Maestro de San Ildefonso. San Atanasio de Alejandría, huile sur toile, 155 x 72, National Sculpture Museum
Le Verbe de Dieu s'est
fait homme pour que nous devenions Dieu ;
il s'est rendu visible
dans le corps pour que nous ayons une idée du Père invisible,
et il a lui-même supporté
la violence des hommes pour que nous héritions de l'incorruptibilité
Saint Athanase. Sur
l'Incarnation du Verbe, 54,3.
Saint
Athanase, évêque et docteur de l'Église
Evêque d'Alexandrie de
328 à 373, Athanase n'eut qu'un objectif : défendre la foi en la divinité du
Christ, qui avait été définie à Nicée, mais se trouvait battue en brèche de
partout. Ni la pusillanimité des évêques, ni les tracasseries policières, ni
cinq exils ne vinrent à bout de son caractère et surtout de son amour pour le
Seigneur Jésus, Dieu fait homme.
Saint Athanase
d'Alexandrie
Patriarche d'Alexandrie,
Père de l'Église (+373)
Les Églises d'Orient le
fêtent aussi en janvier.
Nul ne contribua
davantage à la défaite de l'arianisme. Il n'écrivit, ne souffrit, ne vécut que
pour défendre la divinité du Christ. Petit de taille, prodigieusement
intelligent, nourri de culture grecque, il n'était encore que diacre lorsqu'il
accompagna l'évêque d'Alexandrie au concile de Nicée en 325. Il y contribua à
la condamnation de son compatriote Arius et à la formulation des dogmes de
l'Incarnation et de la Sainte Trinité. Devenu lui-même évêque d'Alexandrie en
328, il fut, dès lors et pour toujours, en butte à la persécution des ariens,
semi-ariens et anti-nicéens de tout genre qui pullulaient en Égypte et dans
l'Église entière. Ces ariens étaient soutenus par les empereurs qui
rêvaient d'une formule plus souple que celle de Nicée, d'une solution de
compromis susceptible de rallier tous les chrétiens et de rendre la paix à
l'empire. C'est ce qui explique que sur les quarante-cinq années de son
épiscopat, saint Athanase en passa dix-sept en exil: deux années à Trèves, sept
années à Rome, le reste dans les cavernes des déserts de l'Égypte. Il fut même
accusé d'avoir assassiné l'évêque Arsène d'Ypsélé. Il ne dut la reconnaissance
de son innocence qu'au fait qu'Arsène revint en plein jour et se montra vivant
aux accusateurs de saint Athanase.
Son œuvre théologique est
considérable.
- A découvrir: ses œuvres
publiées aux éditions du Cerf.
Mémoire de saint
Athanase, évêque et docteur de l'Église. Homme très éminent en sainteté et en
doctrine, placé sur le siège d'Alexandrie, il défendit la foi orthodoxe avec
une vigueur intrépide, depuis le temps de Constantin jusqu'à celui de Valens,
contre les empereurs, les gouverneurs de province, contre un nombre infini d'évêques
ariens, qui lui tendirent toutes sortes de pièges et le forcèrent plusieurs
fois à l'exil ; enfin, après bien des combats et des triomphes qu'il remporta
par sa patience, il rentra dans son Église et s'endormit dans la paix du Christ
la quarante-neuvième année de son épiscopat, en 373.
Martyrologe romain
Athanase a été sans aucun
doute l'un des Pères de l'Église antique les plus importants et les plus
vénérés... Nous avons de nombreux motifs de gratitude envers Athanase. Sa vie,
comme celle d'Antoine et
d'innombrables autres saints, nous montre que "celui qui va vers Dieu ne
s'éloigne pas des hommes, mais qu'il se rend au contraire proche d'eux" (Saint
Athanase - audience du 20 juin 2007 - Benoît XVI)
SOURCE : https://nominis.cef.fr/contenus/saint/1076/Saint-Athanase-d-Alexandrie.html
SAINT ATHANASE
Docteur de l'Église
(296-375)
Saint Athanase naquit à
Alexandrie, métropole de l'Égypte. Sa première éducation fut excellente; il ne
quitta le foyer paternel que pour être élevé, nouveau Samuel, dans le temple du
Seigneur, par l'évêque d'Alexandrie.
Athanase était simple
diacre, quand son évêque le mena au concile de Nicée, dont il fut à la fois la
force et la lumière. Cinq mois après, le patriarche d'Alexandrie mourut, et
Athanase, malgré sa fuite, se vit obligé d'accepter le lourd fardeau de ce
grand siège. Dès lors, ce fut une guerre acharnée contre lui. Les accusations
succèdent aux accusations, les perfidies aux perfidies; Athanase, inébranlable,
invincible dans la défense de la foi, fait à lui seul trembler tous ses
ennemis.
La malice des hérétiques
ne servit qu'à faire ressortir l'énergie de cette volonté de fer, la sainteté
de ce grand coeur, les ressources de cet esprit fécond, la splendeur de ce fier
génie. Exilé par l'empereur Constantin, il lui fit cette réponse:
"Puisque vous cédez
à mes calomniateurs, le Seigneur jugera entre vous et moi."
Avant de mourir,
Constantin le rappela, et Athanase fut reçu en triomphe dans sa ville
épiscopale. Le vaillant champion de la foi eut à subir bientôt un nouvel exil,
et deux conciles ariens ne craignirent pas de pousser la mauvaise foi et
l'audace jusqu'à le déposer de son siège.
Toujours persécuté et
toujours vainqueur, voilà la vie d'Athanase; il vit périr l'infâme Arius d'une
mort honteuse et effrayante et tous ses ennemis disparaître les uns après les
autres. Jamais les adversaires de ce grand homme ne purent le mettre en défaut,
il déjoua toutes leurs ruses avec une admirable pénétration d'esprit. En voici
quelques traits.
En plein concile, on le
fit accuser d'infamie par une courtisane; mais il trouve le moyen de montrer
que cette femme ne le connaissait même pas de vue, puisqu'elle prit un de ses
prêtres pour lui.
Au même concile, on
l'accusa d'avoir mis à mort un évêque nommé Arsène, et coupé sa main droite;
comme preuve on montrait la main desséchée de la victime; mais voici qu'à
l'appel d'Athanase, Arsène paraît vivant et montre ses deux mains.
Une autre fois, Athanase,
poursuivi, s'enfuit sur un bateau; puis bientôt il rebrousse chemin, croise ses
ennemis, qui lui demandent s'il a vu passer l'évêque d'Alexandrie:
"Poursuivez, leur dit-il, il n'est pas très éloigné d'ici."
Ses dernières années furent
les seules paisibles de sa vie. Enfin, après avoir gouverné pendant
quarante-six ans l'Église d'Alexandrie, après avoir soutenu tant de combats, il
alla recevoir au Ciel la récompense de "ceux qui souffrent persécution
pour la justice".
Abbé L. Jaud, Vie
des Saints pour tous les jours de l'année, Tours, Mame, 1950.
SOURCE : http://magnificat.ca/cal/fr/saints/saint_athanase.html
BENOÎT XVI
AUDIENCE GÉNÉRALE
Mercredi 20 juin 2007
Saint Athanase
Chers frères et sœurs,
En poursuivant notre
évocation des grands Maîtres de l'Église antique, nous voulons aujourd'hui
tourner notre attention vers saint Athanase d'Alexandrie. Cet authentique
protagoniste de la tradition chrétienne, déjà quelques années avant sa mort,
fut célébré comme "la colonne de l'Église" par le grand théologien et
Évêque de Constantinople Grégroire de Nazianze (Discours 21, 26), et il a
toujours été considéré comme un modèle d'orthodoxie, aussi bien en Orient qu'en
Occident. Ce n'est donc pas par hasard que Gian Lorenzo Bernini en plaça la
statue parmi celles des quatre saints Docteurs de l'Église orientale et
occidentale - avec Ambroise, Jean Chrysostome et Augustin -, qui dans la
merveilleuse abside la Basilique vaticane entourent la Chaire de saint Pierre.
Athanase a été sans aucun
doute l'un des Pères de l'Église antique les plus importants et les plus
vénérés. Mais ce grand saint est surtout le théologien passionné de l'incarnation,
du Logos, le Verbe de Dieu, qui - comme le dit le prologue du quatrième
Évangile - "se fit chair et vint habiter parmi nous" (Jn 1, 14).
C'est précisément pour cette raison qu'Athanase fut également l'adversaire le
plus important et le plus tenace de l'hérésie arienne, qui menaçait alors la
foi dans le Christ, réduit à une créature "intermédiaire" entre Dieu
et l'homme, selon une tendance récurrente dans l'histoire et que nous voyons en
œuvre de différentes façons aujourd'hui aussi. Probablement né à Alexandrie
vers l'an 300, Athanase reçut une bonne éducation avant de devenir diacre et
secrétaire de l'Évêque de la métropole égyptienne, Alexandre. Proche
collaborateur de son Évêque, le jeune ecclésiastique prit part avec lui au
Concile de Nicée, le premier à caractère œcuménique, convoqué par l'empereur
Constantin en mai 325 pour assurer l'unité de l'Eglise. Les Pères nicéens
purent ainsi affronter diverses questions et principalement le grave problème
né quelques années auparavant à la suite de la prédication du prêtre alexandrin
Arius.
Celui-ci, avec sa
théorie, menaçait l'authentique foi dans le Christ, en déclarant que le Logos
n'était pas le vrai Dieu, mais un Dieu créé, un être "intermédiaire"
entre Dieu et l'homme, ce qui rendait ainsi le vrai Dieu toujours inaccessible
pour nous. Les Évêques réunis à Nicée répondirent en mettant au point et en
fixant le "Symbole de la foi" qui, complété plus tard par le premier
Concile de Constantinople, est resté dans la tradition des différentes
confessions chrétiennes et dans la liturgie comme le Credo de
Nicée-Constantinople. Dans ce texte fondamental - qui exprime la foi de
l'Église indivise, et que nous répétons aujourd'hui encore, chaque dimanche,
dans la célébration eucharistique - figure le terme grec homooúsios, en latin
consubstantialis: celui-ci veut indiquer que le Fils, le Logos est "de la
même substance" que le Père, il est Dieu de Dieu, il est sa substance, et
ainsi est mise en lumière la pleine divinité du Fils, qui était en revanche
niée par le ariens.
A la mort de l'Évêque
Alexandre, Athanase devint, en 328, son successeur comme Évêque d'Alexandrie,
et il se révéla immédiatement décidé à refuser tout compromis à l'égard des
théories ariennes condamnées par le Concile de Nicée. Son intransigeance,
tenace et parfois également très dure, bien que nécessaire, contre ceux qui
s'étaient opposés à son élection épiscopale et surtout contre les adversaires
du Symbole de Nicée, lui valut l'hostilité implacable des ariens et des
philo-ariens. Malgré l'issue sans équivoque du Concile, qui avait clairement
affirmé que le Fils est de la même substance que le Père, peu après, ces idées
fausses prévalurent à nouveau - dans ce contexte, Arius lui-même fut réhabilité
-, et elles furent soutenues pour des raisons politiques par l'empereur
Constantin lui-même et ensuite par son fils Constance II. Celui-ci, par
ailleurs, qui ne se souciait pas tant de la vérité théologique que de l'unité
de l'empire et de ses problèmes politiques, voulait politiser la foi, la rendant
plus accessible - à son avis - à tous ses sujets dans l'empire.
La crise arienne, que
l'on croyait résolue à Nicée, continua ainsi pendant des décennies, avec des
événements difficiles et des divisions douloureuses dans l'Église. Et à cinq
reprises au moins - pendant une période de trente ans, entre 336 et 366 - Athanase
fut obligé d'abandonner sa ville, passant dix années en exil et souffrant pour
la foi. Mais au cours de ses absences forcées d'Alexandrie, l'Évêque eut
l'occasion de soutenir et de diffuser en Occident, d'abord à Trèves puis à
Rome, la foi nicéenne et également les idéaux du monachisme, embrassés en
Égypte par le grand ermite Antoine, à travers un choix de vie dont Athanase fut
toujours proche. Saint Antoine, avec sa force spirituelle, était la personne
qui soutenait le plus la foi de saint Athanase. Réinstallé définitivement dans
son Siège, l'Evêque d'Alexandrie put se consacrer à la pacification religieuse
et à la réorganisation des communautés chrétiennes. Il mourut le 2 mai 373,
jour où nous célébrons sa mémoire liturgique.
L'oeuvre doctrinale la plus
célèbre du saint Évêque alexandrin est le traité Sur l'incarnation du Verbe, le
Logos divin qui s'est fait chair en devenant comme nous pour notre salut. Dans
cette œuvre, Athanase dit, avec une affirmation devenue célèbre à juste titre,
que le Verbe de Dieu "s'est fait homme pour que nous devenions Dieu; il
s'est rendu visible dans le corps pour que nous ayons une idée du Père
invisible, et il a lui-même supporté la violence des hommes pour que nous
héritions de l'incorruptibilité" (54, 3). En effet, avec sa résurrection
le Seigneur a fait disparaître la mort comme "la paille dans le feu"
(8, 4). L'idée fondamentale de tout le combat théologique de saint Athanase
était précisément celle que Dieu est accessible. Il n'est pas un Dieu
secondaire, il est le vrai Dieu, et, à travers notre communion avec le Christ,
nous pouvons nous unir réellement à Dieu. Il est devenu réellement "Dieu
avec nous".
Parmi les autres œuvres
de ce grand Père de l'Église - qui demeurent en grande partie liées aux
événements de la crise arienne - rappelons ensuite les autres lettres qu'il
adressa à son ami Sérapion, Évêque de Thmuis, sur la divinité de l'Esprit
Saint, qui est affirmée avec netteté, et une trentaine de lettres festales,
adressées en chaque début d'année aux Églises et aux monastères d'Égypte pour
indiquer la date de la fête de Pâques, mais surtout pour assurer les liens
entre les fidèles, en renforçant leur foi et en les préparant à cette grande
solennité.
Enfin, Athanase est
également l'auteur de textes de méditation sur les Psaumes, ensuite largement
diffusés, et d'une œuvre qui constitue le best seller de la littérature
chrétienne antique: la Vie d'Antoine, c'est-à-dire la biographie de saint
Antoine abbé, écrite peu après la mort de ce saint, précisément alors que
l'Évêque d'Alexandrie, exilé, vivait avec les moines dans le désert égyptien.
Athanase fut l'ami du grand ermite, au point de recevoir l'une des deux peaux
de moutons laissées par Antoine en héritage, avec le manteau que l'Évêque
d'Alexandrie lui avait lui-même donné. Devenue rapidement très populaire,
traduite presque immédiatement en latin à deux reprises et ensuite en diverses
langues orientales, la biographie exemplaire de cette figure chère à la
tradition chrétienne contribua beaucoup à la diffusion du monachisme en Orient
et en Occident. Ce n'est pas un hasard si la lecture de ce texte, à Trèves, se
trouve au centre d'un récit émouvant de la conversion de deux fonctionnaires
impériaux, qu'Augustin place dans les Confessions (VIII, 6, 15) comme prémisses
de sa conversion elle-même.
Du reste, Athanase
lui-même montre avoir clairement conscience de l'influence que pouvait avoir
sur le peuple chrétien la figure exemplaire d'Antoine. Il écrit en effet dans
la conclusion de cette œuvre: "Qu'il fut partout connu, admiré par tous et
désiré, également par ceux qui ne l'avaient jamais vu, est un signe de sa vertu
et de son âme amie de Dieu. En effet, ce n'est pas par ses écrits ni par une
sagesse profane, ni en raison de quelque capacité qu'Antoine est connu, mais
seulement pour sa piété envers Dieu. Et personne ne pourrait nier que cela soit
un don de Dieu. Comment, en effet, aurait-on entendu parler en Espagne et en
Gaule, à Rome et en Afrique de cet homme, qui vivait retiré parmi les
montagnes, si ce n'était Dieu lui-même qui l'avait partout fait connaître,
comme il le fait avec ceux qui lui appartiennent, et comme il l'avait annoncé à
Antoine dès le début? Et même si ceux-ci agissent dans le secret et veulent
rester cachés, le Seigneur les montre à tous comme un phare, pour que ceux qui
entendent parler d'eux sachent qu'il est possible de suivre les commandements
et prennent courage pour parcourir le chemin de la vertu" (Vie d'Antoine
93, 5-6).
Oui, frères et soeurs!
Nous avons de nombreux motifs de gratitude envers Athanase. Sa vie, comme celle
d'Antoine et d'innombrables autres saints, nous montre que "celui qui va
vers Dieu ne s'éloigne pas des hommes, mais qu'il se rend au contraire proche
d'eux" (Deus caritas est, n. 42).
* * *
Rencontre avec des groupes
dans la Basilique Saint-Pierre
Chers pèlerins de langue
française,
je vous accueille avec
joie auprès de la tombe de Pierre. Que la démarche spirituelle que vous
accomplissez ici affermisse votre foi au Christ et votre lien avec l’Église.
En vous confiant à
l’intercession de la Bienheureuse Vierge Marie, je vous assure de ma prière
pour vous, pour vos familles et à toutes vos intentions.
* * *
Aula Paolo VI
Je salue cordialement les
pèlerins de langue française. À la lumière de l’enseignement et de la vie des
saints, puissiez-vous découvrir que ceux qui vont vers Dieu ne s’éloignent pas
des hommes, mais qu’ils se rendent au contraire vraiment proches d’eux.
Appel du Pape Benoît XVI
pour la Journée mondiale des Réfugiés
On célèbre aujourd'hui la
Journée mondiale des Réfugiés, promue par les Nations unies pour que
l'attention de l'opinion publique ne manque pas à ceux qui ont été obligés de
fuir de leurs pays à la suite de réels dangers pour leur vie. Accueillir les
réfugiés et leur accorder l'hospitalité représente pour tous un geste juste de
solidarité humaine, afin que ces derniers ne se sentent pas isolés à cause de
l'intolérance et du manque d'intérêt. En outre, il s'agit pour les chrétiens de
manifester l'amour évangélique d'une manière concrète. Je souhaite de tout cœur
que soient garantis l'asile et la reconnaissance de leurs droits à nos frères
et sœurs durement éprouvés par la souffrance, et j'invite les responsables des
nations à offrir leur protection à ceux qui se trouvent dans une situation de
besoin aussi délicate.
© Copyright 2007 - Libreria Editrice Vaticana
Le Créateur devenu
serviteur
Il n’était pas digne de
la bonté de Dieu que des êtres suscités par lui fussent détruits à cause de la
ruse pratiquée par le diable à l’encontre des hommes. D’ailleurs, il eût été
d’une inconvenance totale que l’art mis par Dieu à susciter les hommes fût
anéanti par leur négligence ou par la ruse des démons. Ainsi, les êtres
raisonnables périssant et de telles œuvres étant vouées à leur perte, que
fallait-il que Dieu fît, lui qui est bon ? Permettre à la corruption de
prévaloir sur eux et à la mort de les dominer ? Mais quel profit pour ces
êtres d’avoir été suscités à l’origine ? Il valait mieux ne pas être que
de se trouver abandonnés, et de périr, une fois dans l’être. Car de la négligence
de Dieu on conclurait à sa faiblesse plutôt qu’à sa bonté, si après avoir créé
il laissait périr son œuvre, et cela bien plus que s’il n’avait pas fait
l’homme au commencement.
De qui avait-on besoin
pour cette grâce et cette restauration, sinon du Verbe de Dieu qui au
commencement avait créé toutes choses de rien ? C’était à lui de ramener
le corruptible à l’incorruptibilité, et de trouver ce qui en toutes choses
convenait au Père. Étant le Verbe de Dieu, au-dessus de tout, seul par
conséquent il était capable de recréer toutes choses, de souffrir pour tous les
hommes et d’être au nom de tous un digne ambassadeur auprès du Père.
St Athanase d’Alexandrie
Saint Athanase, évêque
d’Alexandrie († 373) et docteur de l’Église, a été au ive siècle l’un
des plus combattifs défenseurs de la divinité du Christ. / Sur
l’Incarnation du Verbe, 6,5-8, 7,4-5, trad. C. Kannengiesser, Paris, Cerf,
1973, Sources Chrétiennes 199, p. 285.289.
Le Fils de l’homme
aurait-il pu ne pas être livré ?
Dieu a
dit : « Tu es terre et à la terre tu retourneras » (Gn
3, 19). « Mais, dira-t-on, sans même que le Sauveur ne vînt du tout, Dieu
pouvait se contenter de parler et d’annuler la malédiction. » Cependant il
faut noter ce qui bénéficie aux hommes et non ce qui est en toute éventualité
possible à Dieu, puisqu’il pouvait, avant l’arche de Noé, détruire les hommes
qui avaient alors transgressé, mais il le fit après que l’arche fut construite.
Il pouvait, en se dispensant de Moïse, tout juste dire un mot et conduire
le peuple hors d’Égypte, mais il valait mieux le faire par Moïse. Le Sauveur
pouvait venir dès le commencement ou, une fois venu, ne pas être livré à
Pilate, mais c’est à la fin des temps qu’il vint et, quand on le cherchait, il
dit : « C’est moi » (Jn 18, 5).
Si Dieu avait parlé en
vertu de son pouvoir et que la malédiction eut été levée, la puissance de celui
qui émettait l’ordre aurait été montrée, mais l’homme serait néanmoins resté le
même, tel qu’était Adam avant la transgression, recevant la grâce de
l’extérieur et sans l’avoir ajustée au corps (car tel il était, lorsqu’il fut
placé au paradis) ; peut-être même se serait-il détérioré, lorsqu’il
aurait appris à transgresser. Dans cet état, s’il était encore séduit par le
serpent, le besoin survenait à nouveau que Dieu commande et lève la malédiction ;
et de cette façon le besoin survenait à perpétuité, et les hommes n’en
demeuraient pas moins réduits en esclavage, toujours soumis au péché.
St Athanase d’Alexandrie
Saint Athanase, évêque
d’Alexandrie († 373) et docteur de l’Église, a été au ive siècle l’un
des plus combatifs défenseurs de la divinité du Christ. / Traités contre
les ariens, t. II, 67-68, trad. C. Kannengiesser, Paris, Cerf, 2019, Sources
Chrétiennes 599, p. 229-233.
SOURCE : https://fr.aleteia.org/daily-prayer/samedi-30-septembre-2/meditation-de-ce-jour-1/
_-_Athanasios.jpg)
Saint
Athanase d’Alexandrie, Fresque, Hosios Loukas,
Saint Athanase
Fête saint : 02 Mai
Présentation
Titre : Docteur de
l’Église
Date : 373
Pape : Saint Marcellin ;
saint Damase
Empereur : Valentinien ;
Valens
Il était, dit saint
Grégoire de Nazianze, d'une humilité si profonde que nul ne portait cette vertu
plus loin que lui. Doux et affable, il n'y avait personne qui n'eût auprès de
lui un accès facile. Il joignait à une bonté inaltérable, une tendre compassion
pour les malheureux. Ses discours avaient je ne sais quoi d'aimable qui
captivait tous les cœurs ; mais ils faisaient encore moins d'impression que sa
manière de vivre. Ses réprimandes étaient sans amertume, et ses louanges
servaient de leçon ; il savait si bien mesurer les unes et les autres, qu'il
reprenait avec la tendresse d'un père et louait avec la gravité d'un maître. Il
était tout à la fois indulgent sans faiblesse et ferme sans dureté.
La Vie des Saints :
Saint Athanase
Auteur
Mgr Paul Guérin
Les Petits Bollandistes
- Vies des Saints - Septième édition - Bloud et Barral - 1876 -
Saint Athanase
À Alexandrie, le
bienheureux décès de saint Athanase, évêque de la même ville, très-célèbre par
sa sainteté et sa doctrine. L'univers presque entier semblait s'être conjuré
pour le persécuter. De retour, à la fin, dans son église, après beaucoup de
combats et autant de victoires dues à sa constance, il rendit son âme au
Seigneur, la quarante-sixième année de son épiscopat, au temps des empereurs
Valentinien et Valens. ✞ 373
Hagiographie
Une lutte perpétuelle est
l’inévitable condition du bien dans l’humanité déchue. Dieu le fit voir à son
Église, lorsque, après avoir si glorieusement vaincu la persécution, elle eut à
repousser les attaques non moins formidables de l’hérésie. Celle-ci, il est
vrai, dès l’apparition du christianisme, avait cherché à troubler les conquêtes
de la foi ; mais, devant le glaive des tyrans et la gloire des martyrs, elle
avait fait peu de bruit et obtenu peu de succès.
Le lecteur, pour
comprendre la vie d’Athanase, a besoin de connaitre le schisme Mélécien et
l’hérésie arienne. Saint Pierre, prédécesseur d’Achillas sur le siège
d’Alexandrie, par son indulgence envers les chrétiens qui avaient offert de
l’encens aux idoles pour éviter la mort, et qui s’en repentaient, avait déplu
à Mélece, évêque de Lycopolis ; ce dernier se sépara de la communion de Pierre
et forma un schisme ; ses partisans prirent le nom de Méléciens. Arius, qui des
sables de la Libye était venu chercher fortune dans la capitale de l’Égypte, se
joignit à ces schismatiques.
Néanmoins, il parvint à
gagner, par un faux repentir, les bonnes grâces d’Achillas, patriarche
d’Alexandrie, qui l’éleva au sacerdoce et lui confia le gouvernement d’une des
paroisses, nommée Baucolis.
Ce n’était pas assez pour
son ambition : il aspirait au patriarcat ; mais saint Alexandre lui fut
justement préféré, pour sa piété, sa charité envers les pauvres, sa science
sacrée et son éloquence. Blessé dans son orgueil et voulant à toute fin jouer
un rôle dans le monde, il se fit le chef d’une nouvelle doctrine, qui fut
bientôt déclarée hérétique. Il enseignait que Jésus-Christ n’est point Dieu,
mais une simple créature, plus parfaite à la vérité que les autres, et formée
avant elles, non pas cependant de toute éternité. Or, si Jésus-Christ n’est pas
Dieu, à quoi aboutissent les espérances des chrétiens ? Il ne négligea rien
pour répandre ces erreurs dans le peuple ; il les mit en chansons pour les
ouvriers, les meuniers, les matelots, les voyageurs. Alexandre, n’ayant pu
ramener cet hérésiarque par les voies de la douceur, le fit condamner par un
concile tenu à Alexandrie, et écrivit aux évêques qui n’avaient pu y assister,
pour leur en faire connaitre les décisions.
Jamais, peut-être, aucun
chef d’hérésie ne posséda à un plus haut degré qu’Arius les qualités propres à
ce maudit et funeste rôle. Instruit dans les lettres et dans la philosophie des
Grecs, doué d’une rare souplesse de dialectique et de langage, il excellait à
donner à l’erreur les traits et le charme de la vérité. Son extérieur aidait à
la séduction. D’un âge déjà avancé, il joignait à l’avantage d’une haute taille
la dignité du vieillard. Son orgueil se dérobait sous un vêtement simple, sous
un visage modeste, recueilli, mortifié, qui lui donnait un faux air de
sainteté, et avec lequel il savait allier un abord gracieux, un ton doux et
insinuant.
Banni du sanctuaire, il
quitte Alexandrie, où il s’est déjà fait de nombreux partisans, et va demander
asile à Eusèbe, évêque de Césarée, métropole de la Palestine. Celui-ci était
l’un des plus savants hommes de son siècle, et auteur d’excellents ouvrages,
pour lesquels la postérité a partagé l’admiration de ses contemporains. Arius
sut lui faire goûter sa doctrine et l’intéresser à sa cause avec plusieurs
autres évêques. Parmi eux se signala un second Eusèbe, parent, dit-on, de la
famille impériale, qui, de sa propre autorité, avait osé abandonner le siège
dédaigné de Béryte, en Judée, pour celui de Nicomédie, séjour ordinaire des
empereurs d’Orient. Sa naissance, sa position, ses talents, ses qualités
extérieures lui donnaient un crédit et un ascendant dont ses sentiments le
rendaient indigne. Il avait apostasié dans la persécution. Condisciple d’Arius,
on l’a soupçonné d’avoir été son secret conseiller, avant de se faire son
protecteur déclaré. Quoi qu’il en soit, bravant encore une fois les règles de
la discipline et de l’ordre hiérarchique, il prit hautement le parti du
sectaire contre le digne patriarche, dont la réputation et le rang offusquaient
son orgueil. Ayant fait venir Arius à Nicomédie, il se concerta avec lui, et
écrivit en sa faveur aux évêques pour obtenir son rétablissement. Alexandre fut
inébranlable dans sa décision, comme il l’était dans sa foi.
Cette scission
scandaleuse agita et troubla l’église d’Orient. Constantin en fut sensiblement
affligé. Mais l’évêque courtisan de Nicomédie lui fit entendre qu’il ne
s’agissait entre Alexandre et Arius que d’une vaine dispute de mots, dont le
tort devait être surtout attribué au zèle amer et inflexible du premier. Ce
fut dans ces préjugés que l’empereur écrivit à l’un et à l’autre, par Osius,
évêque de Cordoue, qu’il députa en Égypte pour régler ce différend. Osius était
le prélat le plus vénéré de cette époque. Il avait souffert courageusement pour
la foi, avait initié Constantin à la connaissance des vérités du
christianisme, et l’on croit qu’il était venu alors en Orient de la part de
l’évêque de Rome, traiter avec l’empereur des affaires de l’Église. La lettre du
prince se terminait par de touchantes exhortations, qui attestent son zèle
sincère pour la foi ainsi que la bonté de son cœur :
« Rendez-moi des jours
sereins et des nuits tranquilles. Si vos divisions continuent, je serai réduit
à gémir, à verser des larmes ; il n’y aura plus pour moi de repos. Où en
trouverais-je, si ceux qui servent avec moi le vrai Dieu, se déchirent si
opiniâtrement ? Je voulais vous aller visiter, mon cœur était déjà avec vous ;
vos discordes m’ont fermé le chemin de l’Orient. Réunissez vous pour me le
rouvrir, donnez-moi la joie de vous voir heureux, comme tous les peuples de mon
empire ».
Ces accents d’un père ne
furent point écoutés. Le désordre augmentait de jour en jour. L’hérésie, comme
partout et toujours, se montra violente et rebelle. Il y eut des émeutes.
Constantin prononça, à cette occasion, un mot justement célèbre. Dans une
ville, les Ariens s’étaient emportés jusqu’à jeter des pierres à la face d’une
de ses statues. Comme ses ministres l’excitaient à tirer vengeance de cet
affront, lui, portant la main à son visage, leur répondit en souriant :
« Je ne me sens pas
blessé ».
La mission de l’évêque de
Cordoue ne fut pas néanmoins sans résultat. Il comprit, d’un côté, toute la
gravité de la controverse ; de l’autre, l’erreur et la mauvaise foi d’Arius ;
et, en les faisant connaître à l’empereur, il lui inspira une grande pensée :
celle de convoquer les évêques de toute la chrétienté, pour donner à la vérité
attaquée l’autorité d’une irrécusable décision. Les Apôtres n’avaient-ils pas
agi ainsi pour terminer la contestation sur les observances mosaïques ?
Au reste, c’était la
première fois, depuis l’extension de l’Évangile, que les circonstances
permettaient de, recourir à ce moyen extraordinaire. On se trouvait à la fin de
324, l’année même de la défaite et de la mort de Licinius, indigne beau-frère
de Constantin, le dernier des survivants de cette funeste ligue de pâtres
parvenus, de monstres débauchés et cruels, qui, pendant près d’un demi-siècle,
s’enivrèrent à l’envi du sang chrétien et dévorèrent la substance des peuples.
Maintenant, sous le doux et glorieux sceptre de Constantin, l’empire se
réjouissait d’une liberté, d’une prospérité inaccoutumée, et s’étonnait de voir
réunis autour de ce prince les ambassadeurs de toutes les nations de
l’univers, qui admiraient ses vertus et redoutaient ses armes, auxquelles la
victoire ne fut jamais infidèle. Dans un de ces moments trop rares et trop
courts pour le bonheur de l’humanité, le monde entier était en paix.
Dès le printemps de
l’année 325, sur l’invitation et avec l’aide du puissant empereur, qui s’était
concerté avec le chef de l’Église, les évêques de toutes les parties du monde
se rendirent en Asie, dans la ville de Nicée, voisine de Nicomédie. Le peuple
fidèle, ému par la nouveauté et l’importance du débat qu’ils allaient
terminer, et la réputation de leurs vertus, accourait sur leur passage, se
prosternait devant eux et les accompagnait de ses vœux et de ses espérances.
Constantin, qui les avait précédés à Nicée, les y accueillit avec la dignité
qui le caractérisait, et, en même temps, avec les plus touchants témoignages de
foi, de déférence et d’affection. Combien ils méritaient cet empressement, ces
hommages des populations et du premier empereur chrétien, des hommes dont la
plupart, outre leur caractère sacré, commandaient le respect et l’admiration
par leur âge, leur courageuse fidélité dans la persécution, leur science et
leur sainteté ! Celui-ci, ancien solitaire, avait été arraché malgré lui au
désert, dont il conservait, dans les dignités, les habitudes simples et
austères ; celui-là était célèbre par ses miracles ; plusieurs portaient encore
sur leurs membres ou sur leur visage les stigmates du martyre. Quels plus
dignes interprètes du grand mystère de la sainte Trinité !
Ces prélats, sans compter
les prêtres, les diacres et les laïques éclairés qui les assistaient, se
trouvèrent réunis au nombre de trois cent dix-huit, parmi lesquels on n’en
compta que dix-sept infectés d’arianisme. Pendant deux mois, depuis le 19 juin
jusqu’au 25 août, ils tinrent, sur différentes questions de dogme et de
discipline, de nombreuses et longues conférences. Arius exposa sa doctrine. En
l’entendant proférer ces nouveautés impies, les Pères du concile se bouchaient
les oreilles. Il leur fallut un grand effort de raison et de prudence pour
consentir à les examiner. Enfin, la question fut approfondie et discutée des
deux côtés avec toute la science et toute l’habileté que chacun pouvait
désirer. On en remit la décision à une séance solennelle, qui eut lieu, en
présence de l’empereur, dans la plus vaste salle de son palais. Les évêques
étaient rangés sur des sièges disposés autour de cette enceinte. Un trône
s’élevait au milieu : on y déposa le livre des Évangiles. Osius présidait
l’assemblée au nom du Pape, que son âge, ses infirmités et les exigences de son
rang avaient retenu à Rome. Dans le fond de la salle, un siège vide, moins
élevé que les autres, mais tout resplendissant d’or, était destiné à
l’empereur. À neuf heures du matin, il se présente sans armes, sans soldats,
accompagné seulement de quelques dignitaires qui professaient le christianisme.
À sa vue, les Pères du concile, qui l’attendaient en silence, se lèvent et se
tiennent debout. Tout, dans le maintien, l’air et la taille de Constantin,
montrait l’homme supérieur aux autres hommes par les heureux dons de la
nature ; comme il l’était par l’éminence de sa dignité. À cinquante ans, il
avait encore l’éclat et les grâces de la jeunesse. La franchise de son
caractère et la pureté de ses mœurs reluisaient sur son front serein. Il
s’avance au milieu de cette assemblée la plus sainte et la plus auguste qu’on
eût jamais vue sous le ciel, avec une magnificence de vêtement qui annonce le
maître de l’empire, avec un respect et une modestie qui révèlent le chrétien.
Arrivé devant son siège, il attendit, pour y prendre place, d’y être invité par
les évêques, qui s’assirent après lui. Alors s’engagea entre les Pères du
concile une discussion d’où sortit la foudre qui terrassa l’hérésie. Les
blasphèmes d’Arius ne tinrent plus devant le terme de consubstantiel,
expression aussi concise qu’énergique de l’unité de nature dans les trois
personnes divines. L’univers répéta avec transport le symbole de Nicée,
magnifique développement du symbole des Apôtres, hymne sublime de foi, d’amour
et de reconnaissance. Les évêques ariens le souscrivirent, après plus ou moins
de résistance, avec plus au moins de bonne foi, à l’exception de deux, qui
furent déposés par le concile, et, avec Arius, condamnés, par l’empereur, au
bannissement : châtiment dû aux téméraires violateurs des lois de la plus haute
société qui ait paru sur la terre.
