated by Newman with notes in the Oxford Library of the Fathers (Select Treatises of St. Athanasius, p. 59) and St. Athanasius, vol. I. The translation given here is Dr. Hort's. The words in brackets are probably gen- uine though not given by Socrates and St. Athanasius].

Dr. Hort in 1876 ("Two Dissertations", etc., pp. 56 sqq.) pointed out that this creed was presumably that of the Church of Csesarea of which Eusebius was bishop. This view is widely accepted (cf. Lightfoot, art. "Euseb." in "Diet, of Christ. Biog." — All refer- ences to Lightfoot, unless otherwise stated, are to this article. — Sanday, " Journal of Theolog. Studies ", vol. I, p. 15; Gwatkin, "Studies of Arianism", p. 42, 2nd edition ; McGiffert, " Prolog, to C. H. of Euseb." in "Select Library of Nic. and post-Nic. Fathers"; Duchesne, "Hist, de I'Eglise", vol. II, p. 149). Ac- cording to this view it is natural to regard the intro- duction, "As we have received" etc., as autobio- graphical, and to infer that Eusebius had exercised the office of the priesthood in the city of Caesarea before he became its bishop, and had received his earliest reli- gious instruction and the sacrament of Baptism there also. But other interpretations of this document are given, one of which destroys, while the other dimin- ishes, its biographical value: (a) According to some