Page:Dictionary of Christian Biography and Literature (1911).djvu/733

 last a compromise was accepted by the council, that Antioch should retain the two Phoenicias and Arabia and that the three Palestines should form the patriarchate of Jerusalem (ib. 614–618). Maximus was among those by whom the Confession of Faith was drawn up (ib. 539–562), and stands second, between Anatolius of Constantinople and Juvenal of Jerusalem, in the signatories to the decree according metropolitical rank to Constantinople (ib. 798).

The next notice of Maximus is in a correspondence with Leo the Great, to whom he had appealed in defence of the prerogatives of his see. Leo promised to help him against either Jerusalem or Constantinople, exhorting him to assert his privileges as bp. of the third see in Christendom (i.e. only inferior to Alexandria and Rome). Maximus's zeal for the orthodox faith receives warm commendation from Leo, who exhorts him as "consors apostolicae sedis" to maintain the doctrine founded by St. Peter "speciali magisterio" in the cities of Antioch and Rome, against the erroneous teaching both of Nestorius and Eutyches, and to watch over the churches of the East generally and send him frequent tidings. The letter, dated June 11, 453, closes with a desire that Maximus will restrain unordained persons, whether monks or simple laics, from public preaching and teaching (Leo Magn. Ep. 109 [92]). Two years later, 455, the episcopate of Maximus came to a disastrous close by his deposition. The nature of his offence is nowhere specified. We do not know how much longer he lived or what became of him. Tillem. ''Mém. eccl.'' t. xv. passim; Le Quien, Oriens Christianus, t. ii. p. 725.

[E.V.]

Maximus (16), bp. of Turin, writer, reckoned as Maximus II., the third bishop, by Cappelletti (Le Chiese d’Ital. xiv. 12, 14, 76), who puts a Maximus I. in 390 as the first bishop. Ughelli (Ital. Sac. iv. 1022) counts them as one (cf. Boll. Acta SS. 25 Jun. v. 48). He was present at the council of Milan in 451 and signed the letter to pope Leo (Leo, Ep. 97; Labbe, iv. 583). He was also at the council of Rome in 465, where his name appears next after pope Hilary's, apparently on account of his seniority (Labbe, v. 86). Gennadius of Massilia (d. 496) gives a sketch of his works, most of which are still extant, but strangely says that he died in the reign of Arcadius and Honorius, i.e. before 423. This has led some to think that there were two bishops of this name, but the early date given by Gennadius seems irreconcilable with the many allusions to Nestorian doctrines in the homilies on the Nativity, and the general opinion is that he is wrong (Gennad. de Scrip. Eccl. c. xl. in Patr. Lat. lviii. 1081). The works of Maximus are in vol. lvii. of Migne's Patrologia Latina. They consist of 117 homilies, 116 sermons, 3 tractates on baptism, 2 (of very doubtful authority) entitled respectively contra Paganos and contra Judaeos, and a collection of expositions de Capitulis Evangeliorum (also doubtful). Many of the sermons and homilies were formerly ascribed to St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, St. Leo, etc. Several are on the great church festivals.

Points of interest in the homilies and sermons are: the notice of fixed lections (e.g. Hom, 36 and 37); abstinence from flesh meat in Lent (Hom. 44); no fasting or kneeling at prayer between Easter and Pentecost (Hom. 61). In Hom. 62, on the other hand, he mentions that the vigil of Pentecost was observed as a fast. This custom therefore probably originated in his time. St. Leo, mentioning the fast of Pentecost, makes it clear that he means the fast immediately following the festival. In Hom. 83 Maximus comments on the creed, which is exactly the same as the Roman creed given by Rufinus. Among contemporary events alluded to may be noticed the synod of Milan in 389, at which Jovinian was condemned (Hom. 9). Seven homilies (86–92) refer to the terror of the city at an impending barbaric invasion, apparently Attila's inroad, 452. Another homily (94) refers to the destruction of the church of Milan on the same occasion. He several times refers to superstitions in his diocese; their observance of the Calends of Jan. (16), their tumults during an eclipse (100), the idolatry still lurking among the lower orders (Serm. 101, 102). There are homilies on the feast of the Nativity of St. John the Baptist, on St. Lawrence, St. Cyprian, St. Agnes, and St. Eusebius of Vercelli, and several on the festival of SS. Peter and Paul which are worth particular attention. In some of these he uses very decided language on the supremacy of St. Peter, e.g., speaking of him as the keystone of the church (Hom. 54), the "magister navis" (Serm. 114); and as entrusted with "totius Ecclesiae gubernacula" (Hom. 70). But in other places he speaks of St. Peter as supreme in discipline, St. Paul in doctrine, and remarks "inter ipsos quis cui praeponatur incertum est" (72). Nowhere does he allude to the church of Rome as inheriting exclusively the supremacy of St. Peter. Gennadius mentions a work of Maximus de Spiritali Baptismi Gratia, and three treatises on this subject, formerly ascribed to St. Augustine, are published by Migne with the works of Maximus, on the strength of three ancient MSS., one of which the church of Turin possesses. Nothing in their style is against Migne's conclusion. The first treatise dwells on the significance of the anointing of the ears before baptism; the second gives an interrogatory creed identical with the one mentioned above in the homilies, and alludes to the custom of baptizing on the third day after the profession of faith; the third speaks of the anointing of the head after baptism, by which is conferred the full regal and sacerdotal dignity spoken of by St. Peter, and of the custom of washing the feet at the same time, after the example of Christ. See F. Savio's Gli Antichi Veseovi d'Italia (Turin, 1899), p. 283.

[M.F.A.]

Maximus (24), an ecclesiastical writer, placed by Eusebius (H. E. v. 27) in the reign of Severus and episcopate of Victor, i.e. in the last decade of 2nd cent. Eusebius says the subject of his work was the origin of evil and whether matter had been created, and elsewhere (Praep. Ev. vii. 22) entitles it, "Concerning Matter" (περὶ τῆς ὕλης), and preserves a long extract, from which it appears to have been in dialogue form. Routh, whose Reliquiae Sacrae (ii. 87) is by far the best ed. of the remains of Maximus, pointed out that the