Dans ce débat solennel,
au milieu de ces vénérables et savants prélats, de ces glorieux athlètes de la
foi, on vit se lever, par leur conseil et à leur grande joie, un jeune lévite,
qui lutta corps à corps avec Arius. Par la supériorité de sa raison, par la
connaissance approfondie et l’intelligence des livres saints, par la lucidité
et la force de l’argumentation, par la chaleur d’une éloquence simple, vraie et
naturelle, il repoussa les audacieuses attaques de ce redoutable adversaire,
déjoua toutes ses ruses, le poursuivit dans tous ses détours, et le confondit,
en éclairant de la plus vive lumière ses plus ténébreux retranchements. Il ne
charma pas moins le concile par sa modestie, par la sincérité de sa foi et de
son dévouement que par l’éclat de sa victoire ; car ce jeune homme aimait
l’Église plus que le plus tendre fils n’aime sa mère, plus que jamais ni Grec
ni Romain n’aima sa patrie : nous avons nommé Athanase.
Enfant d’une famille
distinguée et chrétienne d’Alexandrie, il s’était attaché de bonne heure à
saint Alexandre, qui l’avait élevé et le chérissait comme un fils.
La première rencontre de
saint Athanase avec saint Alexandre eut un caractère tout providentiel. Dans
les premiers temps de son pontificat, dit Rufin, le saint patriarche Alexandre
avait convié tous les clercs de son église, un dimanche soir, à un repas qu’il
voulait leur donner dans sa maison, située sur le bord de la mer. Après les
solennités du jour, Alexandre, en attendant ses hôtes, avait les yeux fixés sur
le rivage, lorsqu’il aperçut un groupe d’enfants qui se livraient aux jeux de
leur âge. Ils avaient élu un évêque ; ils le firent asseoir au milieu d’eux et
écoutèrent gravement ses paroles ; puis ils s’inclinèrent sous sa main
bénissante, et le pontife-enfant imita sur quelques-uns de ses compagnons
toutes les cérémonies du baptême. À cette vue, Alexandre craignit une
profanation ; il envoya son diacre, avec ordre de lui amener les enfants. En
présence du véritable évêque, ceux-ci eurent peur et ne répondirent qu’en
balbutiant à toutes ses interrogations. Enfin, rassurés par l’air de douceur et
de bonté qui se peignait sur son visage, ils lui dirent qu’ils avaient élu un
d’entre eux, Athanase, pour évêque ; que celui-ci avait des catéchumènes
instruits par ses soins, auxquels il venait de conférer le baptême. L’enfant
qui répondait au nom d’Athanase parut alors, mais avec une confusion facile à
deviner. Le patriarche lui demanda s’il avait réellement administré le baptême
selon les rites de l’Église et avec l’intention de conférer un sacrement. La
réponse d’Athanase fut affirmative ; il répéta devant le patriarche les
formules qu’il avait employées. Saint Alexandre donna l’ordre à ses prêtres de
suppléer aux néophytes ainsi baptisés les autres cérémonies de l’Église, mais
sans renouveler le baptême, « parce qu’il avait été validement conféré ».
À partir de ce jour, Athanase et ceux de ses compagnons qui remplissaient près
de sa personne les fonctions de prêtres et de diacre, furent élevés, du
consentement de leurs parents, dans l’école ecclésiastique d’Alexandrie.
Athanase y fit de rapides progrès.
Athanase s’occupa de
bonne heure à bien écrire. Il n’accorda que peu de temps aux lettres profanes,
assez cependant pour ne pas y rester complétement étranger, et pour que l’on
ne pût attribuer à l’ignorance le rang subalterne où elles étaient reléguées
dans son estime. Ce noble et mâle génie répugnait à consumer ses efforts dans
des études vaines.
Les études qui se
rapportaient à la religion employaient la plus grande partie de son temps. La
suite de sa vie et la lecture de ses écrits feront voir jusqu’à quel point il y
excellait. Il cite si souvent et si à propos les livres saints qu’on croirait
qu’il les savait par cœur : au moins conviendra-t-on que la méditation les lui
avait rendus très-familiers. C’était là qu’il avait puisé cette rare piété et
cette profonde intelligence des mystères de la foi. Quant au vrai sens des
oracles divins, il le cherchait dans la tradition de l’Église, et il nous
apprend lui-même qu’il lisait avec soin les commentaires des anciens Pères. Il
dit dans un autre endroit, qu’il apprenait la tradition des saints maitres
inspirés et des martyrs de la divinité de Jésus-Christ. Comme il avait beaucoup
de zèle pour la discipline de l’Église, il acquit aussi une grande connaissance
du droit canonique. On voit encore par ses ouvrages qu’il savait le droit
civil, et c’est ce qui lui a fait donner par Sulpice-Sévère le titre de
jurisconsulte.
Pour aliment de sa
pensée, il choisit l’Ancien et le Nouveau Testament. A ces habitudes de
contemplation se joignirent des trésors de vertu, chaque jour augmentés. La
science et les mœurs brillant chez Athanase d’un éclat pareil et se fortifiant
mutuellement, formèrent cette chaîne d’or, dont si peu d’hommes réussirent à
ourdir le double et précieux fil. La pratique du bien l’initiait à la
contemplation, et la contemplation à son tour lé guidait dans la pratique du
bien.
Quand il eut achevé ses
études littéraires, le désir d’avancer dans les voies de la perfection le
conduisit aux pieds du fameux solitaire saint Antoine. Il resta quelques années
sous sa direction, et revint près du patriarche Alexandre, qui l’éleva au
diaconat et l’employa comme secrétaire. C’est ainsi, ajoute Rufin, qu’Athanase,
nouveau Samuel, fut attaché à la personne du grand prêtre, jusqu’à ce qu’il fut
plus tard appelé à l’honneur de revêtir lui-même l’éphod pontifical.
Athanase n’était encore
que diacre, lorsque le patriarche l’amena avec lui au concile de Nicée. Mais,
aussitôt après, il fut ordonné prêtre, et, l’année suivante, l’auguste
vieillard, se sentant près de mourir, le désigna pour son successeur. Athanase
se cacha, pour se dérober, lui si jeune, à une telle dignité.
« Tu fuis » ; dit le
saint avant d’expirer, « tu fuis, Athanase, mais tu n’échapperas pas ».
Ces paroles furent un
oracle. Le peuple demanda instamment et obtint des évêques assemblés que le jeune
prêtre fût nommé évêque d’Alexandrie. Il avait à peine trente ans ; mais, dans
les circonstances où se trouvait cette église, le génie, la science et la
sainteté n’avaient pas besoin du nombre des années. Ce choix fit frémir
l’hérésie, qui, pour être vaincue, n’avait pas renoncé à ses espérances. Le
jour n’est pas loin, où, par de cauteleuses démarches, par d’artificieuses
professions de foi, elle saura gagner la faveur du prince : et, une fois armée
de l’autorité publique, jusqu’où n’iront pas son audace et ses excès ?
Athanase, quels combats, quelles épreuves vous attendent !
Athanase signala les
commencements de son épiscopat par son attention à pourvoir aux besoins
spirituels des Éthiopiens. Il sacra Frumence évêque, et le leur envoya, afin
qu’il pût achever l’œuvre de leur conversion, qu’il avait si heureusement
commencée ; et lorsqu’il eut établi un bon ordre dans l’intérieur de la ville,
il entreprit la visite générale des églises de sa dépendance.
Les Méléciens donnèrent
beaucoup d’exercice à son zèle. Ils continuèrent, après la mort de Mélèce,
leur chef, de tenir des assemblées et d’ordonner des évêques de leur propre
autorité. Partout ils soufflaient le feu de la discorde, et par là ils
entretenaient le peuple dans l’esprit de révolte. Athanase essaya tous les
moyens possibles pour les ramener à l’unité ; mais il n’y en eut aucun qui lui
réussit. Austères dans leur morale, ils s’étaient fait un grand nombre de
partisans, surtout parmi les gens simples, auxquels ils en avaient imposé. Les
Ariens résolurent de profiter des dispositions où ils les voyaient : ils
s’empressèrent donc de rechercher leur amitié. Les Méléciens n’avaient d’abord
erré dans aucun article de la foi ; ils avaient même été des premiers et des
plus ardents à combattre la doctrine d’Arius ; mais bientôt après ils s’unirent
aux partisans de cet hérésiarque pour calomnier et persécuter Athanase. Il se
forma entre eux une ligue solennelle, afin que les coups qu’ils lui porteraient
fussent plus efficaces. Saint Athanase fait observer à ce sujet, que comme
Hérode et Pilate oublièrent la haine qu’ils se portaient mutuellement pour se
réunir contre le Sauveur, de même les Méléciens et les Ariens dissimulèrent
leur animosité réciproque afin de former une espèce de confédération contre la
vérité. Au reste, voilà l’esprit de tous les sectaires ; ils font cesser leurs
divisions lorsqu’il s’agit de déchirer le sein de l’Église et de déclarer la
guerre à ceux qui tiennent pour la doctrine catholique.
Constantin donna bientôt
de nouvelles preuves de son attachement à la foi de Nicée. Trois mois après la
conclusion du concile, il exila avec indignation Eusèbe de Nicomédie, qui
osait en attaquer les décisions et communiquait ouvertement avec ceux qui s’y
montraient rebelles.
Mais quels sombres nuages
ont voilé tout à coup la gloire jusque-là si pure et si brillante du grand
Constantin ! Quoi I d’un prince ordinairement si doux et si prudent, l’histoire
raconte des actes irréfléchis et barbares, des meurtres domestiques ! Et puis,
sous ce même prince, qui, jusqu’à son dernier soupir, ne cessa d’avoir horreur
de l’hérésie, les hérétiques sont honorés, triomphants et les catholiques
repoussés, persécutés ! Quelle est donc la triste condition de l’humanité
déchue ? Quel impur alliage est venu souiller tout à coup en lui l’or pur de la
charité chrétienne ?
Pour comble de malheur,
il perdit sa mère, la glorieuse sainte Hélène, lorsque, à la veille des plus
astucieuses machinations de l’erreur, les conseils et l’influence de cette
mère plus éclairée que lui dans la foi, eussent été si nécessaires et auraient
prévenu sans doute de nouvelles fautes.
Lorsque sainte Hélène ne
fut plus, toute la tendresse de famille et la confiance de l’empereur se
concentrèrent sur sa sœur Constancie, veuve de Licinius. Celle-ci d’ailleurs,
femme de mérite et de vertu, s’était depuis longtemps laissé entêter de l’arianisme
par Eusèbe de Nicomédie, qui avait été le partisan de Licinius, et par un
prêtre dont l’histoire a dédaigné le nom. Près de rendre le dernier soupir, un
an environ après la mort de sainte Hélène, ·elle signala à Constantin ce prêtre
obscur comme le plus propre à le diriger dans les affaires de la religion.
« Suivez ses avis »,
dit-elle, « je meurs, aucun intérêt ne m’attache plus à la terre, mais je
crains pour vous la colère de Dieu, je crains qu’il ne vous punisse de l’exil
auquel vous avez condamné des hommes justes et vertueux ».
Ces conseils d’une sœur
chérie et mourante ne furent que trop écoutés. Arius est rappelé avec les
évêques exilés pour sa cause, moyennant quelque équivoque ou mensongère
profession de foi. Rétabli sur son siège de Nicomédie, et dans tout son crédit,
Eusèbe ne sera satisfait qu’autant qu’Arius aura reparu et repris ses fonctions
dans l’église d’Alexandrie. Pour l’obtenir, il emploie inutilement auprès
d’Athanase et les sollicitations et les menaces. Inutilement, il lui fait écrire
par l’empereur. Le patriarche est alors en butte à toutes les calomnies. Mandé
à la cour, il se justifie avec une telle évidence, que Constantin, en le
congédiant, lui remet une lettre adressée au peuple d’Alexandrie, où, après
avoir déploré la malice de ceux qui troublent et divisent l’Église pour
satisfaire leur jalousie et leur ambition, il ajoute que les méchants n’ont
rien pu contre leur évêque, dont il a reconnu l’innocence et la sainteté.
Il fallut donc se taire
et dissimuler pendant quelque temps. Mais bientôt les calomnies recommencent
avec un acharnement effronté. La cabale que dirige Eusèbe est en même temps la
plus fourbe et la plus audacieuse qui fût jamais. Protestant de son adhésion à
la foi catholique, ce n’est plus la doctrine, mais le caractère et la conduite
d’Athanase qu’elle attaque ; c’est de crimes qu’elle l’accuse. Et de quels
crimes ? De meurtres, d’opérations magiques, d’impures violences.
Athanase a beau se
justifier encore devant l’empereur, qui, après informations prises auprès des
magistrats d’Égypte, s’irrite de ces odieuses inventions, et menace, si elles
se renouvellent, d’en chercher les auteurs. L’intrigant Eusèbe obtient la
convocation d’un concile particulier à Césarée, résidence du second Eusèbe,
sous prétexte de mettre fin aux divisions, mais au fond pour y faire condamner
le patriarche d’Alexandrie, et il a soin d’y faire appeler en majorité ses
partisans. Aussi Athanase refuse-t-il pendant trois ans de comparaître devant
des juges qui sont ses ennemis ; mais en 344, sur les ordres formels de
l’empereur, à qui on l’a dépeint comme un homme superbe et un sujet rebelle, il
est obligé de se rendre à Tyr, où le synode a été transféré.
Parmi les imputations
déjà détruites, on osa, comme Athanase l’avait prévu, reproduire celles-là
mêmes dont l’invraisemblance seule aurait dû montrer la fausseté.
Une femme fut entendue,
qui déclara qu’elle s’était consacrée à Dieu par vœu de virginité ; mais que,
ayant logé dans sa maison l’évêque Athanase, celui-ci n’avait pas rougi d’outrager
les droits sacrés de l’hospitalité et les droits plus saints encore de la
pudeur. Athanase innocent était aussi trop habile pour se laisser confondre par
cette facile et banale accusation. L’ayant ouïe, il demeura immobile à sa
place, tandis que Timothée, un de ses prêtres, et son confident, se lève, et,
s’avançant vers l’impudente :
« Quoi », lui dit-il, «
c’est moi qui ai commis un tel crime ? »
« Oui, c’est vous
», s’écrie-t-elle avec force, « s’agitant, tout en pleurs, et les cheveux
épars, c’est vous-même, je vous reconnais ».
Et elle indiquait avec
assurance toutes les circonstances de l’attentat imaginé. Cette flagrante
imposture fut accueillie par un rire général, et la misérable ignominieusement
éconduite, malgré les instances d’Athanase, pour qu’on la retînt, afin de lui
faire révéler les auteurs de cette trame malencontreuse.
Mais voici un autre
prétendu forfait.
Arsène, évêque d’une
ville de la Thébaïde et l’un des sectateurs de Mélèce, cet évêque schismatique
dont Arius avait embrassé le parti avant de se faire lui-même chef d’hérésie,
avait disparu tout à coup. Les Méléciens, que les Ariens avaient su gagner à
leur cause, accusèrent Athanase de l’avoir fait mourir. Pour preuve, ils
portaient et montraient de ville en ville une main droite d’homme, prétendant
que c’était celle d’Arsène, dont le patriarche avait voulu se servir pour des
opérations magiques. À la vue de cette main desséchée, les membres du concile
furent saisis, les uns d’horreur, vraie ou feinte, pour l’attentat, les autres
d’indignation contre les machinateurs de l’affreuse calomnie. Athanase, qui
s’était préparé à y donner un éclatant démenti, seul ne fut point ému.
Aussitôt, il envoie prendre un homme qui attendait à la porte, et qui entre,
couvert d’un manteau. C’était Arsène lui-même, dont Athanase était parvenu à
découvrir la retraite au fond de quelque désert, et qu’il avait fait amener
secrètement à Tyr. Plusieurs des assistants connaissaient parfaitement Arsène :
sa présence fut un coup de foudre. Athanase s’étant approché de lui et
soulevant peu à peu son manteau, découvre d’abord la main gauche, puis la main
droite.
« Voilà », dit-il »,
Arsène avec ses deux mains, le Créateur ne nous en a pas donné davantage. Que
mon adversaire montre où l’on a pris la troisième ».
Cӎtait trop de confusion
pour les accusateurs d’Athanase ; à cette fois, ils ne lui pardonnèrent ni leur
supercherie et leur sottise, ni son habileté et son innocence. Cette confusion
se change tout à coup en aveugles transports de colère, et la délibération en
un affreux tumulte. Si cette main n’est pas la main d’Arsène, si Arsène est
vivant, c’est l’effet de quelque sortilège, c’est un nouveau coup de magie, un
nouveau grief contre Athanase. Leur fureur est telle qu’ils se seraient portés
contre lui aux dernières violences, sans le gouverneur de la Palestine qui
l’arracha de leurs mains, et, pour le mettre en sûreté, l’engagea à s’embarquer
la nuit suivante. Athanase fait voile vers Constantinople et va demander
justice à l’empereur.
Les autres chefs d’accusation
ne furent pas mieux établis. Qu’importe ? La décision fut telle qu’on la devait
attendre d’une assemblée délibérant sous la pression des Eusébiens et des
Méléciens réunis, et de la force armée que l’empereur avait mise à leur
disposition. Des troupes stationnaient autour de l’enceinte sacrée : ce
n’étaient plus des diacres, mais des soldats ou des geôliers qui en ouvraient
les portes. Athanase fut condamné et déposé par des juges malintentionnés,
intimidés ou trompés. Dans la crainte que l’empereur ne voulût pas croire aux
crimes qu’on lui imputait, on eut soin de donner pour dernier motif de cette
condamnation qu’Athanase, par son orgueil et l’inflexibilité de son caractère,
était une cause de division et de troubles dans l’Église d’Alexandrie.
Toutefois, de nombreuses et courageuses voix vengèrent Athanase de l’injustice
dont il était victime. Le concile se composait de cent neuf évêques ;
quarante-neuf rendirent témoignage de son innocence et de ses vertus, et
protestèrent contre l’iniquité de ce jugement.
Dès l’ouverture du
concile, le vertueux Potamon, évêque d’Héraclée sur le Nil, voyant Athanase
debout devant les autres évêques assis, dans l’attitude d’un accusé devant ses
juges, ne put retenir ses larmes et son indignation :
« Quoi, Eusèbe », dit-il
à l’évêque de Césarée, « vous êtes assis, vous, pour juger Athanase qui est
innocent ! »
« Dites-moi,
n’étions-nous pas tous deux en prison pendant la persécution ? J’y perdis un
œil, vous voilà avec tous vos membres : comment en êtes-vous sorti ? ».
Ainsi, cet Eusèbe, aussi
bien que le premier, avait apostasié pendant les dernières épreuves.
L’illustre confesseur,
saint Paphnuce, ancien disciple de saint Antoine et alors évêque dans la haute
Thébaïde, celui auquel Constantin rendit tant d’honneurs au concile de Nicée,
prenant par la main saint Maxime de Jérusalem, son compagnon de martyre,
l’entraîna hors du concile en lui disant qu’après avoir souffert ensemble pour
Jésus-Christ, ils ne devaient pas siéger dans l’assemblée des méchants. Il
l’instruisit ensuite de toute la conspiration qu’on lui avait dissimulée et
l’attacha pour toujours à la cause d’Athanase.
Il restait à lever
l’anathème dont le concile œcuménique avait frappé Arius et à le rétablir dans
l’église d’Alexandrie. Mais un ordre de l’empereur ayant appelé tout à coup
les évêques à Jérusalem pour la dédicace de l’église du Saint-Sépulcre, qui
venait d’être terminée, ils reprirent dans cette ville la suite de leurs
délibérations. Arius présenta une profession de foi accompagnée de lettres de
recommandation de l’empereur, à qui cette profession avait paru orthodoxe. Le
concile se hâta de l’approuver et de prononcer la réunion à l’Église d’Arius
et de tous ceux qui avaient suivi son parti.
Cependant, Athanase,
réfugié à Constantinople, ne pouvait arriver jusqu’à l’empereur. Les Eusébiens
lui fermaient également les avenues du palais et le cœur du prince. Mais
Athanase, par une démarche hardie, déjoua l’opposition de ses ennemis.
L’empereur entrait un jour à cheval dans la ville. Athanase s’approche de lui,
et comme l’empereur, déjà prévenu par les décisions du concile de Tyr, avait
peine à l’écouter :
« Prince », lui dit-il, «
Dieu jugera entre vous et moi, puisque, prenant parti pour mes calomniateurs,
vous refusez de m’entendre. Je ne sollicite aucune faveur. Qu’on me confronte
seulement devant vous avec ceux qui m’ont condamné ».
Cette réclamation était
trop conforme aux principes d’équité et de modération de l’empereur pour
n’être pas accueillie. L’invitation de se rendre aussitôt à Constantinople pour
y exposer les motifs de la condamnation du patriarche d’Alexandrie, consterna
les évêques qui l’avaient prononcée et qui se trouvaient encore réunis à
Jérusalem. Mais les chefs du parti furent assez habiles pour les engager à
rentrer dans leurs églises après s’être fait déléguer eux-mêmes pour
représenter leurs collègues auprès de l’empereur.
Là, les fourbes
eurent-ils le front de répéter les accusations auxquelles Athanase avait déjà
donné de si foudroyants démentis ? Non ; ils en improvisèrent une nouvelle
dont le succès était infaillible. Athanase, dirent-ils à l’empereur, a menacé
d’arriver en Égypte le blé destiné à l’approvisionnement de Constantinople.
C’était attaquer Constantin par l’endroit le plus sensible, lui que rien ne
préoccupait, en ce moment, comme la prospérité de la ville dont il avait jeté
les fondements, en 328, sur les rives enchantées du Bosphore, et dont il
voulait faire la première ville du monde.
Malgré les dénégations
formelles d’Athanase, l’empereur, qui connaissait l’ascendant du patriarche
dans toute l’Égypte, crut à une calomnie qu’Eusèbe accompagnait de serments et
l’exila à Trêves, alors la capitale des Gaules. Injustement accusé, Athanase
s’était défendu sans crainte ; injustement condamné, il obéit sans murmure.
La terre de l’exil fut
douce et hospitalière. La vénération des peuples, l’affection de saint Maximin,
évêque de cette ville, la bienveillance et les égards du jeune Constantin, qui
commandait pour son père dans l’Occident, consolèrent le glorieux athlète de
la vérité, de la disgrâce du prince et de l’acharnement de ses ennemis.
La nouvelle de la
condamnation et du bannissement d’Athanase répandit parmi l’ardente et fidèle
population d’Alexandrie une irritation qui put à peine se contenir. Les villes
et les· campagnes de l’Égypte, les solitudes mêmes de la Thébaïde en furent
émues. Mille voix s’élevèrent de toutes parts, et parmi ces voix, la plus
vénérée de ce temps, celle de saint Antoine, pour demander le rappel de
l’illustre patriarche ; mais rien ne put faire revenir Constantin d’une mesure
qui, justifiée par l’autorité d’un concile, lui était d’ailleurs inspirée par
son aversion pour les divisions entre les chrétiens. Il espérait que l’absence
momentanée d’Athanase calmerait les esprits et finirait par ramener l’union et
la paix dans l’église d’Orient. Au reste, Athanase lui-même s’est plu à
reconnaître sur ce point la rectitude d’intention de Constantin. Ce prince
refusa d’ailleurs de le remplacer par un évêque du choix des Eusébiens avec une
résolution et des menaces qui les firent renoncer à leur entreprise.
Les décisions du concile
de Jérusalem ne devaient pas longtemps porter bonheur au superbe Arius :
Alexandrie le repoussa avec horreur. Rappelé par l’empereur à Constantinople,
les Eusébiens se flattèrent de donner plus d’éclat à son triomphe en le faisant
rétablir dans l’église même de la résidence impériale. Mais là se rencontra,
pour s’opposer à son intrusion, un autre Alexandre qui honorait son nom par les
mêmes vertus, la même pureté et la même fermeté de foi que le patriarche
d’Égypte, qui le premier bannit de l’Église le prêtre indocile. Ni prières ni
menaces ne purent déterminer l’évêque de Constantinople à ouvrir à
l’hérésiarque les portes du sanctuaire. Nécessité fut alors aux sectaires de
recourir à l’autorité de l’empereur, qui, avant d’intervenir, voulut s’assurer
lui-même des véritables sentiments d’Arius. Celui-ci renouvelle devant le
prince ses équivoques professions de foi.
« Jurez, lui dit
Constantin, que votre croyance est conforme aux décrets de Nicée ».
Arius jura.
« S’il en est ainsi,
reprit l’empereur, allez en toute assurance ; mais si votre foi trahit votre
serment, que Dieu vous juge ».
Il fait appeler aussitôt
saint Alexandre ; lui communique les protestations d’orthodoxie qu’Arius vient
de réitérer sous la foi du serment, et ajoute qu’il faut tendre la main à un
homme qui demande à se sauver. L’évêque représente que l’hérésiarque, n’ayant
rétracté aucune de ses erreurs, le recevoir dans l’Église ce serait y
introduire l’hérésie elle-même. L’empereur s’irrite, le Saint garde un silence
tout à la fois digne et respectueux, et se retire, abandonnant de plus en plus
dans son cœur sa cause à Dieu.
Déjà, depuis sept jours,
par son conseil et, celui de l’illustre évêque de Nisibe, saint Jacques, doué
du don de prophétie et de miracles, qui se trouvait en ce moment à
Constantinople les catholiques imploraient, dans le jeûne et dans les larmes,
la protection du ciel contre l’audacieuse entreprise de l’erreur. Sorti du
palais impérial dans une profonde affliction, l’évêque va se jeter au pied des
autels et demande instamment à Dieu d’épargner à son Église un tel scandale.
C’était un samedi. Eusèbe, à la tête de ses partisans, voulut préluder par une
ovation publique à l’installation solennelle de l’intrus, fixée au lendemain.
La multitude des Ariens grossissait de rue en rue, tandis qu’Arius excitait
leur enthousiasme par de vains et insolents discours. Parvenu à l’entrée de la
place de Constantin, d’où l’on apercevait le temple où devait se consommer son
triomphe, il pâlit tout à coup, et saisi de violentes douleurs d’entrailles, il
est obligé de s’écarter de la foule. On le trouve bientôt expirant dans le lieu
secret où il s’était retiré : digne fin d’une vie d’orgueil et de sacrilège
hypocrisie. La justice et la patience de Dieu n’attendent pas toujours
l’éternité pour punir.
Plusieurs Ariens se
convertirent ; Constantin vit dans ce tragique événement le châtiment du
parjure et s’attacha de plus en plus à la foi de Nicée. Le lendemain, les
catholiques célébraient en paix et pleins de joie les divins mystères et leur
délivrance miraculeuse. Le bannissement de saint Athanase fut la dernière faute
de Constantin ; et l’ordre de le rappeler, qu’il donna un an après, le dernier
acte de sa vie.
Il laissa trois fils :
Constantin, Constance et Constant. Au premier échurent la Grande-Bretagne, les
Gaules et l’Espagne ; au second, l’Asie et l’Égypte ; au troisième l’Illyrie,
la Grèce, l’Italie et l’Afrique.
Constantin le Jeune se
hâta de remplir les intentions de son père, et de rendre la liberté à saint
Athanase, qui remonta sur son siège, l’an 338, aux acclamations du peuple
d’Alexandrie et de l’Égypte entière.
Le rétablissement
d’Athanase mortifia sensiblement les Ariens ; aussi firent-ils jouer de
nouveaux ressorts pour le perdre. Ils mirent dans leurs intérêts Constance, qui
avait eu l’Orient en partagé, et lui représentèrent Athanase comme un esprit
inquiet et turbulent qui depuis son retour avait excité des séditions et commis
des violences et des meurtres. Ils l’accusèrent encore d’avoir vendu à son
profit les grains destinés à la nourriture des veuves et des ecclésiastiques
qui habitaient les contrées où il ne venait point de blé. Ils formèrent les
mêmes accusations auprès de Constantin et de Constant ; mais leurs députés,
loin de réussir à persuader ces deux princes, furent renvoyés avec mépris. Pour
Constance, il se laissa séduire et ajouta foi au dernier chef d’accusation. Il
ne fut pas difficile au patriarche d’en démontrer la fausseté, et il n’eut
autre chose à faire pour cela que de produire les attestations des évêques de
Libye, où il était marqué qu’ils avaient reçu la quantité ordinaire de froment.
La calomnie découverte ne dissipa point les préjugés de Constance. Ce
malheureux prince était gouverné par Eusèbe de Nicomédie et par d’autres
ariens, qui lui inspiraient leurs propres sentiments, et qui l’amenèrent au
point de leur permettre d’élire un nouveau patriarche d’Alexandrie.
La permission étant
accordée, les hérétiques s’assemblèrent à Antioche sans délai ; ils déposèrent
Athanase, et élurent en sa place un prêtre égyptien de leur secte, nommé
Piste. Ce mauvais prêtre, ainsi que l’évêque qui le sacra, avait été
précédemment condamné par saint Alexandre et par le concile de Nicée. Le pape
Jules refusa de communiquer avec cet intrus, et toutes les églises catholiques
lui dirent anathème ; aussi ne peut-il jamais prendre possession d’une dignité
qu’il avait usurpée.
Athanase, de son côté,
tint à Alexandrie un concile où se trouvèrent cent évêques. On y prit la
défense de la foi, et l’on y reconnut l’innocence du patriarche. Les Pères
écrivirent ensuite une lettre circulaire à tous les évêques, et l’envoyèrent
nommément au pape Jules. Le Saint alla lui-même à Rome en 341 ; mais le long
séjour que les circonstances l’obligèrent de faire dans cette ville, donna aux
Ariens le temps de tout bouleverser en Orient.
Dans la même année 341,
il y eut un synode à Antioche, à l’occasion de la dédicace de la grande église.
On fit dans ce synode, composé d’évêques orthodoxes et hérétiques, vingt-cinq
canons de discipline ; mais les prélats orthodoxes ne furent pas plus tôt
partis, que les hérétiques y en ajoutèrent un vingt-sixième, qui regardait
évidemment saint Athanase. Il portait que si un évêque déposé justement ou
injustement dans un concile retournait à son église sans avoir été réhabilité
par un concile plus nombreux que celui qui avait prononcé la déposition, il ne
pourrait plus espérer d’être rétabli ni même d’être admis à se justifier. Ils
élurent ensuite un certain Grégoire, sorti de la Cappadoce, qui combla la
mesure de son indignité par sa monstrueuse ingratitude pour les bienfaits
d’Athanase.
Le prétendu patriarche,
escorté de soldats que commande Philagre, gouverneur de l’Égypte, fait son
entrée dans Alexandrie comme dans une ville prise d’assaut. Le peuple réclama
contre cette nomination et ces violences, si contraires aux traditions et à la
discipline de l’Église. Le gouverneur fit à ces justes plaintes l’accueil
qu’on devait attendre d’un apostat décrié pour le désordre de ses mœurs et la
dureté de son caractère. Il appelle à son aide les Juifs, les païens, la plus
vile populace, qu’il joint à ses cohortes. Cette troupe hideuse se rue sur les
fidèles assemblés dans les églises et s’y livre aux plus indécents et aux plus
cruels excès. Il y eut du sang répandu, les femmes furent outragées, les païens
offrirent à leurs divinités des sacrifices sur la table sainte. C’est ainsi que
les erreurs les plus opposées se tolèrent et s’associent pour combattre la
vérité.
Le Saint-Siège, lui, s’émut
de tendresse et d’admiration à l’arrivée d’un fils si dévoué, d’un si glorieux
défenseur de la foi et des traditions apostoliques. Les Eusébiens, pendant que
Constance était occupée à la guerre contre les Perses, avaient accusé Athanase
devant le chef de l’Église, dont ils proclamaient ainsi eux-mêmes la
suprématie ; et Athanase, pour répondre à leurs calomnies, lui avait adressé
par écrit une complète justification de sa conduite, confirmée par les
suffrages des évêques d’Égypte, témoins oculaires des faits. Jules Ier
accueillit donc Athanase avec les égards, l’affection et l’honneur dus à son
innocence, à son zèle, à son génie et à ses malheurs.
Le patriarche prit rang
au concile convoqué par le Pape, pour instruire pleinement ce grand procès qui
divisait l’Orient. Sa présence, la bienveillance méritée dont il était
l’objet, déconcertèrent ses accusateurs. Ils n’osèrent pas lui tenir tête
devant un tribunal purement ecclésiastique, où l’absence de la force armée et
des ordres du prince laisserait la vérité et l’innocence se produire en toute
liberté, et ils refusèrent de paraître au concile, afin d’échapper au jugement
qu’ils avaient provoqué les premiers. Ce jugement eut lieu malgré leur
abstention, et saint Jules le proclama, dans une lettre adressée aux Eusébiens,
avec ce ton d’autorité calme et de fermeté affectueuse qui caractérise le
suprême gardien de la foi, le père commun des fidèles. Les condamnations
prononcées contre Athanase dans les conciles de Tyr et d’Antioche, la
nomination et l’installation de Grégoire furent reconnues entachées de passion
et de violence, irrégulières dans la forme, injustes au fond. On invoqua en
même temps l’autorité irréfragable du concile œcuménique de Nicée, l’anathème
fulminé par ce concile contre Arius et ses partisans, et enfin les prérogatives
de l’Église de Rome, son droit traditionnel et incontestable d’intervenir dans
toutes les affaires majeures qui intéressent le dogme et la discipline.
Les orgueilleux sectaires
ne se rendent point à ces arrêts, et, sous l’égide de Constance, ils continuent
à exclure des principaux sièges les évêques orthodoxes, jusqu’à ce que, en
347, à la demande du Pape et des illustres évêques de Trêves et de Cordoue,
Constant obtient de son frère le consentement à une réunion des évêques
d’Orient et d’Occident, dans la ville de Sardique, située en Illyrie, sur les
confins des deux empires.
Dans ce concile, où le
Pape envoya ses légats, auquel présida le grand Osius, l’Église, indépendante
et unie à son chef, prononça les mêmes oracles qu’à Rome, et prit, dès le
premier jour, pour principe et pour règle de ses délibérations, le symbole de
Nicée. Le droit d’appel et de recours au Saint-Siège contre les décisions des
conciles particuliers fut de nouveau proclamé, Athanase déclaré seul évêque
légitime d’Alexandrie, et l’intrus Grégoire exclu de la communion de l’Église.
Deux évêques eusébiens, abandonnant leur parti, vinrent en dévoiler toute la
mauvaise foi et les trames coupables.
Ici encore les ennemis
d’Athanase, n’osant affronter la discussion, s’obstinèrent à n’y prendre
aucune part, renouvelèrent leurs protestations, et, rentrés en Orient, le
troublèrent par leur audace toujours croissante. Dans la ville d’Andrinople,
dix catholiques, qui avaient refusé de communiquer avec eux, furent mis à mort
par ordre des magistrats. Partout les évêques catholiques étaient bannis,
maltraités, odieusement calomniés.
Le puissant empereur
d’Occident, instruit et indigné de ces excès, en écrivit à son frère sur un ton
qui annonçait qu’il serait dangereux de lui résister. Les emportements des
Eusébiens ouvrirent d’ailleurs un instant les yeux â Constance, et lui-même se
sentit saisi tout à coup d’admiration pour le grand évêque d’Alexandrie.
Il lui écrivit de sa main
à plusieurs reprises, non seulement pour l’inviter à rentrer dans son église,
mais encore pour lui exprimer combien il serait heureux de le voir, et le presser,
le conjurer de venir à la cour. Athanase se défia d’abord d’une bienveillance
si imprévue et si subite, mais il dut céder à ces instances réitérées,
qu’accompagnaient d’ailleurs les mesures les plus décisives. La persécution
avait cessé dans toutes les provinces ; les prêtres d’Alexandrie, bannis pour
leur fidélité à leur évêque, étaient rappelés. Ayant pris congé, à Milan, de
l’empereur Constant, et à Rome, du pape Jules, Athanase reprend le chemin de
l’Orient, et voit Constance dans Antioche. Cet empereur l’accueillit avec
bonté, l’entoura, pendant son séjour, de considération et de respect, et à son
départ, lui promit avec serment de ne plus ouvrir l’oreille aux calomnies, de
ne plus souffrir qu’on le troublât dans son ministère.
Alexandrie le reçut avec
les mêmes transports de joie qui avaient éclaté à son premier retour ; le
souvenir des cruautés de l’intrus en doublait la vivacité. Sa présence eut des
effets plus importants. Elle refoula autour de lui les mauvaises passions,
excita la passion du bien et de toutes les vertus évangéliques. Les œuvres de
miséricorde se multiplièrent et s’étendirent à tous les infortunés. Que de
jeunes hommes, que de jeunes filles, sous l’influence de ses exemples,
embrassèrent une vie de sacrifices et d’héroïque dévouement !
