Page:Dictionary of Christian Biography and Literature (1911).djvu/1012

 runs thus: "We do not despise the Antiochian formula of the synod in Encoeniis, but because the terms Ὁμοούσιος and Ὁμοιουύιος occasion much confusion, and because some have recently set up the ἀνόμοιος, we therefore reject ὁμοούσιος and ὁμοιούσιος as contrary to the Holy Scriptures; the ἀνόμοιος, however, we anathematize, and acknowledge that the Son is similar to the Father in accordance with the words of the apostle, who calls Him the image of the invisible God. We believe in our Lord Jesus Christ, His Son, Who was begotten by Him before all ages without change, the only-begotten God, Logos from God, Light, Life, Truth, and Wisdom. . . . And whoever declares anything else outside this faith has no part in the Catholic church" (see Hefele, ii. 265, Clark's ed.; and Gwatkin's Studies of Arianism, pp. 180-182). The subsequent history of Ulfilas is involved in much obscurity. Sozomen (vi. 37) intimates that Ulfilas and his converts suffered much at the hands of Athanaric, a lively picture of whose persecution, 372–375, will be found in the Acts of St. Sabas (Ruinart's Acta Sincera, p. 670) and of St. Nicetas, Sept. 15 (cf. AA. SS. Boll. Sept.), both of which documents are full of most interesting details concerning the life and manners of the Goths. Mr. C. A. Scott, of Cambridge, published an interesting and full monograph on Ulfilas, in which he discusses his history and that of Gothic Christianity during this period. Arianism seems to have specially flourished during the first half of cent. iv. in the provinces along the Danube. and, who lived there, were the leaders of Western Arianism, and Sulpicius Severus expressly asserts (Chron. ii. 38) that almost all the bishops of the two Pannonias were Arians. This would sufficiently account for the Arianism of the Goths who were just then accepting Christianity. The literary fame of Ulfilas is connected with his Gothic translation of the Bible, the one great monument of that language now extant. It does not exist in a complete shape. The fragments extant are contained in (1) the Codex Argenteus, now at Upsala; (2) the Codex Carolinus; and (3) the Ambrosian fragments published by Mai. A complete bibliography of these fragments, as known till 1840, will be found in Ceillier (iv. 346), and a complete ed. in Migne (Patr. Lat. t. xviii.) with a Life, Gothic grammar, and glossaries. Scott (Ulfilas, the Apostle of the Goths, 1885) gathered together the literature after 1840, and gave a long account of the MS. of Waitz. He also discussed (p. 137) some fragments attributed to Ulfilas. The best German works on the life of Ulfilas are those of Waitz (1840), Krafft (1860), and Bessel (1860). Works on the Gothic Bible are by E. Bernhardt (Halle, 1875), and Stamm (Paderborn, 1878); Bosworth's Gothic and Anglo-Saxon Gospels (1874); Skeat, Gospel of St. Mark in Gothic (Oxf. 1883); An Introduction, Phonological, Morphological, Syntactic, to the Gothic of Ulfilas, by T. Le Marchant Douse (1886). The chief ancient sources for the life of Ulfilas are Philostorgius, H. E. ii. 5 ; Socr. ii. 41, iv. 33; Soz. vi. 37; Theod. iv. 37.

[G.T.S.]

Urbanus (1), bp. of Rome under the emperor Alexander Severus, from 223 (or 222) to 230. The Liberian Catalogue gives 8 years 11 months and 11 days as the length of his episcopate. Nothing certain is known of his life. The Acta S. Urbani cannot be relied on. The discovery by De Rossi in the papal crypt of the cemetery of St. Callistus of a broken stone (apparently once the mensa of an altar-tomb), bearing the imperfect inscription '''OVRBANOC E. . .''' has raised an interest in the question of his burial-place and alleged connexion with St. Caecilia. Lipsius inclines to the view that the Urban of the papal crypt was some other Urban, not necessarily a bishop, since the letter E after his name might have begun some other expression than ἐπίσκοπος, e.g. ἐν εἰρήνῃ. De Rossi, however, thinks that the slab in the papal crypt must have been that of the pope, who was actually buried there; and he attributes the contrary tradition to a confusion between him and the earlier Urban, whom he supposes to have been contemporary with St. Caecilia and buried in the cemetery of Praetextatus.

[J.B—Y.]

Urbanus (6), bp. of Sicca Veneria, a town of proconsular Africa (Kaff) 22 miles from Musti (Ant. Itin. xli. 4; Shaw, Trav. p. 95; Aug. Ep. 229). Apparently a member of Augustine's monastic society at Hippo (Aug. Ep. 139. 34), he had occasion to remove from his office for grave misconduct a presbyter named Apiarius. Apiarius appealed to Zosimus, bp. of Rome, who ordered his restoration. In a council which met May 1, 418, the African bishops decreed that no priest, deacon, or inferior clerk should prosecute any appeal beyond sea. Zosimus then sent a commission to Africa, headed by Faustinus, bp. of Potenza, with instructions as to four points they were to impress on the African bishops: (1) That appeals from bishops of other churches should be made to Rome. (2) That bishops should not cross the sea unnecessarily (importune) to visit the seat of government (comitatum). (3) About settling through neighbouring bishops matters relating to priests and deacons excommunicated by their own bishops. Zosimus quotes a decree purporting to be one of the council of Nicaea, enjoining appeal to the bp. of Rome in case of bishops degraded by the bishops of their own province. (4) About excommunicating Urbanus, or at least summoning him to Rome unless he revoked his decision against Apiarius. This was in the latter part of 418. The African bishops were willing to accept provisionally the first and third propositions, until the canons of Nicaea, on which they were said to be founded, should be examined, for they were not aware of the existence among them of such rules. But at the end of 418 Zosimus was succeeded by Boniface, and no further action was taken until May 419, when 217 bishops met in council at Carthage (Hardouin, Conc. vol. i. p. 934; Bruns, Conc. i. 156, 157 ). Faustinus and his colleagues attended, and stated the conditions proposed by Zosimus. The bishops insisted on seeing them in writing, and the documents were accordingly then produced and read. On this Alypius, bp. of Tagaste, remarked that the decree referred to as one of Nicaea and quoted by Zosimus did not appear in the Greek copies with which the African bishops