Page:Dictionary of Christian Biography and Literature (1911).djvu/928

 and not admitted to communion till at the point of death.

Another class of heretics afterwards fell under the condemnation of Siricius. Jovinian, notorious through St. Jerome's vehement writings against him, having been expelled from Milan, had come to Rome and obtained a following there. His teaching came under the notice of two eminent laymen, Pammachius and Victorinus, who represented it to pope Siricius who assembled a synod of clergy at which Jovinian was excommunicated, together with his abettors, Auxentius, Genialis, Germinator, Felix, Frontinus, Martianus, Januarius, and Ingenius. These departed to Milan, whither Siricius sent three presbyters with a letter to the Milanese clergy, informing them of what had been done at Rome, and expressing confidence that they would pay regard to it. The letter is full of strong invective against Jovinian and his colleagues—"dogs such as never before had barked against the church's mysteries"—but contains no arguments. Siricius disclaims any disparagement of marriage, "at which," he says, "we assist with the veil," though he "venerates with greater honour virgins devoted to God, who are the fruit of marriages." The synodical reply from Milan is preserved among the epistles of St. Ambrose (Ep. xlii. ed. Bened.), who presided at the Milanese synod. He and his colleagues thank Siricius for his vigilance, concur with his strictures on Jovinian, supply the arguments which the pope's letter lacked, and declare that they had condemned those whom the pope condemned, according to his judgment. The introductory words of this epistle have been adduced in proof of the view then held of the pope's supreme authority. They are: "We recognize in the letter of your holiness the watchfulness of a good shepherd, diligently keeping the door committed to thee, and with pious solicitude guarding the sheepfold of Christ, worthy of being heard and followed by the sheep of the Lord." This language, though expressing recognition of the bp. of Rome as the representative of St. Peter, cannot be pressed as implying that he was the one doorkeeper of the whole church or an infallible authority in definitions of faith. On the contrary, the bishops at Milan endorsed his judgment, not as a matter of course or as being bound to do so, but on the merits of the case, setting forth their reasons. These proceedings apparently occurred in 390.

About the same time, or soon after, the Meletian schism at Antioch came under the notice of Siricius. His attitude to it is not certainly known. Some six months after the death of Damasus, whose highly valued secretary he had been, Jerome had left Rome for ever. In his bitterly expressed letter to Asilla, inveighing against his opponents and calumniators, he does not mention the new pope; but it may be concluded, if only from his silence, that he had lost the countenance he had enjoyed under Damasus. One expression suggests that he had been a little disappointed at not being made pope himself, and that coolness between him and Siricius may have arisen from this. Siricius and he were at one in their advocacy of virginity against Jovinian and in their general orthodoxy, but there seems to have been no intercourse between them, and, even in the course of the controversy against Jovinian, Siricius appears to have joined others at Rome in disapproving of Jerome's alleged disparagement of matrimony. Further, Rufinus, the once close friend of Jerome, having quarrelled with him in Palestine about Origenism but been temporarily reconciled, in 395 left Jerusalem for Rome. He was favourably received by Siricius, who gave him a commendatory letter on his departure, the quarrel with Jerome having recommenced with increased violence.

For his neglect of Jerome and patronage of Rufinus, Baronius disparages Siricius, even saying that his days were shortened by divine judgment (Baron. ad ann. 397; xxxii.). A further ground of complaint (ad ann. 394; xl.) is his supposed unworthy treatment of another ascetic saint, Paulinus of Nola, who says he was badly treated by the Roman clergy when passing through Rome ( 395) on his way to Nola, and especially blames the pope (Paulin. ad Sulpic. Severum, Ep. i. in nov. edit. v.). For such reasons Baronius has excluded Siricius from the Roman Martyrology. Pagi (in Baron ad ann. 398, 1) defends the pope against the animadversions of Baronius. Siricius died in 398.

[J.B—Y.]

Sirmium, Stonemasons of. The Acts giving the history of the martyrdom of the five stonemasons of Sirmium have been known for centuries, being found in substance in Ado's Martyrology, but only last century was their relation to the history of Diocletian's period recognized. They were stonemasons belonging to Pannonia, engaged in the imperial quarries; one of them, Simplicius, was a pagan. They distinguished themselves by their genius and ability, and attracted the notice of Diocletian by the beauty of their carving. Simplicius was converted by his four companions, and baptized secretly by a bishop, Cyril of Antioch, who had been three years a slave in the quarries and had suffered many stripes for the faith. The pagans, jealous of their skill, accused them before Diocletian, who, however, continued to protect them. When, however, the emperor ordered them to make, among other statues, one of Aesculapius, the masons made all the others, but refused to carve that. The pagans thereupon procured an order for their execution. They were enclosed in lead coffins and flung into the Save. Their Acts then proceed to narrate the martyrdom of the saints called the Quatuor Coronati, whose liturgical history has been told at length in D. C. A. t. i. p. 461. Diocletian, coming to Rome, ordered all the troops to sacrifice to Aescuapius. Four soldiers, Carpophorus Severus, Severianus, and Victorinus, refusing, were flogged to death, and their bodies buried by pope Melchiades and St. Sebastian on the Via Lavicana at the 3rd milestone from the city. These Acts are very valuable illustrations of the great persecution, but are full of difficulties. The whole story is in Mason's Diocletian Persecution, p. 259. Attention was first called to the Acts as illustrating Diocletian's period by Wattenbach in the Sitsungsberichte der Wiener Akad. Bd. x. (1853) S.