Malheureusement, les
bienveillantes dispositions de Constance ne furent pas de longue durée. Le
principal appui des catholiques, l’infortuné Constant, perdit le trône et la
vie, en 350, à l’âge de vingt-sept ans, victime d’une conspiration ourdie par
Magnence, un de ses généraux. Délivré de la crainte des Perses par leur déroute
sous les murs de Nisibe, qu’il dut moins à ses armes qu’aux conseils et aux
miracles de saint Jacques, illustre évêque de cette ville, Constance vengea
bientôt la mort de son frère. La victoire qu’il remporta sur l’usurpateur, dans
les champs de la Pannonie, mit le monde à ses pieds. La prospérité est funeste
aux âmes vaines et faibles. Il rougit d’avoir cédé aux remontrances de son
frère en faveur d’Athanase. Il oublia ses serments. Les orthodoxes sont en
butte, sur tous les points de l’empire, à une violente persécution, qui, sous
le fils de Constantin, rappelle l’ère sanglante des martyrs.
Dans la capitale de
l’Égypte, un chef militaire à la tête de cinq mille soldats, envahit, la nuit,
l’église où priait Athanase avec une multitude considérable de peuple. L’épée
est tirée, des flèches sont lancées contre cette foule agenouillée. À cette
subite et farouche attaque, le peuple se presse autour de son évêque, qu’on
veut lui enlever, ou plutôt qu’on veut immoler au pied des autels. Dans cet
affreux tumulte, le patriarche élève sa voix toujours obéie, il ordonne aux
fidèles de se retirer et de se mettre en sûreté eux-mêmes. Pour lui, il ne
sortit que des derniers, enveloppé, emporté par un groupe dévoué, qui vint à
bout de le dérober aux traits de la troupe homicide.
Proscrit et fugitif,
Athanase ne peut croire que Constance ait commandé ces sacrilèges violences ;
il compte d’ailleurs encore sur ses anciennes protestations et sur sa ·bonne
foi. Pour l’éclairer, il lui adressa une grande apologie où il réfute un à un
tous les griefs des Ariens. Écoutons-le répondre à l’accusation d’une
prétendue correspondance avec l’usurpateur Magnence :
« Le reproche d’avoir
voulu irriter contre vous votre frère, d’heureuse mémoire, avait du moins
quelque prétexte aux yeux des calomniateurs. En effet, j’avais le privilège de
le voir librement, et il me défendait contre vous. Présent, il m’honorait,
absent, il m’a souvent appelé. Mais cet infernal Magnence, Dieu m’est témoin
que je ne le connais pas. Quelle familiarité pouvait donc s’établir d’un
inconnu à un inconnu ? Par où pouvais-je commencer une lettre à lui ? Était-ce
ainsi : Tu as bien fait de tuer celui qui me comblait d’honneurs et dont je
n’oublierai jamais l’amitié ? Je t’aime d’avoir égorgé ceux qui, dans Rome,
m’ont accueilli avec tant de faveur ? ».
Cette justification,
étincelante d’éloquence et de vérité, n’eut pas de prise sur l’âme prévenue de
Constance. Il n’en devint que plus obstiné, et son fanatisme plus violent. Un
nouvel intrus du nom de Georges, autrefois chargé de fournir la viande de porc
à l’armée, et pire que Grégoire, déshonora, fit frémir d’indignation par sa
grossièreté, par son ignorance, par son avarice et sa cruauté, l’illustre siège
d’Alexandrie que réjouissaient naguère les nobles qualités, le génie et les
vertus d’Athanase. Constance assemble conciles sur conciles, auxquels il
impose, avec d’astucieuses formules de foi, plus ou moins favorables à
l’hérésie, l’inévitable condition de la condamnation du patriarche. Il en fut
ainsi à Sirmich en Hongrie, à Rimini en Italie, à Arles en France. Les évêques
qui refusent de les souscrire sont envoyés dans de lointains et rigoureux
exils.
Athanase lui-même errait
de déserts en déserts, toujours recherché et souvent poursuivi de près par les
soldats et les espions des gouverneurs romains. Quelquefois, pour leur
échapper, il rentrait dans les populeuses cités de l’Égypte, où la foule ne le
cachait pas moins que la solitude. Mais sa retraite préférée était dans les
monastères et les ermitages de la Thébaïde, dont il aimait à partager les
études, le silence et les austérités. Là une nombreuse et ardente milice,
prête à mourir pour lui, savait le soustraire aux perquisitions, remplissait
ses messages, copiait et propageait ses écrits dans les sociétés chrétiennes de
l’Orient.
« C’est de là, dit M.
Villemain, qu’Athanase encourageait les évêques d’Égypte zélés pour sa cause ;
qu’il adressait des lettres apostoliques à son église d’Alexandrie ; qu’il
répondait savamment aux hérétiques ; qu’il lançait des anathèmes contre ses persécuteurs.
Du fond de sa cellule, il était le patriarche invisible de l’Égypte ».
On ne lui permit pas de
jouir longtemps de la compagnie des solitaires. Ses ennemis mirent sa tête à
prix. Des soldats furent chargés de faire partout des perquisitions pour le
découvrir. On eut beau maltraiter les moines, ils furent fermes et donnèrent à
entendre qu’ils souffriraient plutôt la mort que de déceler le lieu où Athanase
était caché. Quelque agréable que fût au patriarche la compagnie de ces saints
hôtes, il résolut de les quitter, afin de ne pas les exposer à de plus rudes
souffrances. Il se retira donc dans une citerne, où il pouvait à peine
respirer. La seule personne qu’il vît était un fidèle qui lui apportait ses
lettres et les choses dont il avait besoin pour subsister ; encore ce fidèle,
courait-il de grands dangers, tant les recherches des Ariens étaient
opiniâtres.
La mort de Constance
suspendit seule la persécution. Ce prince fut emporté par une maladie subite,
lorsque des extrémités de l’Orient il courait dans les Gaules, pour réprimer la
révolte du César Julien, que les troupes venaient de proclamer Auguste, et qui
lui succéda.
Vers le même temps,
l’intrus d’Alexandrie devenait odieux à tous les partis, aux païens eux-mêmes,
qu’enhardissait l’avènement de Julien l’Apostat. Ceux-ci le tuèrent dans une
sédition populaire ; puis chargeant son corps sur un chameau, ils le traînèrent
par toute la ville, le brillèrent avec cet animal qui leur semblait impur pour
avoir touché le cadavre de ce sacrilège, et enfin jetèrent ses cendres à la
mer. D’un autre côté, le prince philosophe, par ostentation de tolérance,
rappela d’abord les évêques exilés par la faction arienne. Le retour
d’Athanase, dont l’absence avait été plus que jamais regrettée, excita dans
l’Égypte un tressaillement d’allégresse et d’enthousiasme populaire dont
l’histoire offre peu d’exemples. Ce fut, pour Alexandrie surtout, une fête
telle que l’empire romain n’en connaissait plus depuis l’abolition des anciens
triomphes. Il ne manqua à celui-ci que les spectacles des vaincus enchaînés et
l’orgueil du vainqueur. Les populations de l’Égypte étaient accourues pour
joindre leurs transports à ceux des habitants et des étrangers de toutes les
nations, qui affluaient dans ce port, centre du commerce du monde. Les
catholiques révéraient en lui un Saint, le plus illustre défenseur de leur foi
; tous, un grand homme, un bienfaiteur, un père. Au premier bruit de son
arrivée, un peuple immense se précipita hors des murs. Les rivages du Nil
étaient couverts de spectateurs. On était content de le voir seulement de loin,
d’entendre le son de sa voix. Plus heureux ceux qui pouvaient toucher sa robe,
ou du moins rencontrer son ombre. Dans la pompe triomphale, le peuple était
groupé par rang d’âge, de sexe, de classe, de nation. Les applaudissements, les
acclamations, les chants joyeux, qui se succèdent ou se confondent,
retentissent de toutes parts. Le soir venu, mille flambeaux inondent la ville
de flots de lumière, tandis que la mer est éclairée au loin des feux
resplendissants des hautes tours du Musée. Des festins et d’innocents plaisirs
prolongent jusqu’au sein de la nuit le bruit et le mouvement du jour. Depuis,
quand on voulait dire qu’un gouverneur avait été bien reçu dans la capitale de
l’Égypte, on disait, par manière de proverbe, qu’on lui avait fait autant
d’honneur qu’au grand Athanase. L’hérésie était vaincue dans Alexandrie. Les
catholiques rentrèrent dans toutes les églises, les Ariens furent réduits à
tenir leurs assemblées dans des maisons particulières.
Quelque temps après,
Athanase se vit exposé à de nouvelles épreuves de la part de Julien. Ce prince
avait enfin levé le masque, et ne déguisait plus ses sentiments par rapport au
paganisme. Les prêtres des idoles d’Alexandrie se plaignirent à lui de
l’efficacité des moyens que le patriarche employait contre leurs superstitions,
et ils ajoutèrent que s’il restait plus longtemps dans la ville, on y verrait
bientôt les dieux sans aucun adorateur. Leurs plaintes furent écoutées
favorablement. L’empereur répondit qu’en permettant aux chrétiens, qu’il
appelait Galiléens, par dérision, de revenir dans leur pays, il ne leur avait
point accordé le droit de rentrer dans leurs églises ; qu’Athanase en
particulier n’aurait pas dû porter la témérité si loin que les autres, lui qui
avait été exilé par plusieurs empereurs. Il lui fit donc signifier de sortir de
la ville aussitôt l’ordre reçu, et cela, sous peine d’être sévèrement puni. Il
arrêta même sa mort, et un de ses officiers fut chargé de l’exécution de cet
arrêt.
Lorsque les ordres du
prince furent arrivés à Alexandrie, la douleur et la consternation s’emparèrent
de tous les fidèles. Athanase les consola et leur dit de mettre en Dieu leur
confiance, les assurant que l’orage passerait bientôt. Ayant ensuite recommandé
son troupeau à ses amis, il s’embarqua sur le Nil pour aller dans la
Thébaïde.
L’officier qui avait
ordre de le mettre à mort n’eut pas plus tôt été informé de sa fuite, qu’il le
poursuivit avec ardeur. Le Saint fut averti à temps du danger. Ceux qui
l’accompagnaient lui conseillèrent de s’enfoncer dans les déserts ; mais il
n’en voulut rien faire ; il ordonna même qu’on le ramenât vers Alexandrie, en
disant :
« Montrons que celui qui
nous protège est plus puissant que celui qui nous persécute ».
L’officier, les ayant
joints sans les connaître, leur demanda s’ils n’avaient point vu Athanase.
« Vous êtes précisément
sur ses traces ; il ne s’en faut de rien que vous lui mettiez la main dessus ».
L’officier continua sa
route, pendant qu’Athanase se rendit à Alexandrie, où il demeura quelque temps
caché.
Julien ayant donné de
nouveaux ordres pour qu’on le mît à mort, il se relira dans les déserts de la
Thébaïde. Il s’y voyait souvent obligé de changer de demeure pour échapper aux
perquisitions de ses ennemis. Il était à Antinoé, lorsque saint Théodore de
Thabenne et saint Pammon, tous, deux abbés solitaires, vinrent lui rendre
visite. Ils le consolèrent en lui assurant que ses peines allaient finir. Ils
lui racontèrent ensuite comment Dieu leur avait révélé la mort de Julien. Ils
ajoutèrent encore qu’ils avaient appris par la même voie, que Julien aurait
pour successeur un prince religieux, mais que son règne serait fort court.
Ce prince était Jovien.
Il refusa d’accepter l’empire qu’on lui offrait, jusqu’à ce que l’armée se fût
déclarée pour la religion chrétienne. A peine eut-il été placé sur le trône
impérial, qu’il révoqua la sentence de bannissement portée contre Athanase. Il
lui écrivit en même temps une lettre, où, après avoir donné de justes louanges
à sa fermeté et à ses autres vertus, il le priait instamment de venir reprendre
le gouvernement de son église.
Athanase n’avait point
attendu les ordres de l’empereur pour quitter sa retraite : il en était sorti
immédiatement après la mort de Julien, et il était revenu à Alexandrie. Son
arrivée imprévue avait causé autant de joie que de surprise. Son premier soin,
quand il se vit rendu à son troupeau, fut de reprendre ses fonctions
ordinaires. L’empereur, le connaissant pour un des plus zélés défenseurs de
l’orthodoxie, lui écrivit une seconde lettre, dans laquelle il le priait de lui
envoyer une exposition de la vraie foi, et de lui tracer le plan de conduite
qu’il devait suivre par rapport aux affaires de l’Église. Athanase ne voulut
répondre qu’après avoir conféré avec de savants évêques qu’il fit assembler
pour cet effet. Sa réponse portait qu’il fallait s’attacher à la foi de Nicée,
qui était celle des Apôtres, qui avait été prêchée dans les siècles suivants,
et qui était encore la foi de tout le monde chrétien, « à l’exception d’un
petit nombre de personnes qui avaient embrassé les sentiments d’Arius ».
Les Ariens firent
d’inutiles efforts pour noircir Athanase dans l’esprit de l’empereur : ils ne
retirèrent que de la confusion de leurs calomnies. Jovien eut envie de voir le
saint patriarche, dont il avait conçu une haute idée ; il le manda donc à
Antioche, où la cour était alors, et il lui donna mille marques d’estime et
d’amitié. Athanase, ayant satisfait au désir et aux consultations du prince ,
partit d’Antioche et se hâta de retourner à Alexandrie.
Jovien étant mort le 17
février 364, après un règne de huit mois, Valentinien lui succéda à l’empire.
Comme il voulait faire sa résidence dans l’Occident, il partagea ses états
avec son frère Valens et lui donna l’Orient à gouverner. Ce dernier, qui avait
toujours eu du penchant pour l’arianisme, ne tarda pas à manifester ses
sentiments. Ayant reçu le baptême en 367, des mains d’Eudoxe, évêque des Ariens
de Constantinople, il publia un édit par lequel il bannissait tous les évêques
que Constance avait privés de leurs sièges.
A la nouvelle de l’édit,
le peuple d’Alexandrie s’assembla en tumulte pour demander au gouverneur de la
Province qu’on lui laissât son évêque. Le gouverneur promit d’en écrire à
Valens, et les esprits se calmèrent. Athanase, voyant la sédition apaisée,
s’enfuit secrètement de la ville pour se retirer à la campagne, et il s’y cacha
durant quatre mois dans le caveau où son père avait été enterré. La nuit
suivante, le gouverneur et le général des troupes s’emparèrent de l’église où
il faisait ordinairement ses fonctions. Ils l’y cherchèrent inutilement, sa
retraite l’avait dérobé à leur poursuite. C’était la cinquième fois qu’on
l’obligeait à quitter son siège.
Dès que le peuple sut le
départ du saint patriarche, il en témoigna sa douleur par ses cris et par ses
larmes. Tous s’adressèrent au gouverneur et le prièrent de ménager le retour de
leur évêque. Valens, informé de tout ce qui se passait, craignit qu’il ne
s’élevât quelque sédition ; il prit donc le· parti d’accorder aux habitants
d’Alexandrie ce qu’ils lui demandaient avec tant de chaleur. En conséquence, il
manda qu’Athanase pouvait demeurer en paix à Alexandrie et qu’on ne le
troublerait point dans la possession des églises.
On est surpris et effrayé
de toutes les scènes horribles que présenta l’histoire de l’arianisme.
L’impiété, l’hypocrisie, la dissimulation, la malice, la perfidie des Ariens
paraîtraient incroyables, si elles n’étaient appuyées sur le témoignage de
tous les historiens du temps, et de saint Athanase lui-même. Les faits dont il
s’agit étaient notoires ; ils se passaient à la face de tout l’univers ; ils
étaient consignés dans les synodes des Ariens ; aussi saint Athanase les
inséra-t-il dans son apologie, faite pour devenir publique, avec toutes les
circonstances odieuses qui les accompagnaient, sans craindre que l’on
s’inscrivît en faux contre tout ce qu’il avançait.
Mais ce serait peu
connaître le saint patriarche d’Alexandrie, que de s’en ternir à ces traits
éclatants qui ont fait de lui un des principaux héros du christianisme. Sa vie
privée doit aussi fixer notre admiration.
« Il était, dit saint
Grégoire de Nazianze, d’une humilité si profonde que nul ne portait cette vertu
plus loin que lui. Doux et affable, il n’y avait personne qui n’eût auprès de
lui un accès facile. Il joignait à une bonté inaltérable, une tendre compassion
pour les malheureux. Ses discours avaient je ne sais quoi d’aimable qui
captivait tous les cœurs ; mais ils faisaient encore moins d’impression que sa
manière de vivre. Ses réprimandes étaient sans amertume, et ses louanges
servaient de leçon ; il savait si bien mesurer les unes et les autres, qu’il
reprenait avec la tendresse d’un père et louait avec la gravité d’un maître. Il
était tout à la fois indulgent sans faiblesse et ferme sans dureté. Tous
lisaient leur devoir dans sa conduite ; et quand il parlait, ses discours
avaient tant d’efficacité qu’il n’était presque jamais obligé de recourir aux
voies de rigueur. Les personnes de tout état trouvaient en lui de quoi admirer
et de quoi imiter. Il était fervent et assidu à la prière, austère dans les
jeûnes, infatigable dans les veilles et dans le chant des psaumes, plein de
charité pour les pauvres, condescendant pour les petits, intrépide lorsqu’il
s’agissait de s’opposer aux injustices des grands ».
Il avait, selon le même
auteur, le talent de persuader ceux qui étaient d’un sentiment contraire au
sien, à moins qu’ils ne fussent endurcis dans le mal ; et alors ceux qui ne se
laissaient pas gagner ressentaient une vénération secrète pour sa personne.
Quant à ses persécuteurs, ils trouvaient en lui une âme inflexible et
supérieure à toutes les considérations humaines. Semblable à un roc, rien
n’était capable de le faire fléchir en faveur de l’injustice.
Athanase, après avoir
soutenu de rudes combats et remporté de glorieuses victoires sur les ennemis
de la foi, passa à une meilleure vie le 18 janvier 373. Il mourut dans son lit,
dit la légende du Bréviaire romain. Il trouvait enfin dans la mort un repos
qu’il avait longtemps demandé vainement aux grottes des montagnes et aux
profondeurs des déserts. Il avait gouverné quarante-six ans l’église
d’Alexandrie.
Voici de quelle manière
sa mort est décrite par saint Grégoire de Nazianze :
« Il termina sa vie dans
un âge fort avancé, pour-aller se réunir à ses pères, aux patriarches, aux
prophètes, aux apôtres, aux martyrs, à l’exemple desquels il avait
généreusement combattu pour la vérité. Je dirai, pour renfermer son épitaphe en
peu de mots, qu’il sortit de cette vie mortelle avec beaucoup plus d’honneur
et de gloire qu’il n’en avait reçu à Alexandrie, lorsque après ses différents
exils, il y rentra de la manière la plus triomphante. Qui ne sait en effet que
tous les gens de bien pleurèrent amèrement sa mort, et que la mémoire de son
nom est restée profondément gravée dans leurs cœurs ?… Puisse-t-il du haut du
ciel abaisser sur moi ses regards, me favoriser, m’assister dans le
gouvernement de mon troupeau, conserver dans mon église le dépôt de la vraie
foi ! Et si, pour les péchés du monde, nous devons éprouver les ravages de
l’hérésie, puisse-t-il nous délivrer de ces maux, et nous obtenir, par son
intercession, la grâce de jouir avec lui de la vue de Dieu ».
On peut représenter saint
Athanase dans une barque remontant le Nil et s’enfuyant ; assis, tenant une
plume et écrivant. On l’invoque contre les maux dé tête, probablement en sa
qualité d’homme d’esprit.
SOURCE : https://www.laviedessaints.com/saint-athanase/
Saint Athanase
Évêque et docteur de
l'Église
Saint Athanase, né vers
295, connut dans son enfance les dernières persécutions. Il était sans doute
déjà diacre de l’évêque Alexandre d’Alexandrie lorsqu’il écrivit le « Contra
gentes et de incanatione Verbi » qui est à la fois une apologie contre les
païens et un exposé des motifs de l’Incarnation. Diacre, il accompagna au
concile de Nicée (325) son évêque auquel il succèda en juin 328.
Energique, intelligent et
instruit, il visita entièrement tout son diocèse fort agité par les hérétiques
ariens et mélitiens. Après avoir deux fois refusé à l’empereur Constantin de
recevoir Arius, il dut se disculper des accusations des mélétiens à Nicomédie
(332) et à Césarée de Palestine (333). Refusant une troisième fois de
réconcilier Arius, Athanase fut cité à comparaître devant le concile de Tyr
(335) d’où, n’ayant trouvé que des ennemis, il s’enfuit à Constantinople pour
plaider sa cause devant l’Empereur qui le condamna à l’exil.
Pendant qu’Athanase,
déposé par le concile de Tyr, était en exil à Trêves, les troubles étaient si
forts à Alexandrie qu’on n’osa pas lui nommer un successeur. Après la mort de
Constantin I° (22 mai 337), Constantin II le rendit à son diocèse (17 juin 337)
où il arriva le 23 novembre 337. Les ariens élirent Grégoire de Cappadoce qui,
avec l’appui du préfet d’Egypte, s’empara des églises d’Alexandrie qu’Athanase
dut quitter (mars 339). Réfugié à Rome, il fut réhabilité par un concile réuni
sous la pape Jules I° mais il dut attendre la mort de son compétiteur et
l’amnistie de l’empereur Constance pour rentrer dans son diocèse (21 octobre
346). Constance reprit les hostilités contre Athanase qui fut de nouveau chassé
d’Alexandrie (356) et dut se réfugier dans la campagne égyptienne jusqu’à la
mort de l’Empereur dont le successeur, Julien, rappela immédiatement les exilés
(361). Rentré le 21 février 362, Athanase fut encore condamné à l’exil le 23
octobre 362 mais Julien ayant été tué dans la guerre contre les Perses (26 juin
363), son successeur, Jovien, vrai catholique, le rappela. Jovien mourut
accidentellement (février 364) et son successeur, Valens, arien, chassa de
nouveau Athanase d’Alexandrie le 5 octobre 365 où il l’autorisera à revenir le
1° février 366. Athanase mourut dans la nuit du 2 au 3 mai 373.
Contre les Païens, (32
– 33)
Comment, puisque le corps
est naturellement mortel, l'homme raisonne-t-il sur l'immortalité, et
désire-t-il souvent la mort pour la vertu ? Ou encore, comment, puisque le
corps est éphémère, l'homme se représente-t-il les réalités éternelles au point
de mépriser les choses présentes, et de tourner son désir vers les autres ? Le
corps ne saurait de lui-même raisonner ainsi sur lui-même, ni sur ce qui est
extérieur à lui : il est mortel et éphémère ; il faut donc nécessairement qu'il
y ait autre chose qui raisonne sur ce qui est opposé au corps et contraire à sa
nature. Qu'est cela encore une fois, sinon l'âme raisonnable et immortelle ? Et
elle n'est pas extérieure au corps, mais lui est intérieure — comme le musicien
qui avec sa lyre fait entendre les meilleurs sons. Comment encore, l'œil étant
naturellement fait pour voir et l'oreille pour entendre, se détournent-ils de
ceci et préfèrent-ils cela ? Qu'est-ce qui détourne l'œil de voir ? ou qui
empêche l'oreille d'entendre, alors qu'elle est faite naturellement pour
entendre ? Et le goût, naturellement fait pour goûter, qu'est-ce qui souvent
l'arrête dans son élan naturel ? La main, naturellement faite pour agir, qui
l'empêche de toucher tel objet ? L'odorat, fait pour sentir les odeurs, qui le
détourne de les percevoir ? Qui agit ainsi à l'encontre des propriétés naturelles
des corps ? Comment le corps se laisse-t-il détourner de sa nature, et conduire
par les avis d'un autre, et diriger par un signe de lui ? Tout cela montre que
seule l'âme raisonnable mène le corps. Le corps n'est point fait pour se
mouvoir lui-même, mais il se laisse conduire et mener par un autre, comme le
cheval ne s'attelle pas lui-même, mais se laisse diriger par celui qui l'a
maîtrisé. Aussi y a-t-il des lois chez les hommes, pour leur faire faire le
bien et éviter le mal ; mais les êtres sans raison ne peuvent ni raisonner ni
discerner le mal, puisqu'ils sont étrangers à la rationalité et à la réflexion
raisonnable. Ainsi les hommes possèdent une âme raisonnable ; je pense l'avoir
montré par ce qui vient d'être dit.
Que l'âme soit aussi
immortelle, la doctrine de l'Eglise ne peut l'ignorer, pour trouver là un
argument capable de réfuter l'idolâtrie. On parviendra de plus près à cette
notion, si l'on part de la connaissance du corps et de sa différence d'avec
l'âme. Si notre raisonnement a montré qu'elle est autre que le corps, et si le
corps est naturellement mortel, il s'ensuit nécessairement que l'âme est
immortelle, puisqu'elle est différente du corps. De plus, si, comme nous
l'avons montré, c'est l'âme qui meut le corps, sans être elle-même mue par
d'autres, il s'ensuit que l'âme se meut elle-même, et qu'après que le corps a
été mis en terre, elle se meut encore par elle-même. Car ce n'est pas l'âme qui
meurt, mais c'est quand elle se sépare de lui que meurt le corps. Si donc elle
était mue par le corps, il s'ensuivrait que, le moteur s'éloignant, elle
mourrait ; mais si c'est l'âme qui meut le corps, à plus forte raison elle se
meut elle-même. Et si elle se meut elle-même, nécessairement elle vit après la
mort du corps. Car le mouvement de l'âme n'est pas autre chose que sa vie, de
même aussi que nous disions que le corps vit quand il est en mouvement, et que
c'est la mort pour lui quand il cesse de se mouvoir. On verra cela encore plus
clairement à partir de l'activité de l'âme dans le corps. Quand l'âme est venue
dans le corps et lui est enchaînée, elle n'est pas resserrée et mesurée par la
petitesse du corps, mais bien souvent, alors que celui-ci est couché dans son
lit, immobile, et comme endormi dans la mort, l'âme, selon sa propre vertu, est
éveillée, et s'élève au-dessus de la nature du corps; comme si elle s'en allait
loin de lui, bien que restant dans le corps, elle se représente et contemple
des êtres supra-terrestres ; souvent même elle rencontre ceux qui sont
au-dessus des corps terrestres, les saints et les anges, et s'en va vers eux,
se confiant dans la pureté de l'esprit. Comment donc, à plus forte raison,
détachée du corps quand le voudra Dieu qui l'avait liée à lui, n'aura-t-elle
pas une connaissance plus claire de l'immortalité ? Si, quand elle était liée
au corps, elle vivait une vie étrangère au corps, à plus forte raison, après la
mort du corps, elle vivra et ne cessera de vivre, parce que Dieu l'a ainsi
créée par son Verbe, notre Seigneur Jésus-Christ. C'est pourquoi elle pense et
réfléchit aux choses immortelles et éternelles, puisqu'elle aussi est
immortelle. De même que, le corps étant mortel, ses sens contemplent des choses
mortelles, ainsi l'âme qui contemple des réalités immortelles et raisonne sur
elles, doit-elle nécessairement être immortelle et vivre éternellement. Les
pensées et considérations sur l'immortalité ne la quittent jamais, mais
demeurent en elle comme un foyer qui assure l'immortalité. C'est pourquoi elle
a la pensée de la contemplation de Dieu, et devient à elle-même sa propre voie
; ce n'est pas du dehors, mais d'elle-même qu'elle reçoit la connaissance et la
compréhension du Verbe de Dieu.
Saint Athanase
SOURCE : http://missel.free.fr/Sanctoral/05/02.php
Saint Athanase
Saint Athanase naquit vers l’an 295 et très probablement à Alexandrie. Il est certain qu’il reçut une excellente éducation classique, et plus tard, il dut étudier dans une école chrétienne, sans doute à Césarée. Jeune homme, il enseigna comme lecteur ou didascalos, à l’école catéchétique d’Alexandrie. Avant sa vingt-cinquième année, il se rendit au désert et y connut saint Antoine le Grand ; sans doute même essaya-t-il de vivre en ermite, car il semble avoir été durant toute sa vie un contemplatif. Vers l’an 320, Athanase était diacre d’Alexandre, évêque d’Alexandrie. Il fut le véritable auteur, tant pour la forme que pour le contenu, de l’encyclique publiée en 322 par l’évêque Alexandre contre la doctrine d’Arius, prêtre de Baucalis. Conseiller de ce même Alexandre, trois ans plus tard, au concile de Nicée, Athanase collabora certainement à la définition qui y fut finalement formulée et selon laquelle le Fils est de la même substance que le Père. De retour en Égypte, Athanase succéda à Alexandre sur le siège épiscopal d’Alexandrie durant l’été 328. Au cours des sept premières années de son épiscopat, Athanase, tout en dispensant son enseignement, visita et administra la vallée du Nil de plus en plus loin vers le Sud ; il envoya la première mission en Afrique centrale, et sous la direction de saint Frumence, elle assura la conversion du royaume d’Axoum, en Éthiopie. Partout, il établit d’étroites relations avec les moines et les ermites, et ceux-ci devaient le révérer comme un faiseur de prodiges et lui décerner les titres de « Père de la Vérité » et de « Porte-Christ ». Aucun évêque d’Alexandrie n’avait, avant lui, disposé d’un tel pouvoir. Aussi est-ce sans doute une intrigue politique autant que théologique qui amena l’empereur Constantin à le convoquer à Byzance, puis à le bannir à Trèves, sur la frontière de la Germanie, en 335. Athanase ne retourna en Égypte que deux ans plus tard, quand il put constater que les factions ariennes ne bénéficiaient plus que d’un patronage hésitant de la part du nouvel empereur d’Orient, Constance, fils de Constantin. De 337 à 366, sa vie fut avant tout un combat, au cours duquel il se trouva par moments presque seul, contre toutes les tendances qui auraient conduit à la destruction de l’œuvre accomplie par le concile de Nicée. Par sa résistance, saint Athanase ne devint pas seulement le champion de la substance unique de la Trinité, mais aussi de l’autonomie de l’Église. Fidèle aux décisions du concile de Nicée, il demeura toute sa vie un farouche opposant à l’arianisme en dépit des persécutions et des cinq exils successifs entre 335 et 366. Trois fois encore, il fut arrêté et envoyé en exil – chaque fois il revint. De 356 à 361, il dut se cacher en Égypte, tantôt dans les ermitages du désert et tantôt dans les citernes et les tombeaux. Il y eut de courts moments d’accalmie, puis, durant les dernières années de sa vie, il put demeurer sans trouble à Alexandrie ; sa sécurité, toutefois, ne fut jamais assurée, et quand il mourut, un peu avant l’aube du 2 mai 373, l’issue du combat semblait encore indécise. En effet, Valens, alors empereur d’Orient, était anti-nicéen et de nombreux évêques soutenaient sa politique ; mais cinq années plus tard, Valens mourut et la cause défendue par le concile de Nicée triompha définitivement. En Occident, il est devenu le docteur de la Trinité. Mais il fut avant tout le docteur de l’Incarnation et de la grâce. Il est l’auteur de trois Discours contre les Ariens et d’une Vie de saint Antoine écrite peu après la mort de celui-ci et traduite en latin dès 388. L’église S. Zaccaria de Venise abrite le corps de saint Athanase d’Alexandrie. Saint Athanase est fêté en Occident le 2 mai et en Orient le 18 janvier.
SOURCE : http://www.martyretsaint.com/athanase-dalexandrie/
L'Incarnation restaure
notre connaissance de Dieu
Dieu avait créé les hommes pour que les hommes puissent le connaître, mais les
hommes se sont détournés de lui :
« Et pourquoi donc Dieu aurait-il fait les hommes, s'il n'avait voulu être
connu d'eux ? Aussi, il les crée selon son image et ressemblance. [...]
Mais les hommes méprisèrent le don qui leur était fait ; ils se détournèrent de
Dieu et souillèrent à ce point leur âme qu'ils n'oublièrent pas seulement
l'idée de Dieu, mais se forgèrent toutes sortes d'autres dieux à sa place. »
(1)
En s'incarnant, le Seigneur fixe sur soi les sens de tous les hommes afin que
partout où les hommes étaient attirés, il les ramène et leur enseigne son
véritable Père :
« Puis donc que les hommes s'étaient détournés de la contemplation de Dieu et,
enfoncés comme dans un abîme, gardaient les yeux fixés en bas, cherchant Dieu
dans la création et dans les objets des sens, d'hommes mortels et de démons se
faisant des dieux, pour cette raison le Verbe de Dieu, ami des bommes et commun
sauveur de tous, prend pour lui un corps, et vint en homme parmi les hommes, et
fixe sur soi les sens de tous les hommes. Ainsi ceux qui se représentaient Dieu
dans des êtres corporels connaîtraient la vérité à partir des oeuvres que le
Seigneur accomplirait dans le corps, et par lui considéreraient le Père. » (2)
Saint Athanase donne quelques exemples ; les hommes en voyant le Christ, se
détournent du culte de la nature, des démons ou des morts.
« En hommes ne pensant que choses humaines, partout où ils appliqueraient leurs
sens, ils se verraient attirés et ils apprendraient la vérité en tous lieux.
Car ils étaient ou bien saisis d'un transport sacré pour la création, mais ils
la voyaient confesser le Christ Seigneur ; ou bien leur pensée était prévenue
en faveur des hommes, au point de les prendre pour des dieux, mais s'ils les
comparaient avec les oeuvres du Sauveur, ils voyaient que parmi les hommes seul
le Sauveur est Fils de Dieu, aucune oeuvre chez ceux-là valent celles que
réalisait le Verbe de Dieu.
Même pour les démons ils étaient prévenus, mais en les voyant chassés par le Seigneur,
ils découvraient que lui est le Verbe de Dieu, et que les démons ne sont pas
des dieux.
Et si leur esprit se trouvait alors possédé par la pensée des morts, de sorte
qu'ils rendaient un culte aux héros et à ceux que les poètes appellent des
dieux, voyant la résurrection du Sauveur ils confessaient que c'étaient des
mensonges, et que le seul vrai Seigneur était le Verbe du Père, qui dominait
aussi la mort.
Voilà pourquoi il est né, est apparu comme un homme, est mort, est ressuscité,
émoussant et obscurcissant par ses propres oeuvres tout ce que les hommes
avaient fait, afin que partout où les hommes étaient attirés, il les ramène et
leur enseigne son véritable Père, comme lui-même le dit : « Je suis venu sauver
et trouver ce qui était perdu. »
Le Sauveur, durant tout le temps de son Incarnation, est pour nous une lumière
qui nous renouvelle :
« 16,1. Car une fois l'esprit des hommes tombé dans le sensible, le Verbe
s'abaissa jusqu'à paraître dans un corps, afin de centrer les hommes sur
lui-même en tant qu'homme et de détourner vers lui leurs sens ; désormais ils
le verraient comme un homme ; par ses oeuvres il les persuaderait qu'il n'est
pas un homme seulement, mais Dieu, Verbe et Sagesse du Dieu véritable.
2. C'est ce que veut indiquer Paul :
"Enracinés et fondés dans l'amour, pour que vous receviez la faveur de
comprendre, avec tous les saints, ce qu'est la largeur et la longueur, la
hauteur et la profondeur, et de connaître l'amour du Christ qui surpasse toute
connaissance, pour que vous entriez par votre plénitude dans toute la Plénitude
de Dieu." [Eph 3, 17-19] »
[...]
4. C'est pourquoi il n'a pas dès sa venue offert son sacrifice pour tous, en
livrant le corps à la mort et en le ressuscitant, quitte à se rendre invisible
de ce fait même.
Il s'est au contraire montré visible par ce corps, en y demeurant,
accomplissant des oeuvres et présentant des signes, qui le font connaître non
plus comme un homme, mais comme Dieu Verbe.
