Eustathius of Antioch | |
|---|---|
| Patriarch of Antioch | |
 | |
| In office | 324 – 330 |
| Predecessor | Philogonius of Antioch |
| Successor | Paulinus I of Antioch |
| Personal details | |
| Born | |
| Died | c. 337 Traianopolis, Roman Empire |
| Sainthood | |
| Feast day | 16 July inCatholic Church 21 February inEastern Catholicism andEastern Orthodoxy |
| Venerated in | Catholic Church Eastern Orthodox Church Oriental Orthodoxy (esp.Syriac Orthodox Church[1] andCoptic Orthodox Church)[2] |
Eustathius of Antioch, sometimes surnamedthe Great, was a Christianpatriarch of Antioch in the 4th century. His feast day in theEastern Orthodox Church,Syriac Orthodox Church andCoptic Orthodox Church is February 21 (Amshir 27 in theCoptic calendar).
He was a native ofSide inPamphylia. About 320 he was bishop ofBeroea, and he becamepatriarch of Antioch shortly before theCouncil of Nicaea in 325. In that assembly he distinguished himself zealously against theArians,[3] though theAllocutio ad Imperatorem with which he has been credited is probably not by him.[4] At Nicaea, he and Marcellus joined forces with Alexander.[5][6] In this way, they were able to significantly influence the formulation of the Nicene Creed.[7]
His anti-Arian polemic againstEusebius of Nicomedia made him unpopular among his fellow bishops in the East, and a synod convened at Antioch in 330 deposed him for Sabellianism,[8] which was confirmed by the emperor.[4]
After Nicaea, the conflict at Nicaea between the Eusebians and the pro-Nicenes continued. "Within ten years of the Council of Nicaea all the leading supporters of the creed of that Council had been deposed or disgraced or exiled", including Eustathius.[9] Arius and his theology were now no longer the focus of the Controversy.[10] The focus of the controversy was around the concept ofhomoousios:
"The fifth-century ecclesiastical historian Sozomen reports a dispute immediately after the council, focused not on Arius, but [...] concerning the precise meaning of the termhomoousios. Some thought this term [...] implied the non-existence of the Son of God; and that it involved the error of Montanus and Sabellius. [...] Eustathius accused Eusebius [of Caesarea] of altering the doctrines ratified by the council of Nicaea, while the latter declared that he approved of all the Nicaean doctrines, and reproached Eustathius for cleaving to the heresy of Sabellius".[11]
Eustathius was accused, condemned, and deposed at a synod in Antioch.[12] His supporters at Antioch rebelled against the decision of this synod and were ready to take up arms in his defence.[13] But Eustathius kept them in check, exhorted them to remain true to their faith and humbly left for his place of exile, accompanied by a large body of his clergy. At the behest ofConstantine the Great, Eustathius was banished toTrajanopolis inThrace, where he died, probably about 337, though possibly not until 370.[14][15] The Eusebians proposed Eusebius as the new bishop, but he declined.
When, after the death of Eustathius,Meletius became Bishop of Antioch in 360, the Eustathians would not recognise him, even after his election was approved by theSynod of Alexandria in 362. Their intransigent attitude gave rise to two factions among the orthodox, the so-calledMeletian Schism, which lasted till the second decade of the fifth century.[16]
"The schism at Antioch, between the Eustathians, or old Catholic party, under their Bishop Paulinus [...] and the new Catholic party under Meletius, had troubled both the East and West. The holiest Bishops in the East, such as Basil and Eusebius of Samosata, sided with Meletius. Damasus and the Western Bishops communicated with Paulinus. Meletius asserted Three Hypostases in the HOLY TRINITY, Paulinus I: Damasus would not allow the former, for fear of being considered an Arian, nor Basil the latter, lest he should be imagined a Sabellian. [...] Peter served as a kind of connection between the two conflicting parties, though his sentiments inclined to those of Damasus. Basil addressed a letter to him while at Rome, on the subject, in which he complains in very strong language, that the Western Bishops, who could not be so well acquainted with the actual state of affairs, should presume to class Meletius and Eusebius among the Arians".[17]
The only complete work by Eustathius is theDe Engastrimytho contra Origenem.[18]
TheCommentary on the Hexameron attributed to him in the manuscripts is too late to be authentic.
One or more of the preceding sentences incorporates text from a publication now in thepublic domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Eustathius, of Antioch".Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 9 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 957.
This article incorporates text from this source, which is in thepublic domain.
This article incorporates text from a publication now in thepublic domain: Herbermann, Charles, ed. (1913). "St. Eustathius".Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
| Titles of the Great Christian Church | ||
|---|---|---|
| Preceded by | Patriarch of Antioch 324 – 330 | Succeeded by |
of theChurch of Antioch before 518 | |
| |
| Homoian group |
|
| Meletian group | |
| Eustathian group |
|
| Apollonarist group |
|
| |