5. Des deux côtés, le Sauveur par son incarnation a témoigné de sa
philanthropie :
d'une part, il faisait disparaître la mort de chez nous et nous renouvelait (4)
;
d'autre part, étant sans apparence et invisible, il apparaissait à travers ses
oeuvres et se faisait connaître comme le Verbe du Père, le chef et le roi de
l'univers. » (5)
(1) ATHANASE D'ALEXANDRIE, De Incarnatione 11, 2-3 ; traduction ans Sources
chrétiennes n° 199, par Charles KANNENGIESSER, Cerf 1973, p. 305.
(2) ATHANASE D'ALEXANDRIE, De Incarnatione 15,2
(3) ATHANASE D'ALEXANDRIE, De Incarnatione 15, 3-7
(4) Sur ce point, il faudrait lire d'autres textes de saint Athanase, par
exemple, De Incarnatione, 10.
(5) ATHANASE D'ALEXANDRIE, De Incarnatione 16, 1-5.
F. Breynaert
SOURCE : http://www.mariedenazareth.com/16483.0.html?&L=0
St Athanase, évêque,
confesseur et docteur
Mort à Alexandrie le 2
mai 373. Sa fête apparaît dans le nord de la France au milieu du XIIe siècle
mais elle n’est pas reçue à Rome avant le XVIe siècle. Simple au bréviaire de
1550, elle devient double avec la réforme de St Pie V en 1568.
Leçons des Matines avant
1960
Quatrième leçon.
Athanase, l’énergique défenseur de la religion catholique, était né à
Alexandrie ; ordonné Diacre par l’Évêque de cette ville, nommé Alexandre, il
devint dans la suite son successeur. Il avait accompagné ce Prélat au concile
de Nicée, où, ayant confondu l’impiété d’Arius, il s’attira tellement la haine
des Ariens que, depuis lors, ils ne cessèrent jamais de lui dresser des
embûches. Dans un concile réuni à Tyr, et composé en grande partie d’Évêques
ariens, ils subornèrent une femme pour qu’elle accusât Athanase, d’avoir par
violence, porté atteinte à son honneur, abusant de son hospitalité. Athanase
fut donc introduit, et avec lui un Prêtre nommé Timothée, qui, feignant d’être
Athanase, dit à cette femme : « C’est donc moi qui ai logé chez vous, moi qui
vous ai outragée ? — Oui, répondit-elle effrontément, c’est vous qui m’avez
fait violence » ; et elle affirmait le fait avec serment, invoquant l’autorité
des juges, pour qu’ils "vengeassent une telle infamie. La fourberie étant
découverte, l’impudence de cette femme fut confondue.
Cinquième leçon. Les
Ariens firent aussi courir le bruit qu’un Évêque, nommé Arsène, avait été
assassiné par Athanase. Tandis qu’Arsène était secrètement détenu, ils
produisirent devant les juges la main d’un mort, accusant Athanase d’avoir
coupé cette main à Arsène, pour s’en servir dans des opérations magiques. Mais
Arsène s’enfuit la nuit et vint se présenter devant tout le concile, ce qui
dévoila la scélératesse des ennemis d’Athanase. Ils attribuèrent néanmoins la
justification d’Athanase à des artifices de magie, et ne cessèrent pas de
conspirer contre sa vie. Condamné à l’exil, il fut relégué à Trêves, dans les
Gaules. Sous le règne de l’empereur Constance, qui favorisait les Ariens, il
vit se soulever contre lui de longues et violentes tempêtes, souffrit
d’incroyables épreuves, et parcourut de nombreuses contrées, souvent expulsé de
son Église, souvent aussi rétabli sur son siège, et par l’autorité du Pape
Jules, et par la protection de l’empereur Constant, frère de Constance, ou
encore en vertu des décrets des conciles de Sardique et de Jérusalem. Pendant
ce temps les Ariens continuaient à lui demeurer hostiles ; pour se soustraire à
leur fureur opiniâtre et éviter la mort, il demeura caché pendant cinq ans dans
une citerne desséchée, sans que personne connût sa retraite, sauf un de ses
amis qui lui apportait en secret sa nourriture.
Sixième leçon. Constance
étant mort, Julien l’Apostat, son successeur, permit aux Évêques exilés de
rentrer dans leurs Églises. Athanase revint donc à Alexandrie, où il fut reçu
avec les plus grands honneurs. Mais bientôt les intrigues des mêmes Ariens le
firent persécuter par Julien, et il fut de nouveau forcé à s’éloigner Les
satellites de ce prince le cherchant pour le mettre à mort, Athanase fit
retourner le bateau sur lequel il s’enfuyait, et vint à la rencontre des
émissaires lancés à sa poursuite. Ceux-ci demandant à quelle distance se
trouvait Athanase, il leur répondit qu’il n’était pas loin. Il échappa ainsi à
ses ennemis qui continuèrent leur route et, rentrant à Alexandrie, il y demeura
caché jusqu’à la mort de Julien. Quelque temps après, une nouvelle tempête
s’étant élevée contre lui à Alexandrie, il resta enfermé quatre mois dans le tombeau
de son père. Enfin, délivré par le secours divin de tant de périls de tous
genres, il mourut dans son lit, à Alexandrie, sous Valens. Sa vie et sa mort
furent illustrées par de grands miracles, il a écrit beaucoup d’ouvrages pleins
de piété et de clarté pour expliquer la foi catholique, et il a gouverné très
saintement l’Église d’Alexandrie durant quarante-six ans, au milieu des plus
grandes vicissitudes.
Dom Guéranger, l’Année
Liturgique
Le cortège de notre divin
Roi, qui s’accroît chaque jour d’une manière si brillante, se renforce
aujourd’hui par l’arrivée de l’un des plus valeureux champions qui aient jamais
combattu pour sa gloire. Est-il un nom plus illustre que celui d’Athanase parmi
les gardiens de la Parole de vérité que Jésus a confiée à la terre ? ce nom
n’exprime-t-il pas à lui seul le courage indomptable dans la garde du dépôt
sacré, la fermeté du héros en face des plus terribles épreuves, la science, le
génie, l’éloquence, tout ce qui peut retracer ici-bas l’idéal de la sainteté du
Pasteur unie à la doctrine de l’interprète des choses divines ? Athanase a vécu
pour le Fils de Dieu ; la cause du Fils de Dieu fut la même que celle
d’Athanase ; qui bénissait Athanase bénissait le Verbe éternel, et celui-là
maudissait le Verbe éternel qui maudissait Athanase.
Jamais notre sainte foi
ne courut sur la terre un plus grand péril que dans ces tristes jours qui
suivirent la paix de l’Église, et furent témoins de la plus affreuse tempête
que la barque de Pierre ait jamais essuyée. Satan avait en vain espéré éteindre
dans des torrents de sang la race des adorateurs de Jésus ; le glaive de
Dioclétien et de Galérius s’était émoussé dans leurs mains, et la croix
paraissant au ciel avait proclamé le triomphe du christianisme. Tout à coup
l’Église victorieuse se sent ébranlée jusque dans ses fondements ; dans son
audace l’enfer a vomi sur la terre une hérésie qui menace de dévorer en peu de
jours le fruit de trois siècles de martyre. L’impie et obscur Arius ose dire
que celui qui fut adoré comme le Fils de Dieu par tant de générations depuis
les Apôtres, n’est qu’une créature plus parfaite que les autres. Une immense
défection se déclare jusque dans les rangs de la hiérarchie sacrée ; la
puissance des Césars se met au service de cette épouvantable apostasie ; et si
le Seigneur lui-même n’intervient, les hommes diront bientôt sur la terre que
la victoire du christianisme n’a eu d’autre résultat que de changer l’objet de
l’idolâtrie, en substituant sur les autels une créature à d’autres qui avaient
reçu l’encens avant elle.
Mais celui qui avait
promis que les portes de l’enter ne prévaudraient jamais contre son Église,
veillait à sa promesse. La foi primitive triompha ; le concile de Nicée
reconnut et proclama le Fils consubstantiel au Père ; mais il fallait à
l’Église un homme en qui la cause du Verbe consubstantiel fut, pour ainsi dire,
incarnée, un homme assez docte pour déjouer tous les artifices de l’hérésie,
assez fort pour attirer sur lui tous ses coups, sans succomber jamais. Ce fut
Athanase ; quiconque adore et aime le Fils de Dieu doit aimer et glorifier
Athanase. Exilé jusqu’à cinq fois de son Église d’Alexandrie, poursuivi à mort
par les ariens, il vint chercher tantôt un refuge, et tantôt un lieu d’exil
dans l’Occident, qui apprécia l’illustre confesseur de la divinité du Verbe.
Pour prix de l’hospitalité que Rome s’honora de lui accorder, Athanase lui fit
part de ses trésors. Admirateur et ami du grand Antoine, il cultivait avec une
tendre affection l’élément monastique, que la grâce de l’Esprit-Saint avait
fait éclore dans les déserts de son vaste patriarcat ; il porta à Rome cette
précieuse semence, et les moines qu’il y amena furent les premiers que vit
l’Occident. La plante céleste s’y naturalisa ; et si sa croissance fut lente
d’abord, elle y fructifia dans la suite au delà de ce qu’elle avait fait en
Orient.
Athanase, qui avait su
exposer avec tant de clarté et de magnificence dans ses sublimes écrits le
dogme fondamental du christianisme, la divinité de Jésus-Christ, a célébré le
mystère de la Pâque avec une éloquente majesté dans les Lettres festales qu’il
adressait chaque année aux Églises de son patriarcat d’Alexandrie. La
collection de ces lettres, que l’on regardait comme perdues sans retour, et qui
n’étaient connues que par quelques courts fragments, a été retrouvée presque
tout entière, dans le monastère de Sainte-Marie de Scété, en Égypte. La
première, qui se rapporte à l’année 329, débute par ces paroles qui expriment
admirablement les sentiments que doit réveiller chez tous les chrétiens
l’arrivée de la Pâque : « Venez, mes bien-aimés, dit Athanase aux fidèles
soumis à son autorité pastorale, venez célébrer la fête ; l’heure présente vous
y invite. En dirigeant sur nous ses divins rayons, le Soleil de justice nous
annonce que l’époque de la solennité est arrivée. A cette nouvelle, faisons
fête, et ne laissons pas l’allégresse s’enfuir avec le temps qui nous
l’apporte, sans l’avoir goûtée. » Durant ses exils, Athanase continua
d’adresser à ses peuples la Lettre pascale ; quelques années seulement en
furent privées. Voici le commencement de celle par laquelle il annonçait la
Pâque de l’année 338 ; elle fut envoyée de Trêves à Alexandrie. « Bien
qu’éloigné de vous, mes Frères, je n’ai garde de manquer à la coutume que j’ai
toujours observée à votre égard, coutume que j’ai reçue de la tradition des
Pères. Je ne resterai pas dans le silence, et je ne manquerai pas de vous
annoncer l’époque de la sainte Fête annuelle, et le jour auquel vous en devez
célébrer la solennité. En proie aux tribulations dont vous avez sans doute
entendu parler, accablé des plus graves épreuves, placé sous la surveillance
des ennemis de la vérité qui épient tout ce que j’écris, afin d’en faire une
matière d’accusation et d’accroître par là mes maux, je sens néanmoins que le
Seigneur me donne de la force et me console dans mes angoisses. J’ose donc vous
adresser la proclamation annuelle, et c’est au milieu de mes chagrins, à
travers les embûches qui m’environnent, que je vous envoie des extrémités de la
terre l’annonce de la Pâque qui est notre salut. Remettant mon sort entre les
mains du Seigneur, j’ai voulu célébrer avec vous cette fête : la distance des
lieux nous sépare, mais je ne suis pas absent de vous. Le Seigneur qui accorde
les fêtes, qui est lui-même notre fête, qui nous fait don de son Esprit, nous
réunit spirituellement par le lien de la concorde et de la paix. »
Qu’elle est magnifique,
cette Pâque célébrée par Athanase exilé sur les bords du Rhin, en union avec
son peuple qui la fêtait sur les rives du Nil ! Comme elle révèle le lien
puissant de la sainte Liturgie pour unir les hommes et leur faire goûter au
même moment, et en dépit des distances, les mêmes émotions saintes, pour
réveiller en eux les mêmes aspirations de vertu ! Grecs ou barbares, l’Église
est notre patrie commune ; mais la Liturgie est, avec la Foi, le milieu dans
lequel nous ne formons tous qu’une même famille, et la Liturgie n’a rien de
plus expressif dans le sens de l’unité que la célébration de la Pâque. Les
malheureuses Églises de l’Orient et de l’empire russe, en s’isolant du reste du
monde chrétien pour fêter à un jour qui n’est qu’à elles la Résurrection du
Sauveur, montrent déjà par ce seul fait qu’elles ne font pas partie de l’unique
bergerie dont il est l’unique pasteur.
L’Église grecque, qui
célèbre dans une autre saison la fête du saint Docteur, exprime son admiration
pour lui dans des chants remplis d’enthousiasme dont nous extrairons, selon
notre usage, quelques strophes.
(DIE XVIII JANUARII.)
Salut, ô Athanase, la
règle des vertus, le vaillant défenseur de la foi ! C’est toi qui, par tes
paroles dignes de tout respect, as dissous sans retour l’impiété d’Anus ; tu
nous as enseigné quelle est la puissance de la divinité unique en trois
personnes , qui dans sa bonté a tiré du néant les êtres spirituels et les êtres
sensibles, et tu nous as expliqué les profonds mystères de l’opération divine ;
daigne prier le Christ d’accorder à nos âmes sa grande miséricorde.
Salut, toi qui as servi
d’appui aux patriarches mêmes, trompette résonnante, génie admirable, langue
éloquente, œil lumineux, illustrateur de la saine doctrine, pasteur véritable,
flambeau éclatant, cognée par laquelle a été abattue la forêt entière des
hérésies, toi qui l’as incendiée par le feu de l’Esprit-Saint : très ferme
colonne, tour inébranlable, toi qui enseignes la puissance supersubstantielle
de la Trinité, daigne la supplier d’accorder à nos âmes sa grande miséricorde.
Tu as armé l’Église, ô
Père, des dogmes divins de l’orthodoxie ; par ta science l’hérésie a été
tranchée : tu as achevé ta sainte carrière, et comme Paul tu as conservé la foi
; de même, ô glorieux Athanase, une juste couronne t’est préparée pour prix de
tes travaux.
Semblable à un astre qui
n’a pas de coucher, tu éclaires encore après ta mort la multitude des fidèles
par les rayons de ta doctrine, ô Athanase, Pontife rempli de sagesse.
Guidé par le
Saint-Esprit, tu as conduit ta pensée dans les hauteurs de la contemplation, o
saint Pontife ! Tu as cherché les trésors de vérité caches sous les divins
oracles, et tu as fait part au monde des richesses que tu as découvertes.
Tu as été le phare élevé
et lumineux de la divine doctrine, et tu as dirigé ceux qui étaient battus sur
l’océan de l’erreur, les conduisant, par la sérénité de tes paroles, au
tranquille port de la grâce.
Général de l’armée de
Dieu, tu as défait les bataillons des adversaires du Seigneur ; avec le glaive
du Saint-Esprit tu les as vaillamment taillés en pièces. Père saint, tu as
arrosé la terre entière des eaux vives dont la source était dans ton cœur.
Père saint, par les
persécutions que tu as souffertes pour son Église, tu as complète en ta chair
les souffrances du Seigneur.
Habitants de la terre,
venez apprendre la doctrine de justice dans les enseignements sacrés d’Athanase
: la pureté de sa foi a fait de lui comme la bouche du Verbe qui est avant tous
les siècles.
Par toi, ô bienheureux,
l’Église du Christ est devenue un paradis véritable ; tu y as semé la parole
sainte et tu en as arraché les épines de l’hérésie.
Tu nous as apparu comme
un fleuve de grâce, comme un Nil spirituel, ô toi qui portes Dieu ! Tu as
apporté aux fidèles les fruits de la doctrine de piété, tu as arrosé toutes les
campagnes et nourri au loin la terre. Par le bâton de tes enseignements tu as
chasse les loups de l’hérésie loin de l’Église du Christ : tu l’as entourée et
protégée du rempart de tes paroles, et tu l’as présentée saine et sauve au
Christ ; prie-le donc, le Christ Dieu, qu’il daigne nous délivrer de la
séduction et de tout péril, nous qui célébrons avec foi ta mémoire digne de
vénération.
Vous vous êtes assis, ô
Athanase, sur la chaire de Marc dans Alexandrie, et vous brillez non loin de lui
sur le Cycle sacre. Il partit de Rome, envoyé par Pierre lui-même, pour aller
fonder le second siège patriarcal ; et trois siècles après, vous arriviez
vous-même à Rome, successeur de Marc, pour obtenir du successeur de Pierre que
l’injustice et l’hérésie ne prévalussent pas contre ce siège auguste. Notre
Occident vous a contemplé, sublime héros de la foi ; il vous a possédé dans son
sein ; il a vénéré en vous le noble exilé, le courageux confesseur ; et votre
séjour dans nos régions est demeuré l’un de leurs plus chers et de leurs plus
glorieux souvenirs. Soyez l’intercesseur des contrées sur lesquelles s’étendit
autrefois votre juridiction de Patriarche, ô Athanase ! Mais ayez souvenir
aussi du secours et de l’hospitalité que vous offrit l’Occident. Rome vous
protégea, elle prit en main votre cause, elle rendit la sentence qui vous
justifiait et vous rétablissait dans vos droits ; du haut du ciel, rendez-lui
ce qu’elle fit pour vous ; soutenez et consolez son Pontife, successeur de
Jules qui vous secourut il y a quinze siècles. Une tempête affreuse s’est
déchaînée contre le roc qui porte toutes les Églises, et l’arc-en-ciel ne
paraît pas encore sur les nuées. Priez, ô Athanase, afin que ces tristes jours
soient abrégés, et que le siège de Pierre cesse bientôt d’être en butte à ces
attaques de mensonge et de violence qui sont en même temps un sujet de scandale
pour les peuples.
Vos efforts, ô grand
Docteur, étouffèrent l’odieux arianisme ; mais en nos temps et dans nos régions
occidentales, cette audacieuse hérésie a levé de nouveau la tête. Elle étend
ses ravages à la faveur de cette demi-science qui s’unit à l’orgueil, et qui
est devenue le péril principal de nos jours. Le Fils éternel de Dieu,
consubstantiel au Père, est blasphémé par les adeptes d’une pernicieuse
philosophie, qui consent à voir en lui le plus grand des hommes, à la condition
qu’on leur accordera qu’il fut seulement un homme. En vain la raison et
l’expérience démontrent que tout est surnaturel en Jésus ; ils s’obstinent à
fermer les yeux, et contre toute bonne foi ils osent mêler au langage d’une
admiration hypocrite le dédain pour la foi chrétienne, qui reconnaît dans le
fils de Marie le Verbe éternel incarné pour le salut des hommes. Confondez les
nouveaux ariens, ô Athanase ! Mettez à nu leur faiblesse superbe et leur
artifice ; dissipez l’illusion de leurs malheureux adeptes ; qu’il soit enfin
reconnu que ces prétendus sages qui osent blasphémer la divinité du Christ,
vont se perdre les uns après les autres dans les abîmes honteux du panthéisme,
ou dans le chaos d’un désolant scepticisme, au sein duquel expire toute morale
et s’éteint toute intelligence.
Conservez en nous, ô
Athanase, par l’influence de vos mérites et de vos prières, le précieux don de
la foi que le Seigneur a daigné nous confier ; obtenez-nous de confesser et
d’adorer toujours Jésus-Christ comme notre Dieu éternel et infini, Dieu de
Dieu, lumière de lumière, vrai Dieu de vrai Dieu, engendré et non fait, qui
pour notre salut, à nous hommes, a daigné prendre chair en Marie. Révélez-nous
ses grandeurs jusqu’au jour où nous les contemplerons avec vous dans le séjour
de gloire. En attendant, nous converserons avec lui par la foi sur cette terre
témoin des splendeurs de sa résurrection. Vous l’avez aimé, ô Athanase ! ce Fils
de Dieu, notre Créateur et notre Sauveur. Son amour a été l’âme de votre vie,
le mobile de votre dévouement héroïque à son service. Cet amour vous a soutenu
dans les luttes colossales où le monde entier semblait se soulever contre vous
; il vous a rendu plus fort que toutes les tribulations ; obtenez-le pour nous,
cet amour qui ne craint rien parce qu’il est fidèle, cet amour que nous devons
à Jésus, qui, étant la splendeur éternelle du Père, sa Sagesse infinie, a
daigné « s’humilier jusqu’à prendre la forme d’esclave , et se rendre pour nous
obéissant jusqu’à la mort, et la mort de la Croix [1] ». Comment paierons-nous
son dévouement, si ce n’est en lui donnant tout notre amour, à votre exemple, ô
Athanase ! Et en exaltant d’autant plus ses grandeurs qu’il s’est lui-même plus
abaissé pour nous sauver ?
[1] Philip. II, 8.
Monastery
of Saint Abraam
دير الأنبا إبرام
Bhx Cardinal
Schuster, Liber Sacramentorum
La fête de cet invincible
champion de la consubstantialité du Logos n’entra dans les Bréviaires romains
que durant le bas moyen âge, et elle fut enrichie de leçons propres et du rite
double seulement au temps de saint Pie V. Cela s’explique parfaitement. Le
Calendrier romain primitif avait un caractère local tranché ; les anciens Pères
orientaux n’eurent jamais une grande popularité en terre latine ; si bien
qu’aujourd’hui encore on ne célèbre aucun office liturgique d’un grand nombre
de ces antiques flambeaux de sagesse. Saint Grégoire de Nysse, saint Denys
d’Alexandrie, saint Épiphane, etc. n’ont, dans le Bréviaire romain, aucune
commémoraison. Toutefois saint Athanase a des mérites spéciaux pour avoir
quasi-droit de cité dans la Ville éternelle, puisque, condamné par les Ariens,
déposé de son siège et fugitif dans le monde entier qui s’était comme mis
d’accord pour se coaliser contre lui, il chercha un asile assuré à Rome où il
trouva, en la personne du pape Jules, un vengeur autorisé de la sainteté de sa cause.
Ce fut là, sur l’Aventin, dans le palais de la noble Marcella, dont il était
l’hôte, que l’évêque exilé décrivit pour la première fois aux Romains la vie
merveilleuse d’Antoine et de Pacôme en Égypte. La première semence de vertus
monastiques, jetée par Athanase sur le mont Aventin, fut suivie rapidement
d’une abondante floraison de moines et de monastères qui, au dire de saint
Jérôme, changea l’insouciante capitale du monde romain en une nouvelle
Jérusalem.
Il convient de rappeler
que ce fut le pape Jules qui, ayant cassé l’injuste déposition d’Athanase, le
rendit à son trône patriarcal.
Socrate [2] et Sozomène,
racontant le fait, l’attribuent expressément à la primauté du Pape sur toute
l’Église : Parce qu’à lui, à cause de la dignité du siège, appartenait le soin
de tous, il restitua à l’un et à l’autre (Athanase d’Alexandrie et Paul de
Constantinople) leur propre Église [3].
Sous Grégoire XIII, on
érigea à Rome, en l’honneur de saint Athanase, une église qui est annexée au
Collège pontifical grec, et où, pour cette raison, les offices sont célébrés en
rit byzantin.
La messe est en partie du
Commun des Confesseurs, en partie celle des Docteurs, et elle fait allusion aux
persécutions et aux bannissements dont Athanase fut victime.
Dans la lecture, il est
question des souffrances de l’Apôtre et de leur ultime raison d’être dans la
vie chrétienne, car l’âme, avant d’arriver à la vie glorieuse, doit revivre la
vie du Christ affligé et souffrant (II Cor., IV, 5-14). C’est pourquoi, quelque
grandes que soient les tribulations, et bien que l’esprit se sente incapable de
vaincre la tempête, la foi cependant le soutient, parce qu’elle lui montre que
l’adversité n’est pas destinée, dans les conseils de Dieu, à l’abattre, mais à
l’entraîner à la victoire, puisque, comme le dit l’Apôtre : Virtus in
infirmitate perficitur.
Le premier verset
alléluiatique est tiré du psaume 109 : Tu es sacerdos, etc... Cette divine
promesse est appliquée fort gracieusement à saint Athanase, qui fut plusieurs
fois déposé de son trône patriarcal grâce aux manœuvres des Ariens, en sorte
que, dans tout le monde, il n’y avait plus un pouce de terre où il fût à l’abri
de leurs représailles. A cause de lui furent aussi persécutés des papes et de
nombreux et saints évêques qui ne voulaient pas participer à ces manœuvres. Et
pourtant, seul contre tous, il réussit finalement à rentrer à Alexandrie, et,
comme le dit le Bréviaire : mortuus est in suo lectulo.
Le second verset
alléluiatique est le même que pour la fête d’un autre saint évêque persécuté et
exilé, saint Jean Chrysostome, le 27 janvier.
L’Évangile (Matth., X,
23-28) trace, pour ainsi dire, le programme de vie d’Athanase dans les
persécutions, et il a été magnifiquement illustré par lui dans sa propre
apologie De fuga sua. Même durant la persécution, on ne doit pas être prodigue
de sa vie, pas plus que d’aucun autre bien reçu de Dieu. La vie d’un évêque
appartient moins à lui qu’à l’Église, et il ne peut l’exposer inutilement si
cela doit porter préjudice aux âmes et être pour lui d’un faible avantage. En
ce cas, le fait de se soustraire par la fuite à la haine des ennemis est aussi
méritoire que de prolonger son martyre pour l’amour du troupeau de
Jésus-Christ, et c’est le signe d’une âme sage et généreuse que de savoir endurer
l’épreuve.
L’antienne pour la
Communion, tirée de la lecture évangélique de ce jour, est empruntée à la messe
Salus, de plusieurs martyrs. En voici le sens : Quand il ne peut faire plus, le
monde voudrait du moins nous réduire au silence, pour que nous ne prêchions pas
aux peuples cette parole évangélique qui est la condamnation de ses principes.
Mais cela même ne nous est pas permis, comme le déclarèrent au sanhédrin Pierre
et Jean : Non enim possumus quae vidimus et audivimus non loqui [4] Voilà vraiment
l’instrument de notre victoire sur le monde : la foi. Toute la terre avait
conspiré contre Athanase, et pourtant, pendant près d’un demi-siècle, il tint
tête à ses adversaires ; patriarche invisible, car il paraissait à Alexandrie
et en disparaissait sans que les Ariens pussent arriver à s’emparer de lui, il
gouverna son Église avec tant d’autorité qu’être en communion avec lui
équivalait alors à être catholique, c’est-à-dire fidèle à la consubstantialité
du Verbe définie à Nicée.
Nous ne saurions renoncer
à rapporter aujourd’hui, en l’honneur d’un si grand docteur, son énergique
proposition sur l’indépendance de l’Église vis-à-vis du pouvoir laïque.
« S’il s’agit d’une
décision des évêques, en quoi cela regarde-t-il l’empereur ? Quand a-t-on jamais
entendu parler d’une chose pareille ? Quand un décret ecclésiastique a-t-il
jamais reçu son autorité de l’empereur ou obtenu de lui sa reconnaissance ? De
nombreux conciles ont été célébrés jusqu’ici ; beaucoup de décrets
ecclésiastiques ont été rendus ; mais jamais les Pères n’ont sollicité de
telles approbations de l’empereur ; jamais celui-ci ne s’est immiscé dans les
affaires ecclésiastiques. » [5]
[2] Hist. Eccl. II, c.
15, P. Gr., LXVII, col. 211-212.
[3] Hist. Eccl. III,
VIII, P. Gr., LXVII, col. 1051-52.
[4] Act., IV, 20.
[5] Hist. Arian. ad
Monachos. n. 54 (P. Gr. XXV, col. 755-756).
Dom Pius Parsch, le Guide
dans l’année liturgique
Si l’on vous poursuit
dans une ville, fuyez dans l’autre.
Saint Athanase. — Jour de
mort : 2 mai 373. Tombeau : Actuellement dans l’église de Sainte-Croix, à
Venise. Image : On le représente en évêque grec, avec un livre à la main. Vie :
Nous sommes en présence d’un héros de la foi, né vers 295. Sans doute il ne fut
pas martyr, mais sa vie fut un martyre au vrai sens du mot. Athanase le Grand,
le père de l’orthodoxie (de la vraie foi), mena le combat de l’Église contre
l’arianisme — une hérésie qui niait la divinité du Christ. Jeune diacre, il
avait déjà été, au Concile de Nicée (325), le « plus intrépide champion contre
les Ariens et le principal soutien de la foi de l’Église ». A la mort de son
évêque (328), « tout le peuple de l’Église catholique se réunit comme un corps
et une âme et cria, à mainte reprise, qu’Athanase devait être évêque. C’était
d’ailleurs le désir de l’évêque Alexandre, à son lit de mort. Tout le monde
appelait Athanase un homme vertueux et saint, un chrétien, un ascète, un
véritable évêque » ; Ce fut alors un combat de 50 ans. Sous cinq empereurs
différents, le saint évêque fut exilé cinq fois. Au prix de ces épreuves
incessantes, il rendit témoignage à la vérité de la foi catholique. Jamais son
attachement à l’Église ne fut ébranlé ; jamais son courage ne faiblit. Au
milieu des horribles calomnies et des terribles persécutions dont il était
l’objet, il trouva sa principale consolation dans l’amour indéfectible du
peuple catholique. Mais la haine des Ariens était implacable. Pour échapper à
leur rage et au péril continuel de mort, il dut se cacher pendant cinq ans dans
une citerne desséchée. Seul un ami fidèle connaissait sa retraite et lui
apportait de la nourriture. Mais quand il fuyait devant ses persécuteurs, Dieu
le protégeait visiblement. Un jour que les satellites de l’empereur le poursuivaient
pour le tuer, il tourna son bateau, lui fit remonter le courant et alla ainsi à
la rencontre de ceux qui le poursuivaient. Les soldats lui demandèrent si
Athanase était loin. Il répondit bravement : . Il n’est pas loin d’ici ». Les
soldats continuèrent la poursuite dans le sens opposé et le saint gagna du
temps pour se mettre en sûreté. Il échappa ainsi à plusieurs dangers par la
protection divine. Il mourut enfin à Alexandrie, dans son lit, sous le règne de
l’empereur Valens (373). Saint Athanase laissa plusieurs écrits remarquables
tant pour l’édification des fidèles que pour la défense de la foi catholique.
Il avait gouverné l’Église d’Alexandrie pendant 46 ans.
La messe (In medio). — La
messe décrit, dans ses différentes parties, la vie mouvementée du grand évêque.
A l’Introït, le saint docteur se tient « au milieu » de nous et nous prêche la
parole de Dieu. Dans l’Épître, saint Athanase nous dépeint, en empruntant les
mots de l’Apôtre des nations, les fatigues et les peines qu’il a endurées pour
l’Évangile du Seigneur : « Nous portons toujours la mort du Christ dans notre
corps afin que la vie de Jésus se manifeste en nous ». L’Alléluia chante sa
dignité sacerdotale qui est un reflet du sacerdoce suprême du Christ. « Si l’on
vous persécute dans une ville, fuyez dans une autre » ; ces paroles de
l’Évangile, le saint docteur les a réalisées. Sa vie fut un enchaînement de
fuites et de bannissements. Mais le saint trouva dans la visite intime du
Seigneur, dans l’Eucharistie, la consolation et la force. Il doit en être de
même pour nous (Comm.).
Symbolum Athanasianum
Quicúmque vult salvus
esse, * ante ómnia opus est, ut téneat cathólicam fidem :
Quam nisi quisque
íntegram inviolatámque serváverit, * absque dúbio in ætérnum períbit.
Fides autem cathólica hæc
est : * ut unum Deum in Trinitáte, et Trinitátem in unitáte venerémur.
Neque confundéntes
persónas, * neque substántiam separántes.
Alia est enim persóna
Patris, ália Fílii, * ália Spíritus Sancti :
Sed Patris, et Fílii, et
Spíritus Sancti una est divínitas, * æquális glória, coætérna maiéstas.
Qualis Pater, talis
Fílius, * talis Spíritus Sanctus.
Increátus Pater,
increátus Fílius, * increátus Spíritus Sanctus.
Imménsus Pater, imménsus
Fílius, * imménsus Spíritus Sanctus.
Ætérnus Pater, ætérnus
Fílius, * ætérnus Spíritus Sanctus.
Et tamen non tres ætérni,
* sed unus ætérnus.
Sicut non tres increáti,
nec tres imménsi, * sed unus increátus, et unus imménsus.
Simíliter omnípotens
Pater, omnípotens Fílius, * omnípotens Spíritus Sanctus.
Et tamen non tres
omnipoténtes, * sed unus omnípotens.
Ita Deus Pater, Deus
Fílius, * Deus Spíritus Sanctus.
Ut tamen non tres Dii, *
sed unus est Deus.
Ita Dóminus Pater,
Dóminus Fílius, * Dóminus Spíritus Sanctus.
Et tamen non tres Dómini,
* sed unus est Dóminus.
Quia, sicut singillátim
unamquámque persónam Deum ac Dóminum confitéri christiána veritáte compéllimur
: * ita tres Deos aut Dóminos dícere cathólica religióne prohibémur.
Pater a nullo est factus
: * nec creátus, nec génitus.
Fílius a Patre solo est :
* non factus, nec creátus, sed génitus.
Spíritus Sanctus a Patre
et Fílio : * non factus, nec creátus, nec génitus, sed procédens.
Unus ergo Pater, non tres
Patres : unus Fílius, non tres Fílii : * unus Spíritus Sanctus, non tres
Spíritus Sancti.
Et in hac Trinitáte nihil
prius aut postérius, nihil maius aut minus : * sed totæ tres persónæ coætérnæ
sibi sunt et coæquáles.
Ita ut per ómnia, sicut
iam supra dictum est, * et únitas in Trinitáte, et Trínitas in unitáte
veneránda sit.
Qui vult ergo salvus
esse, * ita de Trinitáte séntiat.
Sed necessárium est ad
ætérnam salútem, * ut Incarnatiónem quoque Dómini nostri Iesu Christi fidéliter
credat.
Est ergo fides recta ut
credámus et confiteámur, * quia Dóminus noster Iesus Christus, Dei Fílius, Deus
et homo est.
Deus est ex substántia
Patris ante sǽcula génitus : * et homo est ex substántia matris in sæculo
natus.
Perféctus Deus, perféctus
homo : * ex ánima rationáli et humána carne subsístens.
Æquális Patri secúndum
divinitátem : * minor Patre secúndum humanitátem.
Qui licet Deus sit et
homo, * non duo tamen, sed unus est Christus.
Unus autem non
conversióne divinitátis in carnem, * sed assumptióne humanitátis in Deum.
Unus omníno, non
confusióne substántiæ, * sed unitáte persónæ.
Nam sicut ánima
rationális et caro unus est homo : * ita Deus et homo unus est Christus
Qui passus est pro salúte
nostra : descéndit ad ínferos : * tértia die resurréxit a mórtuis.
Ascéndit ad cælos, sedet
ad déxteram Dei Patris omnipoténtis : * inde ventúrus est iudicáre vivos et
mórtuos.
Ad cuius advéntum omnes
hómines resúrgere habent cum corpóribus suis ; * et redditúri sunt de factis
própriis ratiónem.
Et qui bona egérunt,
ibunt in vitam ætérnam : * qui vero mala, in ignem ætérnum.
Symbole de Saint Athanase
Quiconque veut être sauvé
doit, avant tout, tenir la foi catholique :
s’il ne la garde pas
entière et pure, il périra sans aucun doute pour l’éternité.
Voici la foi catholique :
nous vénérons un Dieu dans la Trinité et la Trinité dans l’Unité,
sans confondre les
Personnes ni diviser la substance :
autre est en effet la
Personne du Père, autre celle du Fils, autre celle du Saint-Esprit ;
mais une est la divinité
du Père, du Fils et du Saint-Esprit, égale la gloire, coéternelle la majesté.
Comme est le Père, tel
est le Fils, tel est aussi le Saint-Esprit :
incréé est le Père,
incréé le Fils, incréé le Saint-Esprit ;
infini est le Père,
infini le Fils, infini le Saint-Esprit ;
éternel est le Père,
éternel le Fils, éternel le Saint-Esprit ;
et cependant, ils ne sont
pas trois éternels, mais un éternel ;
tout comme ils ne sont
pas trois incréés, ni trois infinis, mais un incréé et un infini.
De même, tout-puissant
est le Père, tout-puissant le Fils, tout-puissant le Saint-Esprit ;
et cependant ils ne sont
pas trois tout-puissants, mais un tout-puissant.
Ainsi le Père est Dieu,
le Fils est Dieu, le Saint-Esprit est Dieu ;
et cependant ils ne sont
pas trois Dieux, mais un Dieu.
Ainsi le Père est
Seigneur, le Fils est Seigneur, le Saint-Esprit est Seigneur ;
et cependant ils ne sont
pas trois Seigneurs, mais un Seigneur ;
car, de même que la
vérité chrétienne nous oblige à confesser que chacune des personnes en
particulier est Dieu et Seigneur, de même la religion catholique nous interdit
de dire qu’il y a trois Dieux ou trois Seigneurs.
Le Père n’a été fait par
personne et il n’est ni créé ni engendré ;
le Fils n’est issu que du
Père, il n’est ni fait, ni créé, mais engendré ;
le Saint-Esprit vient du
Père et du Fils, il n’est ni fait, ni créé, ni engendré, mais il procède.
Il n’y a donc qu’un Père,
non pas trois Pères ; un Fils, non pas trois Fils ; un Saint-Esprit, non pas
trois Saint-Esprit.
Et dans cette Trinité il
n’est rien qui ne soit avant ou après, rien qui ne soit plus grand ou plus
petit, mais les Personnes sont toutes trois également éternelles et
semblablement égales.
Si bien qu’en tout, comme
on l’a déjà dit plus haut, on doit vénérer, et l’Unité dans la Trinité, et la
Trinité dans l’Unité.
Qui donc veut être sauvé,
qu’il croie cela de la Trinité.
Mais il est nécessaire au
salut éternel de croire fidèlement aussi en l’incarnation de notre Seigneur
Jésus-Christ.
C’est donc la foi droite
que de croire et de confesser que notre Seigneur Jésus-Christ, Fils de Dieu,
est Dieu et homme.
Il est Dieu, de la
substance du Père, engendré avant les siècles, et il est homme, de la substance
de sa mère, né dans le temps ;
Dieu parfait, homme
parfait composé d’une âme raisonnable et de chair humaine,
égal au Père selon la
divinité, inférieur au Père selon l’humanité.
Bien qu’il soit Dieu et
homme, il n’y a pas cependant deux Christ, mais un Christ ;
un, non parce que la
divinité a été transformée en la chair, mais parce que l’humanité a été assumée
en Dieu ;
un absolument, non par un
mélange de substance, mais par l’unité de la personne.
Car, de même que l’âme
raisonnable et le corps font un homme, de même Dieu et l’homme font un Christ.
Il a souffert pour notre
salut, il est descendu aux enfers, le troisième jour il est ressuscité des
morts,
il est monté aux cieux,
il siège à la droite du Père, d’où il viendra juger les vivants et les morts.
A sa venue, tous les
hommes ressusciteront avec leurs corps et rendront compte de leurs propres actes
:
ceux qui ont bien agi
iront dans la vie éternelle, ceux qui ont mal agi, au feu éternel.
Telle est la foi
catholique : si quelqu’un n’y croit pas fidèlement et fermement, il ne pourra
être sauvé.
SOURCE : http://www.introibo.fr/02-05-St-Athanase-eveque#nh6
Athanase d’Alexandrie a été le « roc » qui s’est dressé contre Arius et
les non nicéens. Son double traité Contra Gentes et De Incarnatione, de même
que son ouvrage dogmatique fondamental, Contre les ariens, défendent une vision
traditionnelle de l’Incarnation insistant sur la pleine divinité et la réelle
humanité du Christ. Son argumentation est tirée de la Bible et de la tradition
de l’Église. Athanase est l’évêque le plus dynamique de l’Égypte chrétienne au
IVe siècle
44. Certains parlent même du « siècle d’Athanase ». Grégoire de Nazianze le
nomme « le champion et le défenseur de la foi de Nicée » et « le pilier de
l’Église »
46. Accédant au siège épiscopal d’Alexandrie après la mort d’Alexandre en 328,
il n’a qu’un seul but : défendre la foi proclamée à Nicée. Ses convictions et
sa lutte pour la vérité le mènent au milieu des plus grands combats pour la
foi, où il se montre tolérant et modéré.
1. Jusqu’à l’épiscopat
Athanase d’Alexandrie naît vers 298-29947, dans une famille probablement
chrétienne au sein de laquelle il reçoit une bonne éducation religieuse.
Grégoire de Nazianze écrit qu’il avait une excellente connaissance de la Bible,
et le compare aux grands personnages qui ont marqué l’histoire biblique : Noé,
Abraham, Moïse, Aaron, David, Salomon, etc48. Ses ouvrages, en raison des
citations scripturaires qu’ils renferment, sont un témoignage éclairant de sa
familiarité avec les livres saints. Au temps des dernières persécutions, il
était trop jeune pour garder un souvenir de scènes sanglantes, mais il en avait
entendu parler et il ressentait une grande admiration pour ses prédécesseurs,
voyant jusqu’où ils étaient allés par amour du Christ, le Logos de Dieu fait
chair pour nous.
Son enfance reste plutôt inconnue. Rufin d’Aquilée50 raconte toutefois la
fameuse histoire de la rencontre entre Alexandre d’Alexandrie et Athanase.
L’évêque donnait un festin en l’honneur de la fête de saint Pierre Apôtre,
quand il aperçut par la fenêtre quelques garçons en train de jouer sur la
plage. Le « chef de la bande », Athanase, alors âgé de 15-16 ans, reproduisait
sur ses camarades de jeu le rite du baptême chrétien. Alexandre envoya un de
ses prêtres pour faire venir ce jeune homme auprès de l’évêque. Dans le dialogue,
il constata la piété de l’adolescent et déclara valides les baptêmes qu’il
avait effectués. À la suite de cet épisode, Alexandre le prit avec lui et
s’occupa de sa formation théologique et spirituelle. Dans l’ouvrage de jeunesse
d’Athanase, Contre les Païens et Sur l’Incarnation du Logos, transparaît
l’influence théologique d’Alexandre et des grands noms de l’École d’Alexandrie,
Clément et Origène. Cependant, sa manière de penser la foi chrétienne a quelque
chose d’original grâce à l’empreinte pastorale qui domine son oeuvre et sa
réflexion théologique.
En 318, au moment où éclate l'arianisme, Athanase est ordonné diacre par
Alexandre. Celui-ci en fait son secrétaire. Cependant, Athanase porte en lui un
grand désir de perfection et d’idéal de vie chrétienne. Il entre en contact
avec les moines de la Thébaïde et noue des relations profondes avec le «
patriarche des solitaires », Antoine le Grand : « Je fus son disciple, et,
comme Élisée, je versais l’eau sur les mains de cet autre Élie »
51. Pendant plusieurs de ses exils, Athanase trouve un bon accueil chez les
moines du désert pour lesquels il écrit la Vie d’Antoine, une sorte de règle
monastique pour tous ceux qui veulent suivre le Christ selon le modèle de vie
du grand Antoine.
En qualité de secrétaire de son évêque, Athanase participe au concile de Nicée
de 325. Comme simple diacre, il est peu probable qu’il ait pris la parole en
public, mais il a dû jouer un important rôle dans les coulisses du concile.
Dans l’affaire de Mélèce de Lycopolis, Athanase prend le parti d’Alexandre,
c’est-à-dire qu’il soutient son choix de remplacer, à sa mort, un évêque nommé
par Alexandre par un évêque mélétien après élection et approbation par
Alexandre. Seul Mélèce reste privé du droit d’exercer ses fonctions épiscopales.
À Nicée, Athanase trouve le vrai sens de sa vie : devenir le champion et le
défenseur de la foi signée par les pères conciliaires. De plus, il a
probablement eu l’occasion de rencontrer à Nicée les principaux partisans de la
doctrine d’Arius et les principaux théologiens anti-ariens, Eustathe d’Antioche
et Marcel d’Ancyre
52. Après cette « victoire apparente de l’orthodoxie » sur l’arianisme, la vie
d’Athanase va connaître des moments de « gloire » entremêlés de temps d’exil et
d’excommunication.
2. Un épiscopat mouvementé
Dans ses Lettres festales, Athanase dit qu’au moment de son élection pour
la plus haute charge ecclésiastique en Égypte, en l’année 328, il n’avait pas
l’âge requis, c’est-à dire 30 ans. Cela provoqua des ennuis avec les mélétiens
53. Autant le peuple était dans la joie et la satisfaction pour le nouvel
évêque, autant ses adversaires, ariens et mélétiens, cherchaient à lui opposer
d’autres candidats. Épiphane
54 rapporte que les mélétiens avaient choisi un certain Théonas, mais qu’il est
mort au bout de trois mois.
Après sa consécration, Athanase commence ses visites pastorales — Thébaïde,
Pentapole, Ammoniaca —, dans le but de grouper tous les évêques « nicéens » et
de les encourager dans la défense de la foi contre toute doctrine erronée.
Comme évêque, il noue davantage de relations avec les moines du désert. Il
trouve un grand plaisir à fréquenter ce lieu où il s’y rend souvent. Selon la
tradition, il aurait conféré le sacerdoce
55 à Pacôme lors de l'une de ses visites. En qualité d’évêque, Athanase entre
en contact avec ses fidèles par des visites, mais surtout par ses Lettres
festales
56. Dans les deux premières lettres, il donne un message de paix et de joie ;
dans la troisième, il se plaint de ceux qui enseignent une autre doctrine et
troublent la paix de l’Église.
L’empereur Constantin remarque très vite le jeune évêque qui se distingue par
sa foi, son ascèse, sa piété et son zèle pour l’Église d’Alexandrie. Il lui
donne le nom d’« homme de Dieu ». Arius, resté silencieux après Nicée, écrit en
327 une lettre à Constantin où il exprime sa profession de foi. Le mot «
hypostase » était soigneusement évité. À la suite de cette lettre, l’empereur
oblige Athanase à recevoir Arius et ses partisans dans la communion de l’Église.
Le refus de l’évêque entraîne, en 335, la convocation d’un synode à Tyr, où il
est caractérisé comme un homme violent, irascible, non obéissant aux ordres
impériaux. Athanase quitte le synode pour aller trouver l’empereur et
s’expliquer, mais le synode profite de sa fuite pour le condamner.
L’empereur convoque un nouveau synode à Constantinople. Celui-ci approuve la
condamnation. Athanase est exilé à Trèves en Gaule où il est accueilli par
l’évêque Maximin. Il passe deux ans dans cette ville d’où, par l’intermédiaire
des Lettres festales, il entretient le contact avec son Église d’Alexandrie
afin d’encourager ses fidèles à se garder de la doctrine arienne. Seule la mort
de Constantin, en 337, lui permet de revenir dans son diocèse à la demande de
Constance II.
En novembre 337, Athanase rentre dans son diocèse pour la plus grande joie des
prêtres et des fidèles. Les Ariens avaient ordonné évêque Pistus, fidèle
compagnon d’Arius. Mais Athanase fit appel au pape Jules afin d’éclaircir une
fois pour toutes la question arienne. Il gagne l’estime du pape et devint le
défenseur acharné de la divinité du Sauveur
58. Entre temps, Pistus est remplacé par Grégoire de Cappadoce qui s’impose par
la force comme évêque d’Alexandrie. Il chasse Athanase de son palais épiscopal.
Après quelque temps passé aux environs de la ville, Athanase se dirige vers
Rome où il arrive en 339. Avec Ossius de Cordoue, il va à Sardique où se tient
un synode : Orientaux et Occidentaux y sont invités. Le synode débat de
questions dogmatiques. Les participants envisagent une nouvelle formule de foi
pour remplacer celle de Nicée.
Toutefois, Athanase exerce une grande influence sur l’assemblée qui se range de
son côté pour maintenir la formule de foi nicéenne. Cependant, Grégoire de
Cappadoce est toujours l’évêque d’Alexandrie soutenu par l’empereur. D’où
l’indignation d’Athanase qui ne cesse de proclamer le droit de l’Église à se
gouverner elle-même :
Où y a-t-il un canon stipulant qu’un évêque doit être nommé par la cour ? Où se
trouve le canon qui permet aux soldats d’envahir les églises ? Quelle tradition
accorde à des comtes et à des eunuques ignorants une autorité dans les
questions ecclésiastiques et le droit de faire connaître par des édits les
décisions de ceux qui portent le nom d’évêques ?… Montrez-moi encore une Église
qui jouisse encore du privilège d’adorer le Christ en toute liberté ? […]
Tandis que l’empereur est le protecteur de l’hérésie et désire pervertir la
vérité, tout comme Achab voulut changer la vigne de Nabot en jardin potager,
complaît à toutes les requêtes des hérétiques, car leurs suggestions rejoignent
ses propres désirs.
À la mort de Grégoire en 345, Constance II rappelle Athanase sur son siège60.
Prenant la route d’Alexandrie, l’évêque passe par Rome et le pape Jules lui
confie une lettre pour le clergé d’Égypte. Le 21 octobre 346, Athanase rentre à
Alexandrie et se fait acclamer par des foules venues à sa rencontre. Reprenant
ses fonctions d’évêque, il commence ses visites pastorales, rencontre et
réconforte les moines de la Thébaïde. De grands écrits théologiques et
dogmatiques datent de cette période : la Lettre sur les décrets du concile de
Nicée, L’Épître sur la pensée de Denis, l'Apologie contre les Ariens, le traité
Sur la virginité. Très vite, sa renommée dépasse les frontières d’Égypte
61. Après la mort du pape Jules, Athanase envoie une lettre à son successeur,
Libère, pour le mettre au courant des questions théologiques en Orient
62. Cependant, sur l’insistance de l’empereur, favorable à l’arianisme, le pape
convoque un concile à Milan en 355, où tous les évêques, à l’exception de
trois, Lucifer de Cagliari, Eusèbe de Verceil et Denis de Milan, condamnent
Athanase qui s’étonnait de toutes ces années de paix. Suite à cette
condamnation, l'évêque quitte sa ville sans but précis et devient un « fuyard
».
Quand les fidèles apprennent la nouvelle du départ d’Athanase, ils font de leur
mieux pour convaincre le pouvoir impérial de faire revenir leur évêque. Tous
ces efforts sont vains : Athanase est considéré comme un ennemi public. Les
églises sont donc remises aux mains des Ariens
63. Voyant toute son oeuvre détruite et la doctrine nicéenne menacée, le grand
docteur se retire au désert auprès des moines, ses fidèles amis. Il profite de
cette occasion pour visiter les monastères de son diocèse et s’entretenir avec
ces solitaires sur la foi chrétienne reçue des Apôtres et transmise par
l’Église. Du désert, il continue à écrire des oeuvres dogmatiques : les Lettres
à Sérapion de Thmuis (sur la divinité de l’Esprit-Saint), La lettre à Sérapion
(encouragements pour garder la foi de l’Église), l'Apologie à Constance,
l'Apologie pour la fuite, l'Histoire des Ariens adressée aux moines, Synodes de
Rimini et de Séleucie
64. En 361, Julien succède à Constance, Grégoire de Cappadoce est emprisonné,
et le retour d’Athanase est possible. Il rentre à Alexandrie en février 362
après six ans d’absence. Pour sa plus grande joie, il constate, une fois de
plus, la fidélité de ses ouailles à son enseignement et à la foi de Nicée. Dans
son panégyrique Grégoire de Nazianze décrit ce troisième retour d’Athanase :
Ensuite l’Athlète revient de son vigoureux voyage, car c’est ainsi que
j’appelle un exil subi à cause de la Trinité et en même temps qu’elle. Ainsi il
est accueilli par les citadins en liesse et à peu près par tous les Égyptiens
rassemblés de toutes parts, accourus même des coins les plus reculés, les uns
pour se rassasier ne fût-ce que d’entendre ou de voir Athanase, les autres,
comme l’Écriture le raconte aussi, on le sait, au sujet des Apôtres, uniquement
pour être sanctifiés par son ombre (cf. Ac 5, 15) et même par l’imagerie qui
représente de nouveau son portrait. De sorte que, de mémoire d’homme, parmi les
nombreuses manifestations et réceptions organisées bien souvent déjà dans tous
les temps en l’honneur non seulement de beaucoup d’autorités publiques ou
religieuses mais encore en l’honneur de beaucoup de particulier très
distingués, pas une seule n’attira une foule plus nombreuse et plus brillante.
Reprenant ses fonctions, Athanase travaille au rétablissement du symbole nicéen
là où la doctrine arienne avait gagné du terrain. Au printemps de 362, il
réunit un concile à Alexandrie dans le dessein d’accorder le pardon aux prêtres
et aux évêques qui ont adhéré à la théologie arienne par crainte ou séduction
impériale. La formule de Nicée est réaffirmée, bien que l’influence de Mélèce
laisse des traces difficiles à effacer. Le concile traite aussi d'une question
dogmatique nouvelle posée par Apollinaire de Laodicée : l’existence d’une âme
rationnelle dans le Christ. Les décisions du concile triomphent sur tout
l’Orient et elles sont aussi acceptées par Rome. L’empereur Julien, jaloux du
succès d’Athanase, réagit avec violence contre lui :
Je n’apprendrais rien de ce que tu fais qui me fût plus agréable que
l’expulsion, hors de tous les points de l’Égypte, de cet Athanase, de ce
misérable qui a osé, sous mon règne, baptiser des femmes grecques de
distinction .
L’évêque d’Alexandrie quitte ainsi la ville pour la quatrième fois, mais il
prononce ces paroles prophétiques : « ne vous inquiétez pas, mes enfants, c’est
un petit nuage, et il passe vite ». Athanase reprend la route du désert de
Thébaïde où les moines saluent son arrivée par des acclamations. En été 363,
Julien meurt pendant la guerre contre les Perses, et Jovien, un nicéen
convaincu, rappelle l’évêque sur son siège à Alexandrie après 14 mois de
désert. Malheureusement, Jovien meurt subitement dans un accident survenu sur
la route de Constantinople. Son successeur, Valentinien, donne à son frère
Valens le gouvernement de l’Empire d’Orient. Celui-ci, un arien convaincu,
ordonne l’exil des nicéens. Ainsi, Athanase reprend la route de l’exil pour la
cinquième fois. Cet exil ne va durer que quatre mois. Dès février 366, les autorités
impériales le remettent solennellement en possession du siège d’Alexandrie.
Athanase entreprend alors des initiatives de réconciliation avec ceux qui ont
obéi à la doctrine arienne par crainte, peur ou ignorance. Il fait connaître au
pape Libère ses démarches et le met au courant de l’état de la doctrine en
Orient :
La faute commise par l’ignorance est effacée par le repentir. On ne doit pas
refuser le pardon à ceux qui, à Rimini, ont agi par ignorance. Mais on doit
condamner les auteurs de l’hérésie, ceux qui, par leurs sophismes, ont égaré
les esprits simples et jeté un voile sur la vérité.
3. Une fin de vie tranquille
Après tant de luttes, de souffrances et d’exclusions, Athanase voit ses efforts
enfin couronnés. Le peuple est dans la joie et jouit d’avoir un si digne
évêque, dans la lignée de Denis et d’Alexandre d’Alexandrie. Pendant la
dernière période de sa vie, Athanase se consacre à l’administration de son
diocèse. Malgré la vieillesse, il reste toujours jeune d’âme, prêt à lutter
jusqu’au bout afin de défendre l’héritage de la foi chrétienne. Ses derniers
livres sont sereins. Ce sont des ouvrages ascétiques, biographiques,
exégétiques. La Vie d’Antoine, ouvrage écrit à la demande des moines, connaît
un grand succès en Orient auprès des gens qui, par amour du Christ, le Logos de
Dieu Incarné, veulent tout quitter pour le suivre, selon l’exemple du grand
Antoine.
Avec l’aide de l’empereur, Athanase entreprend un énorme travail de
construction d’églises. Ainsi, avec l’autorisation du préfet d’Alexandrie, il
commence la reconstruction du Caesarion. En 369, Athanase fait construire dans
un quartier d’Alexandrie, Mendinion, une église qui porte son nom. Il
l’inaugure le 7 août 370. Il intervient également en faveur de l’unité des
chrétiens, surtout dans l’Église d’Antioche où apparaît la querelle théologique
sur la divinité de l’Esprit-Saint. C’est aux évêques d’Antioche qu’Athanase
donne des explications concernant la formule de foi signée à Nicée dans le
Tomus ad Antiochenos. Après 75 ans de vie, dont 45 comme patriarche d’Égypte,
sans n’avoir jamais manqué à son devoir, d’abord de chrétien puis d’évêque,
Athanase rend son âme à Dieu dans la nuit du 2 au 3 mai 373. Avant de mourir,
il désigne Pierre « un ancien du presbytérium qui, après l’avoir suivi partout,
administra l’épiscopat » pour lui succéder sur le siège d’Alexandrie.
Athanase d’Alexandrie reste pour ses contemporains un homme de contradiction.
Dur avec ses adversaires, charitable et vrai pasteur pour ses fidèles, il
laisse le souvenir d’un grand évêque convaincu et zélé, ayant le grand souci de
transmettre le plus fidèlement possible la foi selon l’Écriture, l’enseignement
des Apôtres et la Tradition de l’Église. Il est un symbole, une doctrine, une
force suprême de l’amour du Christ, celui qui incarne la foi de Nicée et la
défense de la divinité du Logos. Sans jamais se lasser, seul parfois contre
tous, il espère toujours la victoire de Dieu. Prudent et souple, il sait à la
fois attaquer l’adversaire, lui résister et le fuir. Pour lui, « le propre de
la religion chrétienne n’est pas d’imposer mais de persuader ». Athanase est
l’homme qui ne se laisse pas convaincre par les subtilités, et pour montrer la
fausseté de ses adversaires, il expose ses convictions le plus clairement
possible, même si parfois il doit utiliser des néologismes qu’il explique par
la suite. Athanase le Grand reste avant tout un chrétien, un évêque, un homme
de Dieu dévoué totalement au service de la plus grande cause : la vérité sur le
Christ, le Logos de Dieu fait homme, pour notre salut73. Toute la vie
d’Athanase d’Alexandrie est un lien cohérent entre foi et conviction, ascèse et
mission au nom de l’unité et de la paix dans l’Église, l’épouse immaculée du
Christ.
SOURCE : http://www.coptipedia.com/patriarches-a-eveques/saint-athanase-le-grand-dalexandrie-legal-des-apotres.html
Statua di S. Atanasio nella reggia di Venaria Reale
Saint Athanasius of
Alexandria
Also
known as
Athanasius of Egypt
Athanasius the Great
Champion of Christ’s
Divinity
Champion of Orthodoxy
Father of Orthodoxy
Greek Doctor
of the Church
Holy Hierarch
Pillar of the Church
Profile
Studied the
classics and theology in Alexandria, Egypt. Deacon, secretary,
and student of bishop Alexander
of Alexandria.
Attended the Council of Nicea in 325 where
he fought for the defeat of Arianism and
acceptance of the divinity of Jesus. Formulated the doctrine of homo-ousianism which
says that Christ is the same substance as the Father; Arianism taught
that Christ was different from and a creation of the Father, a creature and not
part of God. Bishop of Alexandria c.328;
he served for 46 years. When the dispute over Arianism spilled
over from theology to
politics, Athanasius got exiled five
times, spending more than a third of his episcopate in exile. Biographer of Saint Anthony
the Abbot and Saint Potamon
of Heraclea. Confessor of
the faith and Doctor
of the Church, he fought for the acceptance of the Nicene Creed.
Born
c.295 at Alexandria, Egypt
2 May 373 at Alexandria, Egypt of
natural causes
relics in
San Croce, Venice, Italy
–
bishop standing
over a defeated heretic
Additional
Information
A
Garner of Saints, by Allen Banks Hinds, M.A.
Book
of Saints, by the Monks of
Ramsgate
Lives of the Saints, by Father Alban
Butler
Pope
Benedict XVI: General Audience, 20
June 2007
Roman
Martyrology, 1914 edition
Saint
Athanasius, by Father Adrian
Fortescue
Saints
and Their Symbols, by E A Greene
Saints
of the Day, by Katherine Rabenstein
Short
Lives of the Saints, by Eleanor Cecilia Donnelly
Saint Athanasius, the
Father of Orthodoxy, by Mother Frances Alice Monica Forbes, RSCJ
audiobook version by Librivox
On the Incarnation,
by Saint Athanasius
of Alexandria
audiobook version by Librivox
youtube video of audiobook with image montage
The Life of Antony,
by Saint Athanasius
of Alexandria
audiobook version by Librivox
youtube video of audiobook with image montage
books
Our Sunday Visitor’s Encyclopedia of Saints
other
sites in english
uCatholic:
Saint Athanasius
uCatholic:
Athanasian Creed
Catholic Book Blogger
Saint Athanasius: Marriage is Good, Virginity is Better
Saint Athanasius: Believe – It’s the Rational Thing
images
audio
Contra Gentes, by Saint Athanasius of Alexandria (librivox
audiobook)
Four Discourses Against the Arians, by Saint Athanasius of
Alexandria (librivox audiobook)
Later Treatises of Saint Athanasius, Archbishop of Alexandria (librivox
audiobook)
Life of Anthony, by Saint Athanasius of Alexandria
(librivox audiobook, version 1)
Life of Anthony, by Saint Athanasius of Alexandria (librivox
audiobook, version 2)
On the Incarnation of the Word, by Saint Athanasius of
Alexandria (CCEL version)
On the Incarnation, by Saint Athanasius of Alexandria
(Librivox version)
Saint Athanasius, the Father of Orthodoxy, by Mother
Frances Alice Monica Forbes, RSCJ (Librivox audiobook)
video
On the Incarnation of the Word, by Saint Athanasius of
Alexandria (audiobook with image montage)
e-books
Library of Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church, Festal
Epistles, by Saint Athanasius of Alexandria
Library of Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church, Historical
Tracts, by Saint Athanasius of Alexandria
Library of Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church, Treatises
on Arianism, v1, by Saint Athanasius of Alexandria
Library of Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church, Treatises
on Arianism, v2, by Saint Athanasius of Alexandria
Life of Saint
Anthony, by Saint Athanasius of Alexandria
sitios
en español
Martirologio Romano, 2001 edición
sites
en français
Abbé
Christian-Philippe Chanut
fonti
in italiano
nettsteder
i norsk
Readings
For the Son of God became
man so that we might become God. – Saint Athanasius
Brethren, how fine a
thing it is to move from festival to festival, from prayer to prayer, from holy
day to holy day. The time is now at hand when we enter on a new beginning: the
proclamation of the blessed Passover, in which the Lord was sacrificed. We feed
as on the food of life, we constantly refresh our souls with his precious
blood, as from a fountain. Yet we are always thirsting, burning to be
satisfied. But he himself is present for those who thirst and in his goodness
invites them to the feast day. Our Savior repeats his words: If anyone thirsts,
let him come to me and drink. He quenched the thirst not only of those who came
to him then. Whenever anyone seeks him he is freely admitted to the presence of
the Savior. The grace of the feast is not restricted to one occasion. Its rays
of glory never set. It is always at hand to enlighten the mind of those who
desire it. Its power is always there for those whose minds have been
enlightened and who meditate day and night on the holy Scriptures, like the one
who is called blessed in the holy psalm: Blessed is
the man who has not followed the counsel of the wicked, or stood where sinners
stand, or sat in the seat of the scornful, but whose delight is in the law of
the Lord, and who meditates on his law day and night. Moreover, my friends, the
God who first established this feast for us allows us to celebrate it each
year. He who gave up his Son to death for our salvation, from the same motive
gives us this feast, which is commemorated every year. This feast guides us
through the trials that meet us in this world. God now gives us the joy of
salvation that shines out from this feast, as he brings us together to form one
assembly, uniting us all in spirit in every place, allowing us to pray together
and to offer common thanksgiving, as is our duty on the feast. Such is the
wonder of his love: he gathers to this feast those who are far apart, and
brings together in unity of faith those who may be physically separated from
each other. – from an Easter letter
by Saint Athanasius
The Word who became all
things for us is close to us, our Lord Jesus Christ who promises to remain with
us always. He cries out, saying: See, I am with you all the days of this age.
He is himself the shepherd, the high priest, the way and the door, and has
become all things at once for us. In the same way, he has come among us as our
feast and holy day as well. The blessed Apostle says of him who was awaited:
Christ has been sacrificed as our Passover. It was Christ who shed his light on
the psalmist as he prayed: You are my joy, deliver me from those surrounding
me. True joy, genuine festival, means the casting out of wickedness. To achieve
this one must live a life of perfect goodness and, in the serenity of the fear
of God, practice contemplation in one’s heart. This was the way of the saints,
who in their lifetime and at every stage of life rejoiced as at a feast. Blessed David,
for example, not once but seven times rose at night to win God’s favor through
prayer. The great Moses was full of joy as he sang God’ s praises in hymns of
victory for the defeat of Pharaoh and the oppressors of the Hebrew people.
Others had hearts filled always with gladness as they performed their sacred
duty of worship, like the great Samuel and the blessed Elijah. Because of their
holy lives they gained freedom, and now keep festival in heaven. They rejoice
after their pilgrimage in shadows, and now distinguish the reality from the
promise. When we celebrate the feast in our own day, what path are we to take?
As we draw near to this feast, who is to be Our guide? Beloved, it must be none
other than the one whom you will address with me as our Lord Jesus Christ. He
says: I am the way. As blessed John tells us: it is Christ who takes away the
sin of the world. It is he who purifies our souls, as the prophet Jeremiah
says: Stand upon the ways; look and see which is the good path, and you will
find in it the way of amendment for your souls. In former times the blood of
goats and the ashes of a calf were sprinkled on those who were unclean, but
they were able to purify only the body. Now through the grace of God’s Word
everyone is made abundantly clean. If we follow Christ closely we shall be
allowed, even on this earth, to stand as it were on the threshold of the
heavenly Jerusalem, and enjoy the contemplation of that everlasting feast, like
the blessed apostles, who in following the Savior as their leader, showed, and
still show, the way to obtain the same gift from God. They said: See, we have
left all things and followed you. We too follow the Lord, and we keep his feast
by deeds rather than by words. – from an Easter letter
by Saint Athanasius
You will not see anyone
who is really striving after his advancement who is not given to spiritual
reading. And as to him who neglects it, the fact will soon be observed by his
progress. – Saint Athanasius
The Word of God,
incorporeal, incorruptible, and immaterial, entered our world. Out of his
loving-kindness for us he came to us, and we see this in the way he revealed
himself openly to us. Taking pity on mankind’s weakness, and moved by our
corruption, he could not stand aside and see death have the mastery over us. He
did not want creation to perish and his Father’s work in fashioning man to be
in vain. He therefore took to himself a body, no different from our own, for he
did not wish simply to be in a body or only to be seen. By dying for others, he
immediately banished death for all mankind. The corruption of death no longer
holds any power over mankind, thanks to the Word, who has come to dwell among
us through his one body. – from a talk by Saint Athanaius
Mary, Mother of Grace, it
becomes you to be mindful of us, as you stand near him who granted you all
graces, for you are the Mother of God and our Queen. Help us for the sake of
the King, the Lord God and Master who was born of you. For this reason, you are
called full of grace. Remember us, most holy Virgin, and bestow on us gifts
from the riches of your graces, Virgin full of graces. – Saint Athanasius
MLA
Citation
“Saint Athanasius of
Alexandria“. CatholicSaints.Info. 2 May 2024. Web. 1 May 2025.
<https://catholicsaints.info/saint-athanasius-of-alexandria/>
SOURCE : https://catholicsaints.info/saint-athanasius-of-alexandria/
Saint Athanasius at the Council of Nicea, William of Tyre manuscripts.
BENEDICT XVI
GENERAL AUDIENCE
Paul VI Audience Hall
Wednesday, 20 June 2007
Saint Athanasius of
Alexandria
Dear Brothers and
Sisters,
Continuing our
revisitation of the great Teachers of the ancient Church, let us focus our
attention today on St Athanasius of Alexandria.
Only a few years after
his death, this authentic protagonist of the Christian tradition was already
hailed as "the pillar of the Church" by Gregory of Nazianzus, the
great theologian and Bishop of Constantinople (Orationes, 21, 26), and he
has always been considered a model of orthodoxy in both East and West.
As a result, it was not
by chance that Gian Lorenzo Bernini placed his statue among those of the four
holy Doctors of the Eastern and Western Churches - together with the images of
Ambrose, John Chrysostom and Augustine - which surround the Chair of St Peter
in the marvellous apse of the Vatican Basilica.
Athanasius was
undoubtedly one of the most important and revered early Church Fathers. But
this great Saint was above all the impassioned theologian of the Incarnation of
the Logos, the Word of God who - as the Prologue of the fourth Gospel
says - "became flesh and dwelt among us" (Jn 1: 14).
For this very reason
Athanasius was also the most important and tenacious adversary of the Arian
heresy, which at that time threatened faith in Christ, reduced to a creature
"halfway" between God and man, according to a recurring tendency in
history which we also see manifested today in various forms.
In all likelihood
Athanasius was born in Alexandria, Egypt, in about the year 300 A.D. He
received a good education before becoming a deacon and secretary to the Bishop
of Alexandria, the great Egyptian metropolis. As a close collaborator of his
Bishop, the young cleric took part with him in the Council of Nicaea, the first
Ecumenical Council, convoked by the Emperor Constantine in May 325 A.D. to
ensure Church unity. The Nicene Fathers were thus able to address various
issues and primarily the serious problem that had arisen a few years earlier
from the preaching of the Alexandrian priest, Arius.
With his theory, Arius
threatened authentic faith in Christ, declaring that the Logos was
not a true God but a created God, a creature "halfway" between God
and man who hence remained for ever inaccessible to us. The Bishops gathered in
Nicaea responded by developing and establishing the "Symbol of faith"
["Creed"] which, completed later at the First Council of Constantinople,
has endured in the traditions of various Christian denominations and in the
liturgy as the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed.
In this fundamental text
- which expresses the faith of the undivided Church and which we also recite
today, every Sunday, in the Eucharistic celebration - the Greek term
homooúsios is featured, in Latin consubstantialis: it means that
the Son, the Logos, is "of the same substance" as the
Father, he is God of God, he is his substance. Thus, the full divinity of the
Son, which was denied by the Arians, was brought into the limelight.
In 328 A.D., when Bishop
Alexander died, Athanasius succeeded him as Bishop of Alexandria. He showed
straightaway that he was determined to reject any compromise with regard to the
Arian theories condemned by the Council of Nicaea.
His intransigence -
tenacious and, if necessary, at times harsh - against those who opposed his
episcopal appointment and especially against adversaries of the Nicene Creed,
provoked the implacable hostility of the Arians and philo-Arians.
Despite the unequivocal
outcome of the Council, which clearly affirmed that the Son is of the same
substance as the Father, these erroneous ideas shortly thereafter once again
began to prevail - in this situation even Arius was rehabilitated -, and they
were upheld for political reasons by the Emperor Constantine himself and then
by his son Constantius II.
Moreover, Constantine was
not so much concerned with theological truth but rather with the unity of the
Empire and its political problems; he wished to politicize the faith, making it
more accessible - in his opinion - to all his subjects throughout the Empire.
Thus, the Arian crisis,
believed to have been resolved at Nicaea, persisted for decades with
complicated events and painful divisions in the Church. At least five times -
during the 30 years between 336 and 366 A.D. - Athanasius was obliged to
abandon his city, spending 17 years in exile and suffering for the faith. But
during his forced absences from Alexandria, the Bishop was able to sustain and
to spread in the West, first at Trier and then in Rome, the Nicene faith as
well as the ideals of monasticism, embraced in Egypt by the great hermit,
Anthony, with a choice of life to which Athanasius was always close.
St Anthony, with his
spiritual strength, was the most important champion of St Athanasius' faith.
Reinstated in his See once and for all, the Bishop of Alexandria was able to
devote himself to religious pacification and the reorganization of the
Christian communities. He died on 2 May 373, the day when we celebrate his
liturgical Memorial.
The most famous doctrinal
work of the holy Alexandrian Bishop is his treatise: De Incarnatione, On
the Incarnation of the Word, the divine Logos who was made
flesh, becoming like one of us for our salvation.
In this work Athanasius
says with an affirmation that has rightly become famous that the Word of God
"was made man so that we might be made God; and he manifested himself
through a body so that we might receive the idea of the unseen Father; and he
endured the insolence of men that we might inherit immortality" (54, 3).
With his Resurrection, in fact, the Lord banished death from us like
"straw from the fire" (8, 4).
The fundamental idea of
Athanasius' entire theological battle was precisely that God is accessible. He
is not a secondary God, he is the true God and it is through our communion with
Christ that we can truly be united to God. He has really become
"God-with-us".
Among the other works of
this great Father of the Church - which remain largely associated with the
events of the Arian crisis - let us remember the four epistles he addressed to
his friend Serapion, Bishop of Thmuis, on the divinity of the Holy Spirit which
he clearly affirmed, and approximately 30 "Festal" Letters addressed
at the beginning of each year to the Churches and monasteries of Egypt to
inform them of the date of the Easter celebration, but above all to guarantee
the links between the faithful, reinforcing their faith and preparing them for
this great Solemnity.
Lastly, Athanasius also
wrote meditational texts on the Psalms, subsequently circulated widely, and in
particular, a work that constitutes the bestseller of early Christian
literature: The Life of Anthony, that is, the biography of St Anthony
Abbot. It was written shortly after this Saint's death precisely while the
exiled Bishop of Alexandria was staying with monks in the Egyptian desert.
Athanasius was such a
close friend of the great hermit that he received one of the two sheepskins
which Anthony left as his legacy, together with the mantle that the Bishop of
Alexandria himself had given to him.
The exemplary biography
of this figure dear to Christian tradition soon became very popular, almost
immediately translated into Latin, in two editions, and then into various
Oriental languages; it made an important contribution to the spread of
monasticism in the East and in the West.
It was not by chance that
the interpretation of this text, in Trier, was at the centre of a moving tale
of the conversion of two imperial officials which Augustine incorporated into
his Confessions (cf. VIII, 6, 15) as the preamble to his own
conversion.
Moreover, Athanasius
himself showed he was clearly aware of the influence that Anthony's fine
example could have on Christian people. Indeed, he wrote at the end of this
work: "The fact that his fame has been blazoned everywhere, that all
regard him with wonder, and that those who have never seen him long for him, is
clear proof of his virtue and God's love of his soul. For not from writings,
nor from worldly wisdom, nor through any art, was Anthony renowned, but solely
from his piety towards God. That this was the gift of God no one will deny.
"For from whence
into Spain and into Gaul, how into Rome and Africa, was the man heard of who
dwelt hidden in a mountain, unless it was God who makes his own known
everywhere, who also pro-mised this to Anthony at the beginning? For even if
they work secretly, even if they wish to remain in obscurity, yet the Lord
shows them as lamps to lighten all, that those who hear may thus know that the
precepts of God are able to make men prosper and thus be zealous in the path of
virtue" (Life of Anthony, 93, 5-6).
Yes, brothers and
sisters! We have many causes for which to be grateful to St Athanasius. His
life, like that of Anthony and of countless other saints, shows us that
"those who draw near to God do not withdraw from men, but rather become
truly close to them" (Deus Caritas Est, n. 42).
To special groups
Greetings to the pilgrims
gathered in the Vatican Basilica
Dear Brothers and
Sisters,
I am happy to welcome all
the English-speaking pilgrims to this Basilica. May your visit to the tombs of
the Apostles Peter and Paul strengthen your faith in Christ and renew your love
of his Church. Commending you to the intercession of the Virgin Mary, I assure
you of my prayers for each one of you, your relatives and your friends.
* * *
Greetings to the pilgrims
gathered at Paul VI Audience Hall
I welcome the
participants in the course organized by Foyer Unitas Lay Center. My greetings
also go to the Brothers of the Poor of St Francis Seraphicus. Upon all the
English-speaking visitors present at today's Audience, especially those from
England, Australia and the United States, I invoke God's abundant Blessings.
I also greet the young
people, sick and newly-weds. Tomorrow, we will celebrate
the liturgical Memorial of St Aloysius Gonzaga, a wonderful example of
austerity and Gospel purity. Call on him, dear young people, so that
he may help you build an intimate friendship with Jesus that will enable you to
face your life seriously. May this young Saint be for you, dear sick
people, a support in transforming your daily suffering and trials into
privileged opportunities to cooperate in the salvation of souls; and may it
make you, dear newly-weds, witnesses of a chaste and generous love.
© Copyright 2007 -
Libreria Editrice Vaticana
SOURCE : http://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/audiences/2007/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20070620.html
St. Athanasius
St. Athanasius, the great
champion of the Faith was born at Alexandria, about the year 296, of Christian
parents. Educated under the eye of Alexander, later Bishop of his native city,
he made great progress in learning and virtue. In 313, Alexander succeeded
Achillas in the Patriarchal See, and two years later St. Athanasius went to the
desert to spend some time in retreat with St. Anthony.
In 319, he became a
deacon, and even in this capacity he was called upon to take an active part against
the rising heresy of Arius, an ambitious priest of the Alexandrian Church who
denied the Divinity of Christ. This was to be the life struggle of St.
Athanasius.
In 325, he assisted his
Bishop at the Council of Nicaea, where his influence began to be felt. Five
months later Alexander died. On his death bed he recommended St. Athanasius as
his successor. In consequence of this, Athanasius was unanimously elected
Patriarch in 326.
His refusal to tolerate
the Arian heresy was the cause of many trials and persecutions for St.
Athanasius. He spent seventeen of the forty-six years of his episcopate in
exile. After a life of virtue and suffering, this intrepid champion of the
Catholic Faith, the greatest man of his time, died in peace on May 2, 373. St. Athanasius
was a Bishop and Doctor of the Church.
SOURCE : http://www.ucatholic.com/saints/saint-athanasius/
SAINT ATHANASIUS, BISHOP
FEAST DAY: MAY 2ND
ATHANASIUS was born in
Egypt towards the end of the third century, and was from his youth pious,
learned, and deeply versed in the sacred writings, as befitted one whom God had
chosen to be the champion and defender of His Church against the Arian heresy. Though
only a deacon, he was chosen by his bishop to go with him to the Council of
Nicaea, A.D. 325, and attracted the attention of all by the learning and
ability with which he defended the Faith. A few months later, he became
Patriarch of Alexandria, and for forty-six years he bore, often well-nigh
alone, the whole brunt of the Arian assault. On the refusal of the Saint to
restore Arius to Catholic communion, the emperor ordered the Patriarch of
Constantinople to do so. The wretched heresiarch took an oath that he had
always believed as the Church believes; and the patriarch, after vainly using
every effort to move the emperor, had recourse to fasting and prayer, that God
would avert from the Church the frightful sacrilege. The day came for the
solemn entrance of Arius into the great church of Sancta Sophia. The heresiarch
and his party set out glad and in triumph. But before he reached the church,
death smote him swiftly and awfully, and the dreaded sacrilege was averted. St.
Athanasius stood unmoved against four Roman emperors; was banished five times;
was the butt of every insult, calumny, and wrong the Arians could devise, and
lived in constant peril of death. Though firm as adamant in defence of the
Faith, he was meek and humble, pleasant and winning in converse, beloved by his
flock, unwearied in labors, in prayer, in mortifications, and in zeal for
souls. In the year 373 his stormy life closed in peace, rather that his people
would have it so than that his enemies were weary of persecuting him. He left to
the Church the whole and ancient Faith, defended and explained in writings rich
in thought and learning, clear, keen, and stately in expression. He is honored
as one of the greatest of the Doctors of the Church.
REFLECTON.—The Catholic
Faith, says St. Augustine, is more precious far than all the riches and
treasures of earth; more glorious and greater than all its honors, all its
possessions. This it is which saves sinners, gives light to the blind, restores
penitents, perfects the just, and is the crown of martyrs.
SOURCE : http://jesus-passion.com/saint_athanasius_bishop.htm
%2C_window_09b%2C_transept%2C_St._Athanasius.jpg){kind=spacer}
Athanasius of Alexandria
B Doctor (RM)
Born in Alexandria,
Egypt, in c. 295-297; died May 2, 373; Doctor of the Church (one of the four
great Greek Doctors); in the East he is venerated as one of the three Holy
Hierarchs.
"All of us are naturally frightened of dying and the dissolution of our bodies,
but remember this most startling fact: that those who accept the faith of the
cross despise even what is normally terrifying, and for the sake of Christ
cease to fear even death. When He became man, the Savior's love put away death
from us and renewed us again; for Christ became man that we might become
God." --Athanasius
"He became what we are that He might make us what He is."
--Athanasius
Saint Athanasius Athanasius was a deacon when he led the battle for orthodoxy
against Arianism at the Council of Nicaea, which resulted in his being exiled
five times. Nothing is known of his family, except that they were Christians
and that he had a brother named Peter. So the story really begins on the sands
of Alexandria with a group of children who attracted the attention of their
bishop, Saint Alexander. From his house overlooking the shore, Alexander
watched them at their play and, curious to know what game it was, sent for
them. They told him they were playing at 'baptisms,' one of them acting the
part of the bishop, another being dipped, in imitation of a church ceremony.
Impressed by their innocence and seriousness, he added to their simple game the
Confirmation, and years afterwards the boy who had played the part of the
bishop became his archdeacon. He was Athanasius, who himself later became
bishop of Alexandria.
The saint received an excellent education at the catechetical school of
Alexandria that encompassed Greek literature and philosophy, rhetoric, law, and
Christian doctrine. His intimacy with Biblical texts is extraordinary. In his
own writings, he tells us that he learned theology from teachers who had been
confessors during the Maximian persecution. From early youth, he formed a close
relationship with the hermits of the desert, which was to prove providential
during his exiles because they protected him during several of them.
Athanasius lived at a time when the Church, having survived the fires of
persecution and all the ruthless fury of the pagan world, was torn and
imperilled by internal heresy and division. The arch- heretic was priest of
Baukalis named Arius, who disputed the truth of our Lord's divinity, and who
commanded a popular following. He claimed that Christ was not eternal, that He
was created in time by the Eternal Father and, therefore, could not be
described as co- equal with the Father.
Alexander demanded a written statement from Arius about his teaching to be
discussed first with the Alexandrian clergy and then at a synod of Egyptian
bishops. With only two dissidents, the bishops denounced Arius and the eleven
priests and deacons who followed his teaching. Arius then spread his heresy in
Caesarea, where he enlisted the support of Eusebius of Nicomedia and other
Syrian prelates.
In Egypt he had won over the Meletians, a disaffected body, and many of the
so-called intellectuals. Meanwhile, his doctrines were embodied in hymns set to
popular tunes that were carried into the marketplaces and by sailors to all
parts of the Mediterranean. So widespread became the influence of this pallid
and persuasive priest that the famous Council of Nicaea was called in 325,
presided over by Emperor Constantine.
At the time, Athanasius, who had just composed the treatise De Incarnatione
expounding on the redemptive work of Christ in restoring fallen man to the
image of God in which he was created, was an under-sized, 25-year-old deacon
serving as secretary to Bishop Alexander. He accompanied the bishop to the
council, probably not thinking that he would play any important role in its
outcome. But upon him rested the fate of Christendom; for he more than any
other perceived the gravity of the points at issue, and by his clear and
powerful arguments disconcerted the heretics.
Thus, the battle of faith was won, and the letter sent out by the council
confirming the excommunication of Arius, concluded with the words: "Pray
for us all, that what we have thought good to determine may remain inviolate,
through God Almighty, and through our Lord Jesus Christ, with the Holy Spirit,
to whom be glory for evermore." The Creed, formulated there and confirmed
by the Council of Constantinople in 381, is still used in the liturgy of the
Catholic Church.
But, as the Venerable John Henry Newman declared, in the period after the
Council of Nicaea, the laity were the firm champions of Catholic orthodoxy,
while the bishops floundered on many sides. This, of course, is an
exaggeration, but not entirely without merit. In the reaction that followed,
the discontented faction gained the ear of the emperor, brought false charges
against Athanasius, and continually sought his ruin.
Upon the death of Patriarch Alexander, Athanasius became bishop, though he was
only about 30 (in 328). Almost immediately Athanasius began a visitation of his
entire diocese. As bishop of Alexandria Athanasius also took responsibility for
the welfare of the desert monks and fathers. He became their spiritual head for
40 years. He aided the ascetic movement in Egypt, counted Saints Pachomius and
Serapion among his friends, and was the first to introduce the knowledge of
monasticism in the West. About this time he was also appointed bishop of
Ethiopia, where the Christian faith had recently found a footing.
The Arians were well-represented at the imperial court of Constantinople. So
the battles began with many of the powerful, including the two Eusebii (of
Caesarea and of Nicomedia). Eusebius of Nicomedia, an Arian bishop who returned
from exile in 330, tried to force Athanasius to admit Arius to communion, even
going so far as to enlist Emperor Constantine to pressure the saint. Athanasius
replied to the emperor's letter that the Catholic Church could hold no
communion with heretics who attacked Christ's divinity. Eusebius then tried to
justify Arius in a letter to Athanasius.
Eusebius next moved to enlist the dissident Meletians. They tried to impeach
Athanasius on trumped up charges. The Meletians claimed that the bishop had
exacted a tribute of linen for use in his church, sent gold to someone named
Philomenus who was suspected of treason, and authorized one of his deputies to
destroy a chalice that was being used for the Eucharist by a Meletian priest
named Iskhyras. Athanasius was cleared by the emperor of all these accusations.
Next he was charged with the murder of a Meletian bishop, Arsenius. Everyone
knew that the bishop was in hiding, and he ignored the summons to court.
Athanasius was compelled to appear before a council convened at Tyre in 335.
The panel was packed with enemies and Arians, who made further charges and
brought up old ones such as the broken chalice. Athanasius is credited with a
keen sense of humor, which helped him in confronting his adversaries. After his
accusers produced a hand that they said Athanasius had cut off the murdered
Arsenius, Athanasius is said to have produced the living Arsenius in court.
First pointing out his face, he then drew out from the bishop's cloak first
one, then the other hand, and said, "Let no one now ask for a third, for
God has only given a man two hands."
Realizing that his condemnation was a foregone conclusion, Athanasius abruptly
left the assembly and travelled to Constantinople. Upon his arrival he accosted
the emperor in the street in the attitude of a suppliant, and obtained an
interview. So completely did he vindicate himself that Constantine, in reply to
a letter from the Council of Tyre announcing that Athanasius had been condemned
and deposed, wrote to the signatories a severe reply summoning them to
Constantinople for a retrial of the case. But before the first letter could
reach its destination, a second one was dispatched that confirmed the sentences
of Tyre and banished Athanasius to Trier (Germany).
Thus, they succeeded in keeping Athanasius from his see, but, when he was
recalled and reinstated by Constantine's successor in 338, he was welcomed back
by the citizens in the crowded streets with tumults of applause. The great
Athanasius had returned!
The Arian controversy, however, continued to darken and distract the life of
the Church, Eusebius of Nicomedia continued his attack with fresh charges
against the saintly bishop. This time Athanasius was accused of sedition,
promoting violence, and withholding his tithe of corn from the widows and
orphans to which it belonged. One by one, old and loyal companions deserted him
or were driven from office. During a council at Antioch, he was condemned for
the second time and exiled. An Arian bishop was intruded into the see.
The assembly wrote to Pope Saint Julius seeking his confirmation of the
condemnation. At the same time the orthodox bishops of Egypt drew up an
encyclical in defense of the patriarch, which they sent to the Holy See and to
other Catholic bishops in the West. In reply the pope announced that a synod
should be called to settle the question. Athanasius took refuge among the monks
of the desert, and became an ascetic, renowned for his sanctity, beloved by his
followers.
In the meantime, when a Cappadocian named Gregory was installed as patriarch,
supplanting Athanasius, riots broke out in Alexandria. Athanasius, seeking to
allow peace to prevail, left for Rome to await the hearing of his case. This
was his most fruitful period during which he composed his most important works.
While in Rome, Athanasius established close contact with the Western bishops
who supported him in his struggles.
The synod was duly summoned, but as the Eusebians who had demanded it failed to
appear, it was held without them. The saint, of course, was completely
vindicated; a declaration later endorsed by the Council of Sardica (Sofia).
Nevertheless, Athanasius was unable to return to his see until the death of its
incumbent. Then he was allowed to return only because Constantius, on the verge
of war with Persia, believed it politic to propitiate his brother Constans by
reinstating Athanasius. Thus, for the second time Athanasius was recalled and
welcomed home by a cheering multitude.
For the next few years he was left in peace because the secular powers were
engaged in war and other disturbances. The murder of Constans, however,
eliminated the most powerful support for orthodoxy, leaving Constantius free to
crush the man he had come to regard as a personal enemy. Constantius packed
councils at Arles in 353 and Milan in 355 with Arians and semi-Arians in order
to obtain the condemnation of the saint from self-serving prelates. Constantius
also exiled Pope Liberius to Thrace, where he forced him to agree to censures
against the bishop of Alexandria.
For a time, Athanasius maintained the support of his clergy and people. But one
night, when he was celebrating a vigil in church, soldiers forced open the
doors, killed some of the congregation, and wounded others. Athanasius escaped
and disappeared into the desert, where his faithful monks hid him for six
years. Again, his exile proved to be fruitful for his theological writings.
The death of Constantius in 361 was followed by the murder of Arius, who had
usurped the see of Alexandria. The new emperor Julian the Apostate recalled all
the exiled bishops; thus, Athanasius returned to his see for a few months until
Julian realized that it would be difficult to reinstate paganism while the
champion of Catholicism ruled in Egypt. Julian therefore banished Athanasius as
a "disturber of the peace and an enemy of the gods." So, the saint
retired again to the desert. He was at Antinopolis when he was informed by two
hermits of the death of Julian, who had at that moment died in Persia from an
arrow wound.
At once he returned to Alexandria, and some months later he proceeded to
Antioch at the invitation of Emperor Jovian, who had revoked his sentence of
banishment. Jovian's reign, however, was short. In May 365, Emperor Valens
banished all the orthodox bishops, including Athanasius, who had been
reinstated by the successors of Constantius. Four months later Valens relented--
possibly because he feared an uprising of the Egyptians who had become devoted
to their much persecuted bishop.
Five times altogether he was exiled (335-338 to Trier, Germany; 341-346 to
Rome, Italy; 356-362 to the desert; 362-363 and a second time for four months
in 363 again to the desert), but out of his exile came the Athanasian Creed,
said to have been composed in a cave. He did not really write the creed (it was
probably written by Saint Eusebius of Vercelli), but it was based upon his
writings. The supreme achievement of the 'mean little fellow,' as Julian the
Apostate called him, was that in a critical hour, by his courage and tenacity,
God used him to save the faith of Christendom.
Even in exile Athanasius managed to tend his flock. It was primarily for them
that he wrote the most illuminating theological treatises on Catholic dogma. He
authored Against the Heathen (c. 318), Contra Arianos (c. 358 ?), Apologia to
Constantius, History of the Arians (primary historical source), Defense of
Flight, many letters, The Life of Antony (c. 357), and other pieces. In Against
the Arians, Athanasius drew on the work of Saints Justin and Irenaeus, who
interpreted Scripture in an orthodox tradition, to insist that the Nicene term
homoousios, although not Scriptural itself, was necessary to formulate
correctly the truth of Christ's Scriptural revelation. His Life of Saint Antony
showed his friend as singularly devoted to combatting the powers of evil. It
became a widely diffused classic. From the time of Saint Bede, it inspired
other monastic hagiographers. An 8th-century monk wrote, "If you find a
book by Athanasius and have no paper on which to copy it, write it on your
shirts."
All his thinking was soteriologically determined, hence 'the Word could never
have divinized us if He were merely divine by participation and were not
himself the essential Godhead.' Athanasius defended the oneness of God, yet the
separateness of the three Divine Persons. He also went forward to add the Holy
Spirit to the Godhead to counter Tropici. His theology of the Holy Spirit is
found in his letters to Serapion. In his enlightening treatises on Catholic
dogma, Athanasius showed that asceticism and virginity were effective ways to
restore the divine image in man. Several of his works were addressed to monks,
to whom he also gave repeated practical help.
When he returned to Alexandria after his final exile, Athanasius spent the last
seven years of his life helping to build the Nicene party. Upon his death, his
body was taken first to Constantinople and then to Venice. Although Athansius
was an intense man, he was also known for his not-so-gentle humor, which he
also used as a weapon in his arsenal to support the Catholic faith.
Athanasius has been called "the Father of Orthodoxy," "the
Pillar of the Church," and "Champion of Christ's Divinity."
Cardinal Newman described Athanasius as "a principal instrument after the
apostles by which the sacred truths of the Church have been conveyed and
secured to the world." When Saint Antony, whose biography was written by
Athanasius, died, he bequeathed "a garment and a sheep skin to the bishop
Athanasius." It is said that Athanasius treasured this garment.
(Athanasius is another saint for whom much information is easily available.)
(Attwater, Attwater2, Barr, Benedictines, Bentley, Davies, Delaney, Farmer,
Gill, Walsh, White).
In art, Saint Athanasius
is portrayed as a Greek bishop wearing a pallium between two columns. He holds
an open book and has a heretic under his feet (Roeder) He might also be
represented in a group of Greek fathers, distinguished by name (Tabor) or in a
boat on the Nile (White).
SOURCE : http://www.saintpatrickdc.org/ss/0502.shtml
Saint Athanasius's Shrine (where a portion of his relics are preserved) under St. Mark's Cathedral, Cairo
Altare nella cattedrale copta di San Marco
Saint
Athanasius's Shrine (where a portion of his relics are preserved) under St. Mark's Cathedral, Cairo
Altare nella cattedrale copta di San Marco
St. Athanasius
Bishop of Alexandria; Confessor and Doctor
of the Church; born c. 296; died 2 May, 373. Athanasius was the
greatest champion of Catholic belief on
the subject of the Incarnation that the Church has
ever known and in his lifetime earned the characteristic title of
"Father of Orthodoxy", by which he has been distinguished every
since. While the chronology of
his career still remains for the most part a hopelessly involved
problem, the fullest material for an account of the main achievements of his
life will be found in his collected writings and in the contemporary records of
his time. He was born, it would seem, in Alexandria,
most probably between the years 296 and 298. An earlier date, 293, is sometimes
assigned as the more certain year of his birth; and it is supported
apparently by the authority of the "Coptic Fragment" (published by
Dr. O. von Lemm among the Mémoires de
l'académie impériale des sciences de
S. Péterbourg, 1888) and corroborated by the undoubted maturity
of judgement revealed in the two treatises "Contra
Gentes" and "De Incarnatione", which were admittedly written
about the year 318 before Arianism as
a movement had begun to make itself felt. It must be remembered, however, that
in two distinct passages of his writings (Hist. Ar., lxiv, and De Syn.,
xviii) Athanasius shrinks from speaking as a witness at
first hand of the persecution which
had broken out under Maximian in
303; for in referring to the events of this period he makes no
direct appeal to his own personal recollections, but falls back,
rather, on tradition. Such reserve would scarcely be intelligible, if, on
the hypothesis of the earlier date, the Saint had been then a boy
fully ten years old. Besides, there must have been some semblance of a
foundation in fact for the charge brought against him by his accusers in
after-life (Index to the Festal Letters) that at the times of
his consecration to
the episcopate in 328 he had not yet attained the canonical
age of thirty years. These considerations, therefore, even if they are
found to be not entirely convincing, would seem to make it likely that he was
born not earlier than 296 nor later than 298.
It is impossible to speak
more than conjecturally of his family.
Of the claim that it was both prominent andwell-to-do, we can only observe that
the tradition to the effect is not contradicted by such scanty
details as can be gleaned from the saint's writings.
Those writings undoubtedly betray evidences of the sort of education that
was given, for the most part, only to children and youths of a better class. It
began with grammar, went on to rhetoric, and received its final touches under
some one of the more fashionable lecturers in thephilosophic schools.
It is possible, of course, that he owed his remarkable training in letters to
his saintly predecessor's favour, if not to his personal care.
But Athanasius was one of those rare personalities that derive
incomparably more from their own native gifts of intellect and character than
from the fortuitousness of descent or environment. His career almost
personifies a crisis in the history of Christianity;
and he may be said rather to have shaped the events in which he took part than
to have been shaped by them. Yet it would be misleading to urge that he was in
no notable sense a debtor to the time and place of his
birth. TheAlexandria of his boyhood was an
epitome, intellectually, morally, and politically, of that ethnically
many-coloured Graeco-Roman world, over which the Church of
the fourth and fifth centuries was beginning at last, with
undismayed consciousness, after nearly three hundred years of unwearying
propagandism, to realize its supremacy. It was, moreover, the most important
centre of trade in the whole empire; and its primacy as an emporium
of ideas was
more commanding than that of Rome or Constantinople, Antioch or Marseilles.
Already, in obedience to an instinct of
which one can scarcely determine the full significance without studying the
subsequent development of Catholicism,
its famous "Catechetical School", while sacrificing no jot
or tittle or that passion for orthodoxy which
it had imbibed from Pantænus, Clement, and Origen,
had begun to take on an almost secular character in the
comprehensiveness of its interests, and had counted pagans of
influence among its serious auditors (Eusebius, Church
History VI.19).
To have been born and
brought up in such an atmosphere of philosophizing Christianity was,
in spite of the dangers it involved, the timeliest and
most liberal of educations;
and there is, as we have intimated, abundant evidence in the saint's writings
to testify to the ready response which all the better influences of the place
must have found in the heart and mind of the growing
boy. Athanasius seems to have been brought early in life under
the immediate supervision of the ecclesiastical
authorities of his native city. Whether his long intimacy
with Bishop Alexander began in childhood, we have no means
of judging; but a story which pretends to describe the circumstances of
his first introduction to that prelate has
been preserved for us byRufinus (Hist. Eccl., I, xiv). The bishop,
so the tale runs, had invited a number of brother prelates to
meet him at breakfast after a great religious function on the
anniversary of the martyrdom of St.
Peter, a recent predecessor in the See
of Alexandria. While Alexander was waiting for his guests to
arrive, he stood by awindow, watching a group of boys at play on the seashore
below the house. He had not observed them long before he discovered that they
were imitating, evidently with no thought of irreverence, the
elaborate ritual of Christian
baptism. (Cf. Bunsen's "Christianity and Mankind",
London, 1854, VI, 465; Denzinger,
"Ritus Orientalium" in verb.; Butler's "Ancient Coptic
Churches", II, 268 et sqq.; "Bapteme chez les Coptes",
"Dict. Theol. Cath.", Col. 244, 245). He therefore sent for the
children and had them brought into his presence. In the investigation that
followed it was discovered that one of the boys, who was no other than the
future Primate of Alexandria,
had acted the part of the bishop,
and in that character had actually baptized several
of his companions in the course of their play. Alexander, who seems to
have been unaccountably puzzled over the answers he received to his inquiries,
determined to recognize the make-believe baptisms as
genuine; and decided that Athanasius and his playfellows should
go into training in order to fit themselves for a clericalcareer.
The Bollandists deal
gravely with this story; and writers as difficult to satisfy
as Archdeacon Farrar and the
late Dean Stanley are ready to accept it as bearing on its face
"every indication of truth"
(Farrar, "Lives of the Fathers", I, 337; Stanley,
"East. Ch." 264). But whether in its present form, or in the modified
version to be found in Socrates (I,
xv), who omits all reference to the baptism and
says that the game was "an imitation of the priesthood and the
order of consecrated persons", the tale raises a number
of chronological difficulties and suggests even graver questions.
Perhaps a not impossible
explanation of its origin may be found in the theory that it was one of the
many floating myths set in movement by popular imagination to
account for the marked bias towards an ecclesiastical career
which seems to have characterized the early boyhood of the future champion of
the Faith. Sozomen speaks
of his "fitness for the priesthood", and calls attention to the
significant circumstance that he was "from his tenderest years practically
self-taught". "Not long after this," adds the same authority,
theBishop Alexander "invited Athanasius to be his commensal
and secretary. He had been well educated,
and was versed in grammar and rhetoric, and had already, while still a young
man, and before reaching the episcopate, given proof to
those who dwelt with him of his wisdom and acumen" (Soz., II, xvii).
That "wisdom andacumen" manifested themselves in a various
environment. While still a levite under Alexander's care, he
seems to have been brought for a while into close relations with some
of the solitaries of the Egyptian desert,
and in particular with the great St. Anthony, whose life he is
said to have written. The evidence both of the intimacy and for the authorship
of the life in question has been challenged, chiefly by non-Catholic
writers, on the ground that the famous "Vita" shows signs of
interpolation. Whatever we may think of the arguments on the subject, it is
impossible to deny that the monastic idea appealed powerfully
to the young cleric'stemperament, and that he himself in after years was
not only at home when duty or accident threw
him among the solitaries, but was so monastically self-disciplined
in his habits as to be spoken of as an "ascetic" (Apol.
c. Arian., vi). In fourth-century usage the word would have a definiteness
of connotation not easily determinable today. (See ASCETICISM).
It is not surprising that
one who was called to fill so large a place in the history of his
time should have impressed the very form and feature of his personality,
so to say, upon the imagination of
his contemporaries.St.
Gregory Nazianzen is not the only writer who has described him for us
(Orat. xxi, 8). A contemptuous phrase of the Emperor
Julian's (Epist., li) serves unintentionally to corroborate the
picture drawn by kindlierobservers. He was slightly below the middle
height, spare in build, but well-knit, and intensely energetic. He had a finely
shaped head, set off with a thin growth of auburn hair, a small but
sensitively mobile mouth, an aquiline nose, and eyes of intense but kindly
brilliancy. He had a ready wit, was quick in intuition,
easy and affable in manner, pleasant in conversation, keen, and, perhaps,
somewhat too unsparing in debate. (Besides the references already cited, see
the detailed description given in the January Menaion quotes in
the Bollandist life. Julian
the Apostate, in the letter alluded to above sneers at the diminutiveness
of his person— mede
aner, all anthropiokos euteles, he writes.) In addition to
these qualities, he was conspicuous for two others to which even his
enemies bore unwilling testimony. He was endowed with a sense of
humour that could be as mordant — we had almost said
as sardonic — as it seems to have been spontaneous and unfailing; and
his courage was
of the sort that never falters, even in the most disheartening hour of
defeat. There is one other note in this highly gifted and
many-sided personality to
which everything else in his natureliterally ministered, and which must be
kept steadily in view, if we would possess the key to
his character and writing and understand the extraordinary
significance of his career in the history of the Christian
Church. He was by instinct neither
a liberal nor a conservative in theology.
Indeed the terms have a singular inappropriateness as applied to a temperament
like his. From first to last he cared greatly for one thing and one thing only;
the integrity of his Catholic creed.
The religion it engendered in him was obviously — considering the
traits by which we have tried to depict him — of a passionate and consuming
sort. It began and ended in devotion to the Divinity of Jesus
Christ. He was scarcely out of his teens, and certainly not
in more than deacon's orders,
when he published two treatises, in which his mind seemed to strike
the keynote of all its riper after-utterances on the subject of the Catholic Faith.
The "Contra Gentes" and the "Oratio de Incarnatione" — to
give them the Latin appellations by which they are more commonly
cited — were written some time between the years 318 and 323. St.
Jerome (De Viris Illust.) refers to them under a common title, as
"Adversum Gentes Duo Libri", thus leaving his readers to
gather the impression which an analysis of the contents of both
books certainly seems to justify, that the two treatises are in
reality one.
As a plea for the Christian position,
addressed chiefly to both Gentiles and Jews,
the young deacon's apology,
while undoubtedly reminiscential in methods and ideas of Origen and
the earlier Alexandrians, is, nevertheless,
strongly individual and almost pietistic in tone. Though it deals
with the Incarnation, it is silenton most of those ulterior problems
in defence of which Athanasius was soon to be summoned by the force of
events and the fervour of his own faith to devote the
best energies of his life. The work contains no explicit discussion of
the nature of the Word's Sonship, for instance; no attempt
to draw out the character of Our
Lord's relation to the Father; nothing, in short, of those Christological questions
upon which he was to speak with such splendid and courageous clearness
in time of shifting formularies and undetermined views. Yet
those ideas must
have been in the air (Soz., I, xv) for, some time between the years 318 and
320, Arius, a native of Libya (Epiphanius, Haer., lxix) and priest of
the Alexandrian Church, who had already fallen undercensure for
his part in the Meletian troubles which broke out during
the episcopate of St. Peter, and whose teachings had succeeded
in making dangerous headway, even among "the consecrated virgins"
of St.
Mark's see (Epiphanius, Haer., lxix; Socrates, Church
History I.6), accused Bishop Alexander of Sabellianism. Arius,
who seems to have presumed on the charitable tolerance of
the primate,
was at length deposed (Apol. c. Ar., vi) in
a synod consisting of more than one hundred bishops of Egypt and
Libya (Depositio Ar., 3). The condemned heresiarch withdrew first to Palestine
and afterwards to Bithynia, where, under the protection of Eusebius
of Nicomedia and his other "Collucianists", he was able to
increase his already remarkable influence, while his friends were endeavouring
to prepare a way for his forcible reinstatement as priest of
theAlexandrian Church. Athanasius, though only in deacon's order,
must have taken no subordinate part in these events. He was the trusted
secretary and advisor of Alexander, and his name appears in the list of
those who signed the encyclical letter subsequently issued by
the primate and
his colleagues to offset the growing prestige of the new teaching, and the
momentum it was beginning to acquire from the
ostentatious patronageextended to the deposed Arius by
the Eusebian faction. Indeed, it is to this party and to the leverage it
was able to exercise at the emperor's court that the subsequent importance
of Arianism as
a political, rather than a religious, movement seems primarily to be due.
The heresy,
of course, had its supposedly philosophic basis, which has been
ascribed by authors, ancient and modern, to the most opposite sources. St.
Epiphanius characterizes it as a king of revived Aristoteleanism (Haer.,
lxvii and lxxvi); and the same view is practically held by Socrates (Church
History II.35), Theodoret (Haer. Fab., IV, iii), and St.
Basil (Against
Eunomius I.9). On the other hand, a theologian as
broadly read as Petavius (De
Trin., I, viii, 2) has no hesitation in deriving it from Platonism; Newman in
turn (Arians of the Fourth Cent., 4 ed., 109) sees in it the influence
of Jewish prejudices rationalized by the aid of Aristoteleanideas;
while Robertson (Sel. Writ. and Let. of Ath. Proleg., 27)
observes that the "common theology", which was invariably
opposed to it, "borrowed its philosophical principles
and method from the Platonists."
These apparently conflicting statements could, no doubt, be easily adjusted;
but the truth is
that the prestige ofArianism never
lay in its ideas.
From whatever school it
may have been logically derived,
the sect,
as a sect,
was cradled and nurtured in intrigue. Save in some few
instances, which can be accounted for on quite other grounds, its prophets relied
more upon curial influence than upon piety,
or Scriptural knowledge,
or dialectics. That must be borne constantly in mind, if we would not move
distractedly through the bewildering maze of events that make up
the life of Athanasius for the next half-century to come. It is
his peculiar merit that he not only saw the drift of things from the
very beginning, but was confident of the issue down to the last (Apol. c. Ar.,
c.). His insight and courage proved almost
as efficient a bulwark to the Christian
Church in the world as did his singularly lucid grasp
of traditional Catholic belief.
His opportunity came in the year 325, when the Emperor
Constantine, in the hope of putting an end to the scandalous debates
that were disturbing the peace of the Church,
met the prelates of
the entire Catholic world
in council at Nicaea.
The
great council convoked at this juncture was something more than a
pivotal event in the history of Christianity.
Its sudden, and, in one sense, almost unpremeditated adoption of a
quasi-philosophic and non-Scriptural term — homoousion —
to express the character of orthodox belief in
the Person of the historicChrist, by defining Him to
be identical in substance, or co-essential, with the Father, together
with its confident appeal to the emperor to lend
the sanction of his authority to the decrees and
pronouncements by which it hoped to safeguard this more explicit
profession of the ancient Faith, had consequences of the gravest import,
not only to the world of ideas,
but to the world of politics as well. By the official promulgation to
the term homoöusion, theological speculation received
a fresh but subtle impetus which made itself felt long after Athanasius
and his supporters had passed away; while the appeal to
the secular arm inaugurated a policy which endured practically
without change of scope down to the publication of the Vatican decrees in
our own time. In one sense, and that a very deep and vital one, both
the definition and the policy were inevitable. It was inevitable in
the order of religious ideas that
any break in logical continuity
should be met by inquiry and protest. It was just as inevitable that the
protest, to be effective, should receive some countenance from a power which up
to that moment had affected to regulate all the graver circumstances
of life (cf. Harnack, Hist. Dog., III, 146,
note; Buchanan's tr.). As Newman has
remarked: "The Church could not meet together in one, without
entering into a sort of negotiation with the power that be;
who jealousy it is the duty of Christians,
both as individuals and
as a body, if possible, to dispel" (Arians of the Fourth Cent., 4
ed., 241).Athanasius, though not yet in priest's orders,
accompanied Alexander to the council in
the character of secretary and theological adviser.
He was not, of course, the originator of the famous homoösion. The term
had been proposed in a non-obvious and illegitimate sense by Paul
of Samosata to the Father at Antioch,
and had been rejected by them as savouring
of materialistic conceptions of the Godhead (cf. Athan.,
"De Syn., " xliii; Newman,
"Arians of the Fourth Cent., " 4 ed., 184-196; Petav. "De
Trin., " IV, v, sect. 3; Robertson, "Sel.Writ. and
Let. Athan. Proleg.", 30 sqq.).
It may even be questioned
whether, if left to his own logical instincts, Athanasius
would have suggested anorthodox revival
of the term at all ("De Decretis", 19; "Orat. c. Ar.", ii,
32; "Ad Monachos", 2). His writings, composed during the forty-six
critical years of his episcopate, show a very sparing use of the word; and
though, as Newman (Arians
of the Fourth Cent., 4 ed., 236) reminds us,
"the authentic account of the proceedings" that took place
is not extant, there is nevertheless abundant evidence in support of the common
view that it had been unexpectedly forced upon the notice of the bishops, Arian and orthodox,
in the greatsynod by Constantine's proposal to account
the creed submitted by Eusebius
of Caesarea, with the addition of the homoösion, as a safeguard
against possible vagueness. The suggestion had in all probability come
from Hosius (cf.
"Epist. Eusebii.", in the appendix to the "De
Decretis", sect. 4; Socrates, Church
History I.8 andIII.7;
Theodoret, Church
History I; Athanasius; "Arians of the Fourth Cent.", 6, n.
42; outos ten en Nikaia pistin exetheto, says the saint,
quoting his opponents); but Athanasius, in common with the leaders of theorthodox party,
loyally accepted the term as expressive of the traditional sense in
which the Church had
always held Jesus
Christ to be the Son
of God. The conspicuous abilities displayed in
the Nicaean debates and the character for courage and
sincerity he won on all sides made the youthful cleric henceforth a
marked man(St. Greg. Naz., Orat., 21). His life could not
be lived in a corner. Five months after the close of
the council the Primate of Alexandria died;
and Athanasius, quite as much in recognition of his talent, it would
appear, as in deference to the deathbed wishes of the deceased prelate,
was chosen to succeed him. His election, in spite of his extreme
youth and the opposition of a remnant of
the Arian and Meletian factions in the AlexandrianChurch,
was welcomed by all classes among the laity ("Apol.
c. Arian", vi; Sozomen, Church
History II.17, 21, 22).
The opening years of
the saint's rule
were occupied with the wonted episcopal routine of a fourth-centuryEgyptian bishop. Episcopal visitations, synods, pastoral correspondence,
preaching and the yearly round ofchurch functions consumed the bulk of his
time. The only noteworthy events of which antiquity furnishes at least probable
data are connected with the successful efforts which he made to provide a hierarchy for
the newly planted church in Ethiopia (Abyssinia)
in the person of St.
Frumentius (Rufinus I, ix; Soc. I, xix; Soz., II, xxiv), and the
friendship which appears to have begun about this time between himself and
the monks of St.
Pachomius. But the seeds of disaster which the saint's piety had
unflinchingly planted at Nicaea were beginning to bear a disquieting
crop at last. Already events were happening at Constantinople which
were soon to make him the most important figure of his time. Eusebius
of Nicomedia, who had fallen into disgrace and been banished by the Emperor
Constantine for his part in the earlier Arian controversies,
had been recalled from exile. After an adroit campaign of intrigue, carried on
chiefly through the instrumentality of theladies of the imperial
household, this smooth-mannered prelate so
far prevailed over Constantine as to induce him to order the recall
of Arius likewise from exile. He himself sent a characteristic letter
to the youthfulPrimate of Alexandria,
in which he bespoke his favour for the condemned heresiarch, who was described
as a man whose opinions had been misrepresented. These events must have
happened some time about the close of the year 330. Finally the
emperor himself was persuaded to write to Athanasius, urging that all
those who were ready to submit to
the definitions of Nicaea should be re-admitted to ecclesiastical communion.
ThisAthanasius stoutly refused to do, alleging that there could be no
fellowship between the Church and
the one who denied the Divinity of Christ.
The Bishop of Nicomedia thereupon
brought various ecclesiastical and
political charges against Athanasius, which, though unmistakably refuted
at their first hearing, were afterwards refurbished and made to do
service at nearly every stage of his subsequent trials. Four of these were very
definite, to wit: that he had not reached the canonical age at the
time of his consecration;
that he had imposed a linen tax upon the provinces; that his officers had, with
his connivance and authority, profaned the Sacred Mysteries in the
case of an alleged priest names Ischyras;
and lastly that he had put one Arenius to death and afterwards dismembered the
body for purposes of magic. The nature of the charges and the
method of supporting them were vividly characteristic of the age. The curious
student will find them set forth in picturesque detail in the second part of
the Saint's "Apologia", or "Defense against
the Arians", written long after the events themselves, about the year
350, when the retractation of Ursacius and Valens made
their publication triumphantly opportune. The whole unhappy story at this
distance of time reads in parts more like a specimen of
late Greek romance than the account of an inquisition gravely
conducted by a synod of Christian
prelates with the idea of
getting at the truth of
a series of odious accusations brought against one of their number. Summoned by
the emperor's order after protracted delays extended over a period of thirty
months (Soz., II, xxv), Athanasius finally consented to meet the
charges brought against him by appearing before a synod of prelates at Tyre in
the year 335. Fifty of his suffragans went with him to vindicate
his good name; but the complexion of the ruling party in
the synod made it evident that justice to
the accused was the last thing that was thought of. It can hardly be wondered
at, that Athanasius should have refused to be tried by such a court. He,
therefore, suddenly withdrew from Tyre,
escaping in a boat with some faithful friends who accompanied him
to Byzantium, where he had made up his mind to present himself
to the emperor.
The circumstances in
which the saint and
the great catechumen met
were dramatic enough. Constantine was returning from a hunt,
when Athanasius unexpectedly stepped into the middle of the road and
demanded a hearing. The astonished emperor could hardly believe his
eyes, and it needed the assurance of one of the attendants to convince him that
the petitioner was not an impostor, but none other than the
great Bishop of Alexandria himself.
"Give me", said the prelate,
"a just tribunal, or allow me to meet my accusers face to face
in your presence." His request was granted. An order was peremptorily sent
to the bishops,
who had tried Athanasius and, of course, condemned him in his absence, to
repair at once to the imperial city. The command reached them while they were
on their way to the great feast of the dedication of Constantine's new church at Jerusalem.
It naturally caused some consternation; but the more influential
members of the Eusebian faction never lacked either courage or
resourcefulness. The saint was taken at his word; and the old charges
were renewed in the hearing of the emperor himself. Athanasius was
condemned to go into exile at Treves, where he was received with the
utmost kindness by the saintly Bishop Maximinus and the
emperor's eldest son,Constantine. He began his journey probably in the month of
February, 336, and arrived on the banks of the Moselle in the late autumn of
the same year. His exile lasted nearly two years and a half. Public opinion in
his own diocese remained loyal to him during all that time. It
was not the least eloquent testimony to theessential worth of
his character that he could inspire such faith. Constantine's treatment
of Athanasius at this crisis in his fortunes has always been difficult to
understand. Affecting, on the one hand, a show of indignation, as if he
really believed in the political charge brought against the saint,
he, on the other hand, refused to appoint a successor to
the Alexandrian See, a thing which he might in consistency have been obliged to
do had he taken seriously the condemnation proceedings carried through by
the Eusebians at Tyre.
Meanwhile events of the
greatest importance had taken place. Arius had died
amid startlingly dramatic circumstances at Constantinople in
336; and the death of Constantine himself had followed, on the 22nd
of May the year after. Some three weeks later the
younger Constantine invited the exiled primate to
return to his see;
and by the end of November of the same year Athanasius was once more
established in his episcopalcity. His return was the occasion of great
rejoicing. The people, as he himself tells us, ran in crowds to see his face;
the churches were given over to a kind of jubilee; thanksgivings
were offered up everywhere; and clergy and laity accounted
the day the happiest in
their lives. But already trouble was brewing in a quarter from which the saint might
reasonably have expected it. The Eusebian faction, who from
this time forth loom large as the disturbers of his peace, managed to
win over to their side the weak-minded Emperor
Constantius to whom the East had been assigned in the
division of the empire that followed on the death of Constantine. The old
charges were refurbished with a graver ecclesiastical accusation
added by way of rider. Athanasius had ignored the decision of a duly
authorized synod. He had returned to his see without
the summons of ecclesiastical authority
(Apol. c. Ar., loc. cit.). In the year 340, after the failure of
the Eusebian malcontents to secure the appointment of
an Arian candidate of dubious reputation names Pistus,
the notorious Gregory of
Cappadocia was forcibly intruded into the Alexandrian See,
and Athanasius was obliged to
go into hiding. Within a very few weeks he set out for Rome to
lay his case before the Church at
large. He had made hisappeal to Pope Julius, who took up his cause
with a whole-heartedness that never wavered down to the day of
that holy pontiff's death. The pope summoned
a synod of bishops to
meet in Rome.
After a careful and detailed examination of the entire case,
the primate's innocence
was proclaimed to the Christian
world.
Meanwhile
the Eusebian party had met at Antioch and passed a series
of decrees framed for the sole purpose of preventing the saint's return
to his see.
Three years were passed at Rome,
during which time the idea of
the cenobitical life, as Athanasius had seen it practised in
the deserts of Egypt,
was preached to the clerics of
the West (St. Jerome, Epistle cxxvii, 5). Two years after
the Roman synod had published its decision,Athanasius was
summoned to Milan by
the Emperor Constans, who laid before him the plan which Constantiushad
formed for a great reunion of both the Eastern and Western
Churches. Now began a time of extraordinary activity for
the Saint. Early in the year 343 we find the undaunted exile in Gaul,
whither he had gone to consult the saintly Hosius,
the great champion of orthodoxy in
the West. The two together set out for theCouncil
of Sardica which had been summoned in deference to the Roman
pontiff's wishes. At this great gathering of prelates the
case of Athanasius was taken up once more; and once more was his innocence
reaffirmed. Two conciliar letters
were prepared, one to the clergy and faithful of Alexandria,
and the other to the bishops of Egypt and
Libya, in which the will of the Council was
made known. Meanwhile the Eusebianparty had gone
to Philippopolis, where they issued an anathema against Athanasius
and his supporters. Thepersecution against
the orthodox party
broke out with renewed vigour, and Constantius was
induced to prepare drastic measures against Athanasius and the priests who
were devoted to him. Orders were given that if
the Saint attempted to re-enter his see,
he should be put
to death. Athanasius, accordingly, withdrew fromSardica to Naissus in
Mysia, where he celebrated the Easter
festival of the year 344. After that he set out
forAquileia in obedience to a friendly summons from Constans, to
whom Italy had
fallen in the division of the empire that followed on the death
of Constantine. Meanwhile an unexpected event had taken place which made
the return of Athanasius to his see less
difficult than it had seemed for many months. Gregory of Cappadocia
had died (probably of violence)
in June, 345. The embassy which had been sent by the bishops ofSardica to
the Emperor
Constantius, and which had at first met with the most insulting treatment,
now received a favourable hearing. Constantius was
induced to reconsider his decision, owing to a threatening letter from his
brother Constans and the uncertain condition of affairs of
the Persian border, and he accordingly made up his mind to
yield. But three separate letters were needed to overcome
the naturalhesitation of Athanasius. He passed rapidly from Aquileia to Treves,
from Treves to Rome,
and from Rome by
the northern route to Adrianople and Antioch, where he met Constantius.
He was accorded a gracious interview by the vacillating Emperor, and sent
back to his see in
triumph, where he began his memorable ten years' reign, which lasted down to
the third exile, that of 356. These were full years in the life of
the Bishop; but the intrigues of the Eusebian, or Court, party
were soon renewed. Pope Julius had died in the month of April, 352,
and Liberius had
succeeded him as Sovereign Pontiff. For two years Liberius had
been favourable to the causeof Athanasius; but driven at last into
exile, he was induced to sign an ambiguous formula, from which the
great Nicene test, the homoöusion, had been studiously omitted.
In 355 a council was held at Milan,
where in spite of the vigorous opposition of a handful of loyal prelates among
the Western bishops,
a fourth condemnation of Athanasius was announced to the world. With his
friends scattered, the saintly Hosius in
exile, the Pope
Liberius denounced as acquiescing
in Arian formularies, Athanasius could hardly hope to
escape. On the night of 8 February, 356, while engaged in services in
the Church of St. Thomas, a band of armed men burst in to
secure his arrest (Apol. de Fuga, 24). It was the beginning of his third exile.
Through the influence of
the Eusebian faction at Constantinople, an Arian bishop, George of
Cappadocia, was now appointed to rule the see of Alexandria. Athanasius,
after remaining some days in the neighbourhood of the city, finally withdrew
into the deserts of
upper Egypt,
where he remained for a period of six years, living the life of
the monks and
devoting himself in his enforced leisure to the composition of that group of
writings of which we have the rest in the "Apology to Constantius",
the "Apology for his Flight", the "Letter to theMonks", and
the "History of the Arians". Legend has naturally been
busy with this period of the Saint's career; and we may find in the
"Life of Pachomius" a collection of tales brimful of
incidents, and enlivened by the recital of "deathless 'scapes in the
breach." But by the close of the year 360 a change was apparent in the
complexion of the anti-Nicene party. The Arians no longer
presented an unbroken front to their orthodoxopponents.
The Emperor
Constantius, who had been the cause of so much trouble, died 4
November, 361, and was succeeded by Julian.
The proclamation of the new prince's accession was the signal for
a pagan outbreak
against the still dominant Arian faction in Alexandria. George,
the usurping Bishop, was flung into prison and murdered amid
circumstances of great cruelty, 24 December (Hist. Aceph., VI). An
obscure presbyter of
the name of Pistus was immediately chosen by
the Arians to succeed him, when fresh news arrived that
filled the orthodox party
with hope. An edict had been put forth by Julian (Hist. Aceph.,
VIII) permitting the exiledbishops of
the "Galileans" to return to their "towns and
provinces". Athanasius received a summons from his own flock, and he
accordingly re-entered his episcopal capital 22 February, 362. With
characteristic energy he set to work to re-establish the somewhat shattered
fortunes of the orthodox party
and to purge thetheological atmosphere
of uncertainty. To clear up the misunderstandings that had arisen in the course
of the previous years, an attempt was made to determine still further the
significance of the Nicene formularies. In the meanwhile, Julian,
who seems to have become suddenly jealous of the influence
that Athanasius was exercising at Alexandria,
addressed an order to Ecdicius, the Prefect of Egypt,
peremptorily commanding the expulsion of the restored primate,
on the ground that he had never been included in the imperial act of
clemency. The edict was communicated to the bishop by
Pythicodorus Trico, who, though described in the "Chronicon
Athanasianum" (xxxv) as a "philosopher", seems to have behaved
with brutal insolence. On 23 October the people gathered about the proscribed bishop to
protest against the emperor's decree;
but the saint urged
them to submit, consoling them with the promise that his absence would be of
short duration. Theprophecy was curiously fulfilled. Julian terminated
his brief career 26 June, 363; and Athanasius returned in secret
to Alexandria,
where he soon received a document from the new emperor, Jovian,
reinstating him once more in his episcopal functions. His
first act was to convene a council which reaffirmed the
terms of the Nicene
Creed. Early in September he set out for Antioch, bearing
a synodal letter, in which the pronouncements of
this council had been embodied. At Antioch he had an
interview with the new emperor, who received him graciously and even asked him
to prepare an exposition of the orthodox faith.
But in the following FebruaryJovian died; and in October,
364, Athanasius was once more an exile.
With the turn of
circumstances that handed over to Valens the
control of the East this article has nothing to do; but
the accession of the emperor gave a fresh lease of life to
the Arian party. He issued a decreebanishing
the bishops who
has been deposed by Constantius,
but who had been permitted by Jovian to return to their sees.
The news created the greatest consternation in the city of Alexandria itself,
and the prefect, in order to prevent a serious outbreak, gave public
assurance that the very special case of Athanasius would be laid before
the emperor. But the saint seems
to have divined what was preparing in secret against him. He quietly
withdrew from Alexandria,
5 October, and took up his abode in a country house outside the city. It was
during this period that he is said to have spent four months in hiding in
his father's tomb (Sozomen, Church
History VI.12; Socrates, Church
History IV.12). Valens,
who seems to have sincerely dreaded the possible consequences of a popular
outbreak, gave order within a very few weeks for the return of Athanasius
to hissee.
And now began that last period of comparative repose which unexpectedly
terminated his strenuous and extraordinary career. He spent his remaining days,
characteristically enough, in re-emphasizing the view of the
Incarnation which had been defined at Nicaea and which
has been substantially the faith of
the Christian
Church from its earliest pronouncement in Scripture down to
its last utterance through the lips of Pius
X in our own times. "Let what was confessed by
the Fathers of Nicaea prevail", he wrote to a philosopher friend
and correspondent in the closing years of his life (Epist. lxxi, ad Max.). That
that confession did at last prevail in the
various Trinitarian formularies that followed upon that
of Nicaea was due, humanly speaking, more to his
laborious witness than to that of any other champion in the long
teachers' roll of Catholicism.
By one of those inexplicable ironies that meet us everywhere
in human history, this man, who had endured exile so often, and
risked life itself in defence of what he believed to be the
first and most essential truth of
the Catholic creed,
died not by violence or
in hiding, but peacefully in his own bed, surrounded by his clergy and
mourned by thefaithful of the see he
had served so well. His feast in the Roman Calendar is
kept on the anniversary
of his death.
[Note on his depiction in
art: No accepted emblem has been assigned to him in the history of
western art; and his career, in spite of its picturesque diversity and
extraordinary wealth of detail, seems to have furnished little, if
any, material for distinctive illustration. Mrs. Jameson tells us
that according to the Greek formula, "he ought to be represented
old, bald-headed, and with a long white beard"
(Sacred and Legendary Art, I, 339).]
Sources
All the essential
materials for the Saint's biography are to be found in his writings, especially
in those written after the year 350, when the Apologia contra Arianos was
composed. Supplementary information will be found in ST. EPIPHANIUS, Hoer.,
loc. cit.; in ST. GREGORY OF NAZIANZUS, Orat., xxi; also RUFINUS,
SOCRATES, SOZMEN, and THEODORET. The Historia Acephala, or Maffeian
Fragment (discovered by Maffei in 1738, and inserted by GALLANDI in Bibliotheca
Patrum, 1769), and the Chronicon Athanasianum, or Index to the Festal
Letters, give us data for the chronological problem. All the foregoing sources
are included in MIGNE, P.G. and P.L. The great PAPEBROCH'S Life is in the Acta
SS., May, I. The most important authorities in English are: NEWMAN, Arians
of the Fourth Century, and Saint Athanasius; BRIGHT, Dictionary of
Christian Biography; ROBERTSON, Life, in the Prolegomena to the Select
Writings and Letters of Saint Athanasius (re-edited in Library of the
Nicene and post-Nicene Fathers, New York, 1903); GWATKIN, Studies of
Arianism (2d ed., Cambridge, 1900); MOHLER, Athanasius der Grosse;
HERGENROTHER and HEFELE.
Clifford,
Cornelius. "St. Athanasius." The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol.
2. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1907.16 Apr.
2018 <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02035a.htm>.
Transcription. This
article was transcribed for New Advent by David Joyce.
Ecclesiastical
approbation. Nihil Obstat. 1907. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John
M. Farley, Archbishop of New York.
Copyright © 2020 by Kevin
Knight. Dedicated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
SOURCE : http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02035a.htm
Ікона
преподобного Афанасія Затвірника (Україна, Київ)
Icon
of St. Athanasius Recluse (Kyiv, Ukraine )
St. Athanasius, Patriarch
of Alexandria, Doctor of the Church
From his works, and the
fathers and historians of that age. See his life by Hermant, who first cleared
up the intricate history of Arianism. See also Tillemont, Ceillier, Orsi, the
Benedictin editors of this father, and Combefis, Bibl. Concionat. p. 500 ad
530.
A.D. 373.
ST. GREGORY Nazianzen
begins with these words his panegyric of this glorious saint, and champion of
the faith: 1 “When
I praise Athanasius, virtue itself is my theme: for I name every virtue as
often as I mention him who was possessed of all virtues. He was the true pillar
of the church. His life and conduct were the rule of bishops, and his doctrine
the rule of the orthodox faith.” St. Athanasius was a native of Alexandria, and
seems to have been born about the year 296. His parents who were Christians,
and remarkable for their virtue, were solicitous to procure him the best
education. After he had learned grammar and the first elements of the sciences,
St. Alexander, before he was raised to the episcopal chair of that city, was
much delighted with the virtuous deportment of the youth, and with the
pregnancy of his wit; and took upon himself the direction of his studies,
brought him up under his own eye, always made him eat with him, and employed
him as his secretary. Athanasius copied diligently the virtues of his master,
imbibed his maxims of piety and holy zeal, was directed by him in the plan and
method of his studies, and received from him the greatest assistance in the
pursuit of them. By writing under so great a master, he acquired the most
elegant, easy, and methodical manner of composition. Profane sciences he only
learned as far as they were necessary, or might be rendered subservient to
those that are more sublime and important: but from their aid he contracted an
elegant, clear, methodical, and masterly style; and was qualified to enter the
lists in defence of our holy faith with the greatest advantage. However, the
sacred studies of religion and virtue he made the serious employment of his
whole life: and how much he excelled in them, the sequel of his history and
perusal of his works show. From his easy and ready manner of quoting the holy
scriptures, one would imagine he knew them by heart; at least by the assiduous
meditation and study of those divine oracles he had filled his heart with the
spirit of the most perfect piety, and his mind with the true science of the
profound mysteries which our divine religion contains. But in his study of the
sacred writings, the tradition of the church was his guide, which he diligently
sought in the comments of the ancient doctors, as he testifies. 2 In
another place he declares that he had learned it from holy inspired masters,
and martyrs for the divinity of Christ. 3 That
he might neglect no branch of ecclesiastical learning, he applied himself
diligently to the study of the canons of the church, in which no one was more
perfectly versed: nor was he a stranger to the civil law, as appears from his
works; on which account Sulpicius Severus styles him a lawyer.
Achillas who had
succeeded St. Peter in the patriarchal see of Alexandria, dying in 313, St.
Alexander was promoted to that dignity. 4 The
desire of grounding himself in the most perfect practice of virtue drew St.
Athanasius into the deserts to the great St. Antony, about the year 315; with
whom he made a considerable stay, serving him in quality of a disciple, and
regarding it as an honour to pour water on his hands when he washed them. 5 When
he had by his retreat prepared himself for the ministry of the altar, he
returned to the city, and, having passed through the inferior degrees of
ecclesiastical orders, was ordained deacon about the year 319. St. Alexander
was so much taken with his prudence, virtue, and learning, that he desired to
have him always with him, and governed his flock by his advice. He stood much
in need of such a second, in defending his church against the calumnies and
intrigues of the schismatics and heretics. The holy patriarch St. Peter had, at
the intercession of the martyrs and confessors, dispensed with the rigour of the
canons in behalf of certain persons, who through frailty had fallen into
idolatry during the persecution, and upon their repentance had received them
again to communion. Meletius, bishop of Lycos in Thebais, unjustly took offence
at this lenity, and on that pretence formed a schism over all Egypt against St.
Peter and his successors. Arius, a Lybian by birth, and a deacon, who for
seditious practices was expelled the church by his bishop St. Peter, fell in
with Meletius. St. Peter was so well acquainted with his turbulent spirit, that
no entreaties could move him, even when he was going to martyrdom, to receive
him into the communion of the church. However, his successor, Achillas, upon
his submission and repentance, not only admitted him into his communion, but
also ordained him priest, and intrusted him with the church of Baucalis, one of
the parishes of the city. Achillas was succeeded by St. Alexander, whose
promotion Arius resented as an injury done to himself, being in his own opinion
the more worthy: and some time after impudently and blasphemously asserted that
Christ was not God, but a mere creature, though formed before all other created
beings, (but not from eternity,) and of a nature superior in perfection to all
other creatures. St. Alexander long endeavoured by mildness to reclaim the
heresiarch, but was compelled by his obstinacy to cut him off from the
communion of the church, in a synod of all the bishops under his jurisdiction,
held at Alexandria. Arius fled first into Palestine, and thence to Nicomedia,
where he had already gained by letters the confidence of Eusebius, the crafty
bishop of that city. In 319, St. Alexander sent an account of his proceedings
against Arius in a circular letter directed to all the bishops of the church,
signed by St. Athanasius and many others. In 325, he took the holy deacon with
him to the council of Nice, who there distinguished himself by the
extraordinary zeal and learning with which he encountered not only Arius, but
also Eusebius of Nicomedia, Theognis, and Maris, the principal protectors of
that heresiarch; and he had a great share in the disputations and decisions of
that venerable assembly, as Theodoret, Sozomen, and St. Gregory Nazianzen
testify.
Five months after this
great council, St. Alexander, lying on his death-bed, by a heavenly inspiration
recommended to his clergy and people the choice of Athanasius for his
successor, thrice repeating his name: and when he was found to be absent he
cried out: “Athanasius, you think to escape, but you are mistaken.” 6 Sozomen
says he had absconded for fear of being chosen. In consequence of this
recommendation, the bishops of all Egypt assembled at Alexandria, and finding
the people and clergy unanimous in their choice of Athanasius for patriarch,
they confirmed the election about the middle of the year 326; for St. Cyril
testifies 7 that
he held that chair forty-six years. He seems then to have been about thirty
years of age. He ordained Frumentius bishop of the Æthiopians, and made the
visitation of the churches under his jurisdiction throughout all Egypt. The
Meletians continued, after the death of their author, to hold private
assemblies, ordain new bishops by their own authority, every where to divide
the people, and to fill Egypt with factions and schisms. In vain did St.
Athanasius employ all the power which his authority put into his hands to bring
them back to the unity of the church. The severity of their morals gained them
a reputation among the people, and their opposition to the Catholics moved the
Arians to court their friendship. Though these schismatics were in the beginning
orthodox in faith, and the first and most violent opposers of Arius, yet they
soon after joined his partisans in calumniating and impugning St. Athanasius;
for which purpose they entered into a solemn league of iniquity together. For
St. Athanasius observes, 8 that
as Herod and Pontius Pilate forgot their enmity to agree in persecuting Christ,
so the Meletians and Arians dissembled their private animosities to enter into
a mutual confederacy and cabal against the truth: which is the spirit of all
sectaries, who, though divided in every other thing, unite in persecuting the
truth and opposing the church.
Arius being recalled from
banishment, into which he had been sent by the emperor, St. Athanasius refused
him entrance into the church; whereupon he retired to his friends in Palestine
and the neighbouring eastern provinces, at whose entreaty Constantine urged St.
Athanasius to admit him to his communion. The intrepid patriarch answered the
emperor, that the Catholic church could hold no communion with heresy that so
impudently attacked the divinity of Jesus Christ. 9 Eusebius
of Nicomedia and Theognis, after three years’ banishment, seeing Arius already
released from his exile, wrote a letter to the emperor, which is extant in
Socrates and Sozomen, artfully declaring that they all agreed in faith, that
they received the word consubstantial, having now fully examined its meaning,
and that they entirely gave themselves up to peace; but could not anathematize
Arius, whom, by a long converse with him, and both by word and writing, they
had found not to be guilty of what had been laid to his charge, and who had
already met with a favourable reception from his imperial majesty. Hereupon the
sentence of their banishment was reversed, and they were both permitted to
return to their respective sees. This Eusebius had before ambitiously procured
his translation from the see of Berytus to that of Nicomedia, which being at
that time the residence of the eastern emperors, gave him a fair opportunity of
ingratiating himself with the great ministers of state, and thereby of
rendering himself considerable for power and interest at court. He neither wanted
parts nor learning, was of a subtle and daring temper, a deep dissembler, and
the most artful of men; and on these accounts a proper instrument of the devil
to be the contriver of the calumnies and persecutions against our saint and the
Catholic church. He was no sooner come back to Nicomedia, than he began to set
his engines at work. He first wrote a civil letter to St. Athanasius, wherein
he endeavoured to justify Arius. But neither his own flattering words, nor the
emperor’s threats, which he procured, prevailing, he wrote to the Meletians,
that the time was now come to put their designs in execution and impeach
Athanasius. It was some time before they could agree what they should lay to
his charge. At length they sent three of their schismatical bishops, Isio,
Eudæmon, and Callinicus, to Nicomedia, who undertook to accuse him to the
emperor of having exacted linen for the use of his church, and imposed it as a
tribute upon the people; also of sending a purse of gold to one Philumenus, who
was plotting to usurp the empire. Athanasius being summoned to appear before
Constantine, his cause was heard in his palace of Psammathia, situated in the
suburbs of Nicomedia. The emperor, having examined the accusations against him,
was convinced of his innocence, acquitted him of what had been alleged against
him, and sent him back with a letter to the faithful of Alexandria, wherein he
calls him a man of God, and a most venerable person.
Eusebius, though baffled
for the present, did not despair of compassing his ends; and, in the mean time,
contrived the banishment of St. Eustathius, the most zealous and holy patriarch
of Antioch. And soon after, new allegations were laid against Athanasius,
charging him with the murder of Arsenius, a Meletian bishop, and with other crimes.
Constantine appeared shocked at the accusation of the murder, and sent an order
to St. Athanasius to clear himself in a council, which was to be held at
Cæsarea, in Palestine, whereof Eusebius, one of the Arian party, was bishop.
The saint, disliking it, no doubt, on this account, and justly apprehensive he
should not have liberty allowed him for his defence, did not appear. This his
enemies represented to Constantine as the effect of pride and stubbornness;
who, being exasperated by these suggestions, began to entertain an ill opinion
of him, and appointed another council to assemble at Tyre, where he commanded
Athanasius, at his peril, to appear. The council met there in August, 335,
consisting of sixty bishops, chiefly Arians. St. Athanasius, after some delay,
came thither, attended with a considerable number of bishops of his own
province, and, among these, the illustrious confessors, Paphnutius and Potamon.
All the chiefs of the Arian sect were present; the two Eusebiuses, Flacillus,
the intruded bishop of Antioch, Theognis of Nice, Maris of Chalcedon, Narcissus
of Neronias, Theodorus of Heraclea, Patrophilus of Scythopolis, Ursacius of
Syngidon, Valens of Mursa, and George of Laodicea. The just exception which St.
Athanasius made against such judges who had declared themselves his enemies,
was tyrannically overruled, and, on his entering the council, they, instead of
allowing him to take his place among them, obliged him to stand as a criminal
at the bar before his judges. St. Potamon could not forbear tears upon the
occasion; and, addressing himself to Eusebius of Cæsarea, who had been a
prisoner with him for the faith in the late persecution, cried out: “What,
Eusebius, are you sitting on the bench, and doth Athanasius stand arraigned?
Who can bear this with patience? Tell me; were not you in prison with me during
the persecution? As for my part, I lost an eye in it, but I see you are whole
and sound. How came you to escape so well?” By which words he insinuated a
suspicion of public fame, that Eusebius had been guilty of some unlawful
compliance. The rest of the Egyptian bishops persisted in refusing to allow
those to be judges of their patriarch, who were his professed enemies; but
their remonstrances were not regarded.
The first article of
accusation against the saint was, that Macarius, his deputy, had been guilty of
sacrilege, in breaking the chalice of one Ischyras, a supposed priest, whilst
he was officiating at the altar. This, which had been already proved to be mere
calumny, and was further confuted by deputies sent from Tyre into Egypt to
examine into the state of the affair, whereby it appeared that the whole charge
was groundless and malicious, and that Ischyras, who at length was reconciled
to St. Athanasius, had been set on by certain bishops of the Meletian faction.
He was next accused of having ravished a virgin consecrated to God: and a woman
was accordingly prevailed with to own and attest the fact in open council.
Whereupon Timothy, one of the saint’s clergy, turning to her, “Woman,” said he,
“did I ever lodge at your house; did I ever, as you pretend, offer violence to
you?”—“Yes,” said she, “you are the very person I accuse;” adding, at large,
the circumstances of time and place. The imposture thus plainly discovering
itself, put the contrivers of it so much out of countenance, that they drove
her immediately out of the assembly. St. Athanasius indeed insisted on her
staying, and being obliged to declare who it was that had suborned her; but
this was overruled by his enemies, alleging that they had more importunate
crimes to charge him with, and such as it was impossible to elude by any
artifices whatsoever. They proceeded next to the affair of Arsenius, an old
Meletian bishop, whom they accused St. Athanasius of having murdered. To support
this charge, they produced in court a dried hand, supposed to be the hand of
Arsenius, which, as they alleged, the patriarch had ordered to be cut off, to
be employed in magical operations. The truth was: Arsenius, styled by his party
bishop of Hypsele, had fallen into some irregularity, and had absconded. St.
Athanasius had first procured certificates from many persons that he was still
living; and prevailed with him afterwards, through the interest of friends, to
come privately to Tyre, to serve St. Athanasius on this occasion. The saint
therefore asked if any of the bishops present knew Arsenius: several answering,
they did; he then made him appear before the whole assembly with both his
hands. Thus was the wicked purpose of his adversaries defeated, no less to the
pleasure and satisfaction of the innocent, than to the shame and confusion of
the guilty. Arsenius soon after made his peace with St. Athanasius, and with
the Catholic church; as did also John, the most famous of the Meletian bishops.
The Arians called the saint a magician, and one that imposed upon their senses
by the black art; and would have torn him to pieces had not the imperial
governor interposed and rescued him out of their hands, who for further
security sent him on board a ship that sailed the same night. Having thus
escaped their fury, he went soon after for Constantinople. All these
particulars are related by St. Athanasius, in his apology: also by Socrates,
Sozomen, and Theodoret. Though the saint had been convicted of no crime, the
Arian bishops pronounced against him a sentence of deposition, forbidding him
to reside at Alexandria, lest his presence should excite new disorders there,
repeating in their sentence the calumnies which had been so fully refuted.
Constantine, who had
refused to see or give audience to our saint on his arrival at Constantinople,
whom he looked upon as justly condemned by a council, sent an order to the
bishops of Tyre to adjourn to Jerusalem, for the dedication of the church of
the holy sepulchre, which he had caused to be built there. Arius came thither
at this time to the council, with a letter from the emperor, and a profession
of faith which he had presented to him, and which is extant in Socrates. In it
the subtle heretic professes his belief in Christ, “as begotten before all
worlds: God the Word, by whom all things were made,” &c. But neither the
word consubstantial, nor any thing equivalent to it, was there. The heresiarch
had assured the emperor that he received the council of Nice, who was thus
imposed upon by his hypocrisy; but he ordered the bishops to examine his
profession of faith. The Eusebians readily embraced the opportunity which they
had long waited for, declared Arius orthodox, and admitted him to the
communion. St. Athanasius, in the mean time, having requested of the emperor,
who had refused him audience, that his pretended judges might be obliged to
confront him, that he might be allowed the liberty to exhibit his complaints
against them, Constantine sent them an order to come to Constantinople to give
an account of their transactions at Tyre. But only six, and these the most
artful of the number, obeyed the summons, namely, Eusebius, Theognis, Maris,
Patrophilus, Ursacius, and Valens. These agreed to attack St. Athanasius with a
fresh accusation, as they did, charging him with having threatened to hinder
the yearly transportation of corn from Alexandria to Constantinople. This
accusation, though protested against by the saint as absolutely false and to
the last degree improbable, was nevertheless believed by Constantine, who
expressed his resentment at it, and banished him, in consequence, to Triers,
then the chief city of the Belgic Gaul.
The holy man arrived
there in the beginning of the year 336, and was received with the greatest
respect by St. Maximinus, bishop of the place, and by Constantine the younger,
who commanded there for his father. St. Antony and the people of Alexandria
wrote to the emperor in favour of their pastor: but he answered that he could
not despise the judgment of a council. 10 The
saint had the satisfaction to be informed that his church at Alexandria
constantly refused to admit Arius. The year after, on Whitsunday, the 12th of
May, Constantine departed this life, being sixty-three years and almost three
months old, whilst he yet wore the Neophyte’s white garment after his baptism.
His historian testifies with what ardour the people offered up their prayers to
God for his soul. 11 He
was buried in the porch of the church of the twelve apostles, which he had
founded in Constantinople for the burying place of the emperors and patriarchs,
though he had built that of St. Irene for the great church or the cathedral. He
would be buried in that holy place, according to Eusebius, “that he might
deserve to enjoy the benefit of the mystical sacrifice, and the communion of
devout prayers.” 12 Constantine’s
three sons divided the empire, as their father’s will directed. Constantine,
the eldest, had Britain, Spain, Gaul, and all that lies on this side the Alps:
Constantius, the second son, Thrace, Asia, Egypt, and the East: Constans, the
youngest, had Italy, Africa, Greece, and Illyricum. Constantine, the younger,
restored St. Athanasius to his see, sending with him a letter filled with high
commendations of the holy prelate, and expressions of great respect for his
sanctity, and of indignation against his adversaries. The saint passed through
Syria, and was received by his flock with a joy and pomp equal to the triumph
of an emperor.
The city of Alexandria
was situate within the jurisdiction of Constantius, whom the Arians had gained
over to their party without much difficulty. These heretics accused St.
Athanasius afresh to the three emperors for raising tumults and seditions upon
his return, for committing violences and murder, and selling, for his own
private use, the corn which Constantine had destined for the support of widows
and ecclesiastics in those countries where corn did not grow; but the
attestations of the bishops who had received it in Lybia justified him, and
covered his accusers with confusion. Constantine and Constans sent away their
deputies with disgrace: but Constantius being met at Antioch by Eusebius of
Nicomedia, and others of his party, was easily persuaded into the belief of
this last head of the accusation, and prevailed upon to grant them leave to
choose a new bishop of Alexandria. They lost no time, but, assembling at
Antioch, named one Pistus to that see, an Egyptian priest of their sect, who,
together with the bishop that ordained him, had been condemned by St. Alexander
and by the council of Nice: but Pope Julius rejected his communion, and all
other Catholic churches pronounced anathemas against him; nor was he ever able
to get possession of the patriarchal chair. St. Athanasius called a council of
about a hundred bishops, at Alexandria, to defend the Catholic faith: after
which he repaired to Rome to Pope Julius, to whom this council sent letters and
deputies.—Here the pope acquitted him in a council of fifty bishops, held in
341, and confirmed him in his see: but he was obliged to continue at Rome three
years, during which the Arians carried on every thing by violence in the east.
The same year a council met at Antioch to the dedication of the great church,
called the Golden Church, and framed twenty-five canons of discipline. After
the departure of the orthodox prelates, the Arians framed a canon levelled
against St. Athanasius, that if a bishop, who had been deposed in a council,
whether justly or unjustly, should return to his church, without the authority
of a greater council than that which had deposed him, he should never hope to
be re-established, nor have his cause admitted to a hearing. They then named
Gregory, a Cappadocian, and placed him by force of arms in the see of
Alexandria, in 341. The Emperor Constans, in 345, invited St. Athanasius to
Milan; and, by earnest letters, obliged his brother Constantius to join with
him in assembling a general council of the East and West at Sardica, in
Illyricum. It met in May, 347, and consisted of three hundred bishops of the
West, and seventy-six of the East, according to Socrates and Sozomen; but,
according to St. Athanasius, only of one hundred and seventy, besides the
Eusebians; which agrees nearly with Theodoret, who reckons them in all two
hundred and fifty. They were collected out of thirty-five provinces, besides
the Orientals. This is reputed a general council, and is proved such by Natalis
Alexander, though commonly looked upon only as an appendix to that of Nice. St.
Athanasius, Marcellus of Ancyra, and Asclepas of Gaza, were acquitted. They and
some others out of the eastern empire were present. But the Arian Orientals
made a body apart, being fourscore in number, who having formed several
assemblies in certain places by the way, on their arrival at Sardica, refused,
as they had agreed before they came, to join the other prelates; alleging the
presence of Athanasius, and other such frivolous pretences; and at length, upon
an intimation of the threats of the synod, if they did not appear, and if the
Eusebians did not justify themselves of the matters laid to their charge, they
all fled by night, and held a pretended council at Philippopolis, as St.
Hilary, in his fragments, and Socrates testify. Dr. Cave alleges, that they
dated their acts at Sardica: but this they did only to usurp the venerable name
of that synod: for at the same time they quote the synodal epistle of the
prelates who remained at Sardica, before the date of which epistle all
historians testify that they had left that city. The true council
excommunicated the chiefs of the Eusebians, with Gregory the Cappadocian,
forbidding all Catholic bishops to hold communication with them. 13 This
council sent two deputies to Constantius to press the execution of its decrees.
The Emperor Constans wrote to him also, both before and after the council, to
acquaint him, that, unless he restored Athanasius to his see, and punished his
calumniators, he would do it by force of arms. Gregory the Cappadocian, who
had, with the Arian governors, exercised a most bloody persecution against the
Catholics, and among others had caused to be beaten to death the holy confessor
St. Potamon, dying four months after the council of Sardica, facilitated our
saint’s return to Alexandria, and deprived the emperor of all pretexts for
hindering or delaying it. Constantius had also upon his hands an unsuccessful
war against the Persians, and dreaded the threats of a civil war from his
brother. Therefore he wrote thrice to the holy prelate, entreating him to
hasten his return to Alexandria. St. Athanasius, at the request of Constans,
went first to him, then residing in Gaul, and probably at Milan, and thence to
Rome, to take leave of Pope Julius and his church. He took Antioch on his way
home, where he found Constantius, who treated him with great courtesy, and only
desired that he would allow the Arians one church in Alexandria. The saint
answered, that he hoped, that, in that case, the same favour might be granted
to the Catholics at Antioch, who adhered to Eustathius: but this not being
relished by the Arians, Constantius insisted no longer on that point, but
recommended Athanasius in very strong terms to his governors in Egypt. In the
mean time, the zealous and pious Emperor Constans was treacherously slain by
Magnentius, in Gaul, in January, 350. Nevertheless, Constantius restored
Athanasius, who immediately assembled a council at Alexandria, and confirmed
the decrees of that of Sardica. St. Maximus did the same in a numerous synod at
Jerusalem. Many Arian bishops on this occasion retracted their calumnies
against the holy man, and also their heresy, among whom were Ursacius and
Valens: but they soon returned to the vomit.
Magnentius usurped the
empire in Italy, Gaul, and Africa, and Vetrannio in Pannonia. Constantius
marched into the West against them. He made himself master of Vetrannio’s
person by a stratagem, and his army defeated Magnentius, near Mursa, in
Pannonia, in 351, and that tyrant fell soon after, by his own sword. Whilst
Constantius resided at Sirmium, in 351, a council was held in that city,
consisting chiefly of oriental bishops, most of them Arians. Photinus, bishop
of that see, who renewed the heresy of Sabellius, and affirmed Christ to be no
more than a mere man, having been already condemned by two councils at Milan,
was here excommunicated, deposed, and banished by the emperor. The profession
of faith drawn up in this synod, is commonly esteemed orthodox, and called the
first confession of Sirmium. The Arians had never ceased to prepossess the
credulous emperor against Athanasius, whose active zeal was their terror; and
that prince was no sooner at liberty, by seeing the whole empire in his own
hands, than he began again to persecute him. He procured him to be condemned by
certain Arian bishops, at Arles in 353, and again at Milan, in 355, where he
declared himself his accuser, and banished the Catholic bishops who refused to
subscribe his condemnation, as SS. Eusebius of Vercelli, Dionysius of Milan,
Paulinus of Triers, &c. He sent a chamberlain to obtain of Pope Liberius
the confirmation of this unjust sentence: but he rejected the proposal with
indignation, though enforced with presents and threats. Liberius not only
refused the presents which were brought him, but, when the messenger sought
means to deposit them, as an offering in St. Peter’s church, unknown to the
pope, he threw them out of doors. Constantius hereupon sent for him under a
strict guard to Milan, where, in a conference, recorded by Theodoret, he boldly
told Constantius that Athanasius had been acquitted at Sardica, and his enemies
proved calumniators and impostors, and that it was unjust to condemn a person
who could not be legally convicted of any crime: the emperor was reduced to
silence on every article; but being the more out of patience, ordered him,
unless he complied within three days, to go into banishment to Berœa, in
Thrace. He sent him indeed five hundred pieces of gold to bear his charges, but
Liberius refused them, saying, he might bestow them on his flatterers: as he
did also a like present from the empress, bidding the messenger learn to
believe in Christ, and not to persecute the church of God. After the three days
were expired, he departed into exile, in 356. Constantius, going to Rome to
celebrate the twentieth year of his reign, in 357, the ladies joined in a
petition to him that he would restore Liberius, who had been then two years in
banishment. He assented, upon condition that he should comply with the bishops
then at court. About this time Liberius began to sink under the hardships of
his exile, and his resolution was shaken by the continual solicitations of
Demophilus, the Arian bishop of Berœa, and of Fortunatian, the temporizing
bishop of Aquileia. He was so far softened by listening to flatteries and
suggestions, to which he ought to have stopped his ears with horror, that he
yielded to the snare laid for him, to the great scandal of the church. He
subscribed the condemnation of St. Athanasius, and a confession or creed, which
had been framed by the Arians at Sirmium, though their heresy was not expressed
in it; and he wrote to the Arian bishops of the East, that he had received the
true Catholic faith which many bishops had approved at Sirmium. 14 The
fall of so great a prelate, and so illustrious a confessor, is a terrifying
example of human weakness, which no one can call to mind without trembling for
himself. St. Peter fell by a presumptuous confidence in his own strength and
resolution; that we may learn that every one stands only by humility. Liberius,
however, speedily imitated the repentance of the prince of the apostles. And he
no sooner had recovered his see, than he again loudly declared himself the
patron of justice and truth: and, when the council of Rimini was betrayed into
a prevarication, which was construed in favour of Arianism, Liberius vigorously
opposed the danger, and by his strenuous active zeal, averted the desolation
with which it threatened many churches, as Theodoret testifies. 15
Constantius, not content
to have banished the bishops who favoured Athanasius, also threatened and
punished all the officers and magistrates who refused to join in communion with
the Arians. Whilst his presence in the West filled it with confusion and acts
of tyranny, St. Athanasius was at Alexandria, offering up to God most fervent
prayers for the defence of the faith. Constantius next turned all his rage
against him and against the city of Alexandria, sending orders to Syrianus, the
duke, that is, general of the troops of Egypt, to persecute the archbishop and
his clergy. He likewise dispatched two notaries to see his orders executed.
They endeavoured to oblige the saint to leave the city. He answered, that he
had returned to his see, and had resided there till that time by the emperor’s
express order; and therefore could not leave it, without a command of equal
authority, (which they owned was not in their power to produce,) or unless
Syrianus, the duke, or Maximus, the prefect or governor, would give him such an
order in writing, which neither of them would do. Syrianus, convinced of the
justice of his plea, promised to give neither him nor the public assemblies of
his people any further disturbance, without express injunction from the emperor
to that effect. Twenty-three days after this solemn promise, confirmed by oath,
the faithful were assembled at the church of St. Theonas, where they passed the
night in prayer, on account of a festival to be celebrated the next day.
Syrianus, conducted by the Arians, surrounded the church at midnight, with
above five hundred soldiers, who having forced open the doors, committed the
greatest disorders. The patriarch, however, kept his chair; and, being
determined not to desert his flock in their distress, ordered a deacon to sing
the 136th psalm, and the people to repeat alternately: For his mercy
endureth for ever. After this, he directed them to depart and make the
best of their way to their own houses, protesting that he would be the last
that would leave that place. Accordingly, when the greater part of the people
were gone out, and the rest were following, the clergy and monks that were left
forced the patriarch out along with them; whom (though almost stifled to death)
they conveyed safely through the guards and secured him out of their reach.
Numbers on this occasion were trampled to death by the soldiers, or slain by
their darts. This relation is given by the saint in his apology for his flight,
and in his History of the Arians, addressed to the monks. The next step of the
Arians was to fix a trusty man of their party in this important see: and the
person they pitched upon was one George, who had been victualler to the army,
one of the most brutish and cruel of men: who was accordingly placed in the
patriarchal chair. His roughness and savage temper made him seem the fittest
instrument to oppress the Catholics, and he renewed all the scenes of bloodshed
and violence of which Gregory had set the example, as Theodoret relates. Our
holy bishop hereupon retired into the deserts of Egypt: but was not permitted
to enjoy long the conversation of the devout inhabitants of those parts, who,
according to the expression of St. Gregory Nazianzen, lived only to God. His
enemies having set a price upon his head, the wildernesses were ransacked by
soldiers in quest of him, and the monks persecuted, who were determined rather to
suffer death than to discover where he lay concealed. The saint, apprehensive
of their suffering on his account, left them, and retired to a more remote and
solitary place, where he had scarcely air to breathe in, and saw none but the
person that supplied him with necessaries and brought him his letters, though
not without great danger and difficulty. 16
Constantius died on the
3rd of November, in 361; a prince whose memory will be eternally infamous for
his heresy, and persecution of the church, his dissimulation, levity, and
inconstancy, his weakness of mind, and the treacherous murder of all his
uncles. The year following, George, the Arian usurper of the see of Alexandria,
was massacred by the Pagans for his cruelty. Thus was Athanasius delivered from
all his chief enemies. Julian the Apostate, on coming to the empire, granted
all the bishops who had been banished by Constantius the liberty to return to
their respective churches; not out of any good will he bore them, but with a
view, as his own historian writes, to increase their divisions by this license,
and lessen his fears for their uniting against him: also to reflect an odium on
the memory and proceedings of his predecessor. Most of the orthodox bishops
took their advantage of this permission; and the usurper of the see of
Alexandria being massacred by the Pagans in July, 362, our saint returned to
his flock in August, after an absence of above six years. His entrance was a
kind of triumph of the Catholic faith over its enemies; and the citizens
hereupon drove the Arians out of all the churches.
In 359, the council of
Rimini had the weakness so far to yield to the artifices of the Arians as to
omit in the creed the word consubstantial. The prelates were afterwards
surprised to see the triumph of the Arians on that account, and were struck
with remorse for their unwary condescension. Their fall was owing, not to any
error in faith, but to a want of courage and insight into the artifices of the
Arians. Nevertheless, Lucifer of Cagliari, 17 and
some other bishops, pretended, by a Pharisaical pride, that the lapsed,
notwithstanding their repentance, could no longer be admitted by the church to
communion in the rank of bishops or priests. St. Athanasius, on the contrary,
being filled with the spirit of tenderness which our divine Redeemer exercised
and recommended to be shown towards sincere penitents, condemned this excessive
severity: and in 362, assembled a council at Alexandria; at which assisted St.
Eusebius of Vercelli, in his return from his banishment in Thebais, St.
Asterius of Petra, &c. This synod condemned those who denied the divinity
of the Holy Ghost, and decreed that the authors of the Arian heresy should be
deposed, and upon their repentance received only into the lay-communion; but
that those prelates who had fallen into it only by compulsion, and for a short
time, should, upon their repentance, retain their sees. This decision was
adopted in Macedonia, Achaia, Spain, Gaul, &c., and approved at Rome. 18 For
we learn from St. Hilary, that Liberius, who died in 366, had established this
discipline in Italy, and we have his letter to the Catholic bishops of that
country, in which he approves what had been regulated in this regard in Achaia
and Egypt, and exhorts them to exert their zeal against the authors of their
fault, in proportion to the grief they felt for having committed it. 19
Theodoret says, that the
priests of the idols complained to Julian, that if Athanasius was suffered to
remain in Alexandria, there would not remain one adorer of the gods in that
city. Julian, having received this advice, answered their complaint, telling
them, that though he had allowed the Galileans (his name of derision for
Christians) to return to their own country, he had not given them leave to enter
on the possession of their churches; and that Athanasius in particular, who had
been banished by the orders of several emperors, ought not to have done this:
he therefore ordered him immediately to leave the city on the receipt of his
letter, under the penalty of a severer punishment. He even dispatched a
messenger to kill him. The saint comforted his flock, and having recommended
them to the ablest of his friends, with an assurance that this storm would soon
blow over, embarked in a boat on the river for Thebais. He who had orders to
kill him, hearing that he had fled, sailed after him with great expedition. The
saint, having timely notice sent him of it, was advised by those who
accompanied him to turn aside into the deserts that bordered on the Nile. But St.
Athanasius ordered them to tack about, and fall down the river towards
Alexandria; “to show,” said he, “that our protector is more powerful than our
persecutor.” Meeting the pursuivant, he asked them whether they had seen
Athanasius as they came down the river, and was answered that he was not far
off, and that if they made haste, they would quickly come up with him. Upon
this the assassin continued the pursuit, while St. Athanasius got safe and
unsuspected to Alexandria, where he lay hid for some time. But upon a fresh
order coming from Julian for his death, he withdrew into the deserts of
Thebais, going from place to place to avoid falling into the hands of his
enemy. St. Theodorus, of Tabenna, being come to visit him, while at Antinoë,
with St. Pammon, put an end to his apprehensions on this score, by assuring
him, on a revelation God had favoured him with, that Julian had just then
expired in Persia, where he was killed on the 27th of June, in 363. The holy
hermit acquainted him also that the reign of his Christian successor would be
very short. This was Jovian, who being chosen emperor, refused to accept that
dignity till the army had declared for the Christian religion. He was no sooner
placed upon the throne but he wrote to St. Athanasius, cancelling the sentence
of his banishment, and praying him to resume the government of his church,
adding high commendations of his virtue and unshaken constancy. St. Athanasius
waited not for the emperor’s orders to quit his retreat, but on being apprized,
as before related, of the death of his persecutor, appeared on a sudden, and
resumed his usual functions in the midst of his people, who were joyfully
surprised at the sight of him. The emperor, well knowing that he was the chief
person that had stood up in defence of the Christian faith, besought him, by a
second letter, to send him a full account in writing of its doctrines, and some
rules for his conduct and behaviour in what regarded the affairs of the Church.
St. Athanasius called a synod of learned bishops, and returned an answer in
their name; recommending that he should hold inviolable the doctrine explained
in the council of Nice, this being the faith of the apostles, which had been
preached in all ages, and was generally professed throughout the whole Christian
world, “some few excepted,” says he, “who embrace the opinions of Arius.” The
Arians attempted in vain to alter his favourable dispositions towards the saint
by renewing their old calumnies. Not satisfied with his instructions by
letters, he desired to see him; and the holy bishop was received by him at
Antioch, with all possible tokens of affection and esteem; but after giving him
holy advice he hastened back to Alexandria. The good emperor Jovian reigned
only eight months, dying on the 17th of February, in 364. Valentinian, his
successor, chose to reside in the West, and making his brother Valens partner
in the empire, assigned to him the East. Valens was inclined to Arianism, and
openly declared in favour of it, in 367, when he received baptism from the
hands of Eudoxius, bishop of the Arians, at Constantinople. The same year he
published an edict for the banishment of all those bishops who had been
deprived of their sees by Constantius. Theodoret says this was the fifth time
that St. Athanasius had been driven from his church. He had been employed in
visiting the churches, monasteries, and deserts of Egypt. Upon the news of this
new tempest, the people of Alexandria rose in tumults, demanding of the
governor of the province that they might be allowed to enjoy their bishop, and
he promised to write to the emperor. St. Athanasius seeing the sedition
appeased, stole privately out of the town, and hid himself in the country in
the vault in which his father was interred, where he lay four months, according
to Sozomen. The very night after he withdrew, the governor and the general of
the troops took possession of the church in which he usually performed his
functions; but were not able to find him. As soon as his departure was known,
the city was filled with lamentations, the people vehemently calling on the
governor for the return of their pastor. The fear of a sedition moved Valens at
length to grant them that satisfaction, and to write to Alexandria that he
might abide there in peace in the free possession of the churches. In 369, the
holy patriarch convened at Alexandria a council of ninety bishops, in whose
name he wrote to the bishops of Africa to beware of any surprise from those who
were for preferring the decrees of the council of Rimini to those of Nice
The continued scenes of
perfidy, dissimulation, and malice which the history of Arianism exhibits to
our view, amaze and fill us with horror. Such superlative impiety and hypocrisy
would have seemed incredible, had not the facts been attested by St. Athanasius
himself, and by all the historians of that age. They were likewise of so public
a nature, having been performed before the eyes of the whole world, or proved
by ocular demonstration in the Arians’ own synods, that St. Athanasius could
never have inserted them in his apology, addressed to these very persons and to
the whole world, could any circumstances have been disproved, or even called in
question. By such base arts and crimes did the Arian blasphemy spread itself,
like a spark of fire set to a train of gunpowder; and, being supported by the
whole power of a crafty and proud emperor, seemed to threaten destruction to
the church of Christ, had it not been built on foundations which, according to
the promises of Him who laid them, all the power of hell shall never be able to
shake. During more than three hundred years it had stood the most violent
assaults of the most cruel and powerful persecutors, who had bent the whole
power of the empire to extirpate, if it had been possible, the Christian name.
But the more it was depressed the more it grew and flourished, and the blood of
martyrs was a seed which pushed forth and multiplied with such a wonderful
increase, as to extend its shoots into every part of the then known world, and
to fill every province and every rank of men in the Roman empire. By the
conversion of the emperors themselves, it appeared triumphant over all the
efforts of hell. But the implacable enemy of man’s salvation did not desist in
his attacks.—His restless envy and malice grew more outrageous by his defeats;
and shifting his ground, he stirred up his instruments within the bowels of the
church itself, and excited against it a storm, in which hell seemed to vomit
out all its poison, and unite all the efforts of its malice. But these vain
struggles again terminated in the most glorious triumph of the church.—In those
perilous times, God raised up many holy pastors, whom he animated with his
spirit, and strengthened in the defence of his truth. Among these St.
Athanasius was the most illustrious champion. By his undaunted courage, and
unparalleled greatness of soul, under the most violent persecutions, he merited
a crown equal to that of the most glorious martyrs: by his erudition,
eloquence, and writings he holds an illustrious place among the principal
doctors of the church; and by the example of his virtue, by which he rivalled
the most renowned anchorets of the deserts, and the most holy confessors, he
stemmed the torrent of scandal and iniquity, which threatened to bear down all
before it.
St. Gregory Nazianzen
gives the following portrait of his virtues in private life: “He was most
humble and lowly in mind, as his virtue was most sublime and inimitable. He was
most courteous to all, and every one had easy access to him; he was meek, gentle,
compassionate, amiable in his discourse, but much more so in his life; of an
angelical disposition; mild in his reproofs, and instructive in his
commendations; in both which he observed such even measures, that his reproof
spoke the kindness of a father, and his commendation the authority of a master;
and neither was his indulgence over tender, nor his severity harsh. His life
supplied the place of sermons, and his sermons prevented correction. In him all
ranks might find enough to admire, and enough to imitate; one might commend his
unwearied austerity in fasting and prayer; another his perseverance in
watchings and the divine praises; a third his admirable care of the poor; a
fourth his courage in checking the injustice of the rich, or his condescension
to the humble.”—Thus St. Gregory Nazianzen, 20 who
says he was a loadstone to dissenters, drawing them to his opinion, unless
hardened in malice; and always at least raising in them a secret reverence and
veneration for his person; but that he was an adamant to his persecutors; no
more capable of impressions against justice, than a rock of marble is of
yielding to any slight touch. After innumerable combats, and as many great
victories, this glorious saint, having governed the church of Alexandria
forty-six years, was called to a life exempt from labour and suffering, on the
2nd of May, on a Thursday, according to the Oriental Chronicle of the Copthes,
in the year 373, as is clear from the same author, St. Proterius, and St.
Jerom; not in 371, as Socrates mistakes. 21 St.
Gregory Nazianzen thus describes his death: “He ended his life in a holy old
age, and went to keep company with his fathers, the patriarchs, prophets,
apostles, and martyrs, who had fought valiantly for the truth, as he had done:
and to comprise his epitaph in few words, he departed this life with far
greater honour and glory than what he had received in his more than triumphant
entries into Alexandria, when he returned from his banishments: so much was his
death lamented by all good men; and the immortal glory of his name remained
imprinted in their hearts.” He desires the saint “to look down upon him from
heaven, to favour and assist him in the government of his flock, and to
preserve it in the true faith: and if, for the sins of the world, heretics were
to prevail against it, to deliver him from these evils, and to bring him, by
his intercession, to enjoy God in his company.”
The humility, modesty,
and charity of this great saint; his invincible meekness towards his enemies,
who were the most implacable and basest of men, and the heroic fortitude,
patience, and zeal, by which he triumphed over the persecutions of almost the
whole world confederated against him, and of four emperors, Constantine,
Constantius, Julian, and Valens, three of whom employed wiles, stratagems, and
hypocrisy, and sometimes open force to destroy him: these, I say, and all other
eminent virtues, have rendered his name venerable in the church to the latest
ages, which he ceases not to instruct and edify by his writings. 22
These and other virtues,
St. Athanasius learned and practised in the most heroic degree, by studying
them devoutly and assiduously in the sacred life, and in the divine heart of
Jesus.—And in the simplicity of faith he adored the incomprehensible greatness
of the Divinity, his infinite wisdom, justice, and sanctity, with the boundless
treasures of his love and mercy, in the mystery of his adorable incarnation. If
we have a holy ambition to improve ourselves in this saving knowledge, in this
most sublime and truly divine science, which will not only enlighten our
understanding, but also reform all the affections of our hearts, and be in us a
source of unspeakable peace, joy, love, light, and happiness, we must study in
the same school. We must become zealous lovers and adorers of our most amiable
Redeemer: we must meditate daily on his admirable life, penetrating into the
unfathomed abyss of his love, and his perfect sentiments of humility, meekness,
and every virtue in all his actions, and join our homages with those which he
paid in his divine heart, and still continues to offer to his Father: we must
sacrifice to him our affections in transports of joy and fervour, adoring,
praising, loving, and thanking him, and must continually beg his mercy and
grace, that we may be replenished with his spirit of humility and every virtue;
and, above all, that his love may take absolute possession of our hearts, and
of all our faculties and powers. “The Son of God,” says St. Athanasius, “took
upon himself our poverty and miseries, that he might impart to us a share of
his riches. His sufferings will render us one day impassible, and his death
immortal. His tears will be our joy, his burial our resurrection, and his
baptism is our sanctification, according to what he says in his gospel: For
them I sanctify myself, that they also may be made holy in fruits.”
Note 1. Or.
21. [back]
Note 2. Orat. contra
gentes, p. 1. [back]
Note 3. L. de
Incarn. p. 66. [back]
Note 4. The hearsay
story of St. Athanasius baptizing certain children at play, is inconsistent
with the evident chronology of his history; as is shown by Hermant, Tillemont,
&c. It is only grounded on the authority of Rufinus, who, on other
accounts, is acknowledged to be a careless writer. [back]
Note 5. Athan. Vit.
Anton, p. 794. [back]
Note 6. Sozomen, b.
2, c. 17. Theodoret, b. 2, c. 26. [back]
Note 7. Ep.
1. [back]
Note 8. Or. 1,
contr. Arian. [back]
Note 9. Apol. contra
Arian. p. 178, and Socr. l. 2, c. 22. [back]
Note 10. St. Jerom
says, (in Chron. ad an. 338,) that Constantine inclined to the Arian doctrine.
But St. Athanasius and all others, except Lucifer of Cagliari, expressly affirm
that he always adhered to the faith of the council of Nice, against which,
while he lived, none durst openly appear. When he was deceived by Arius and
Eusebius, they always persuaded him that they maintained its decisions. If he
sometimes persecuted St. Athanasius, it was never for his doctrine or faith;
and the Arians forged against him calumnies of another nature when they
endeavoured to exasperate this prince against him. This emperor was baptized in
his last sickness by Eusebius of Nicomedia; but that crafty Arian did not
openly discover his heresy to him, enjoyed at that time the communion of the
Catholic Church, and was the diocesan of the castle of Aguyron, where he
received the sacraments from his hands. He had shown great zeal for the
extinction of that heresy in the council of Nice. His devotion and sincere
piety, his extraordinary zeal for the Christian religion, and for the peace of
the church, his respect for priests, &c., the many wholesome laws which he
made in favour of religion, and the great sentiments of piety in which he
received baptism and the other sacraments, oblige us to excuse some symptoms of
vanity in his youth, and with the church to speak of his name with gratitude
and respect. His heroic virtues atoned for faults and errors which true
repentance blotted out. That he was imposed upon by the artifices of wicked
Arian hypocrites, so far as to harbour suspicions against St. Athanasius, was
an extreme misfortune, which proved favourable to the abettors of heresy, fatal
to many, and the ruin of his son Constantius, and of his own sister,
Constantia. In excuse for Constantine’s unjust treatment of St. Athanasius, we
ought to reflect how often princes are obliged to see with the eyes of others,
and how difficult it frequently is to them, when surrounded with flatterers, to
come to the knowledge of the truth. But God opened the eyes of this emperor
before his death, with regard to the innocence of his holy servant: he
accordingly gave orders in his last illness that he should be recalled from his
banishment, in which he had then lived one year and some months; but as this
could not be put in execution before the middle of the year 338, the
continuance of his exile was one year and four months. [back]
Note 11. Innumerabilis
populus unà cum sacerdotibus Dei, non sine gemitu ac lacrymis, pro imperatoris
anima preces offerebant Deo, gratissimum pio principi officium exhibentes. In
hoc etiam Deus prolixam erga famulum suum benevolentiam declaravit; quippe quod
maxime ambierat, locum juxta Apostolorum memoriam ei concesserit, ut animæ
illius tabernaculum Apostolici nominis atque honoris consortio frueretur,
divinisque cæremoniis, ex mystico sacrificio et sanctarum precum communione
potiri mereretur. Eus. l. 4, Vit. Const. c. 11, ed. Vales. [back]
Note 12. De vitâ
Constant. l. 4, c. 71. [back]
Note 13. This
council of Sardica decrees that the appeal of a bishop deposed in his own
province, to the bishop of Rome, be always allowed, and that the pope may
either refuse to re-examine the cause, if he thinks that superfluous, or depute
bishops of a neighbouring province, or send persons from Rome to determine it.
(Can. 3, 4, 7.) This was no new law; but a confirmation of that which had been
established from the beginning; and, as a proof of it, we see that St.
Athanasius had, before this, appealed to Pope Julius, and been acquitted by him
at Rome; nor had the Eusebians themselves found fault with the procedure. [back]
Note 14. Liberius
fell by a prevarication and notorious scandal; but not by heresy. There were
three confessions of faith or creeds, compiled by the Arians, at Sirmium. The
first, framed in the council of Sirmium, in 351, against Photinus, was orthodox
in its terms; though the word consubstantial was omitted in it. This
was drawn up by the oriental bishops, who alone composed that council; the
West, except Pannonia, being then subject to Magnentius. The second confession
was made at Sirmium, in 357, when Constantius arrived there from Rome; only
Valens, Ursacius, and Germinius, are named as concerned in it: and Osius of
Cordova, and Potamius of Lisbon, as subscribing to it: for Osius, after most
zealously maintaining the faith, was vanquished by tortures, and unhappily
fell, but died penitent, in Spain, within a year after, as St. Athanasius
assures us. This second creed openly expressed the Arian impiety, and forbade
any mention to be made either of unity or of likeness of
substance in Christ with the Father: for the Catholics called Christ of
the same substance as the Father: the Semi-Arians of like substance;
the Anomæans, or rank Arians, entirely unlike in substance: the last
mentioned were also called Eunomians, from one of the chief of that sect. In
359, a third confession was published by the Arians at Sirmium, in which Christ
is said to be alike in substance in all things. This third
contains clearly the Semi-Arian heresy; and was made two years after the fall
of Liberius. Nor could he have subscribed the second, of which the very authors
of it were immediately ashamed, so that it was no more mentioned; and it was
framed by very few, and those all western bishops. Whereas St. Hilary
testifies, (Fragm. 6, p. 1357,) that Liberius signed the confession which had been
made by twenty-two bishops, of which number Demophilus was one, which agrees to
the first. Hence Liberius, writing to the oriental bishops, says, he had signed
their confession of faith, or that made by them; and that it was presented to
him by Demophilus. He moreover calls it Catholic. All which circumstances
concur in the first. Sozomen assures us, (l. 4, c. 15,) that, when he arrived
at Rome, he anathematized all who did not confess the Son like to the Father
in all things; which was expressly condemning the second creed. How
then could he have subscribed to it so short a time before? [back]
Note 15. Theodoret,
Hist. l. 2, c. 17. [back]
Note 16. This seems
to have given occasion to the fable of Rufinus, that the taint lived several
years hidden in the bottom of a well: a circumstance which would not have been
omitted either by the saint himself, or by St. Gregory of Nazianzen. [back]
The trophies which
Lucifer gained by his zeal, were blasted by the scandal of an unhappy schism to
which he gave birth. After the death of Constantius, Lucifer repaired to
Antioch with St. Eusebius of Vercelli. St. Eustathius, the bishop of Antioch,
whom the Arians had banished, being then dead, the election of St. Meletius was
canonical; yet some Catholics rejected it, because the Arians had joined in
choosing him. The Catholics had continued to adhere to their bishop, St.
Eustathius, during his banishment: after his death, those who schismatically
separated themselves from the communion of Meletius were called Eustathians;
and Lucifer arriving at Antioch, put himself at their head, ordained Paulinus
their bishop, and separated himself from the communion of St. Eusebius, because
he disapproved the ordination of Paulinus. Thus Lucifer laid the foundation of
the fatal schism at Antioch. Another schism of which he was the author, was
still more notoriously unjust, and carried by him to greater lengths. St.
Athanasius, in his famous council at Alexandria, in 362, allowed that the
bishops, who at Rimini had been drawn into the snare of the Arians, and into an
omission favourable to their heresy, and all others who had been engaged in a
like fault, should upon their repentance, be suffered to retain their sees.
This indulgence so far displeased Lucifer, that he refused to communicate with
those penitent bishops, and with those who received them, that is, with the
pope and the whole Catholic Church. Many were engaged with him in this schism,
at Antioch, at Rome, in several other parts of Italy, in Egypt, and Palestine,
but chiefly in Sardinia and Spain. The author survived nine years after his
return to Cagliari, and seems to have continued obstinate to his death, which
happened in 371, according to St. Jerom in his chronicle. The ancients only
reproach him with the crime of his schism, so that we are to understand of his
followers, what Theodoret says, that after his return into Sardinia, he added
to schism certain maxims contrary to those of the Catholic Church. See
Theodoret, Hist. Eccl. l. 3, c. 2. St. Jerom, Dial. adv. Luciferian. St.
Ambrose de obitu Satyri, p. 316. Socrates, l. 3, c. 9. Sozomen, l. 5, c. 13:
and amongst the moderns, Tillemont, t. 7. p. 514. Ceillier, t. 5, p.
384. [back]
Note 18. Conc. t. 7,
p. 73 and 680. [back]
Note 19. S. Hil.
fragm. 12, p. 1357; Constant, ep. decret. 13, p. 448. [back]
Note 20. Or. 21, p.
378. [back]
Note 21. The Greeks
honour St. Athanasius on the 2nd of May, because his relics were on that day
deposited in the church of St. Sophia at Constantinople, when they were
translated thither from Alexandria, as their Ephemerides, in their Synaxarium,
expressly mention. They also commemorate him on the 18th of January, which Jos.
Assemani (in Kalend. Univ. t. 6, p. 299,) proves, against Papebroke, to have
been the day of his death, as the Menæa expressly assure us. The Greeks join
with him, on the 18th of January, St. Cyril, because he was bishop of the same
city; though he died in June, on the 9th of which month he is again
commemorated in the Menæa, but on the 27th in the Menology of the emperor
Basil. See Jos. Assemani, ad 2 Maij t. p. 301, 302, 303, against the different
opinions both of Bollandus and Papebroke. [back]
Note 22. Photius
observes, (Cod. 140,) that the diction and style of St. Athanasius is clear,
majestic, full of deep sense, strength, and solid reasoning, without any thing
redundant or superfluous. He seems to hold the next place in eloquence after
St. Basil, St. Gregory Nazianzen, and St. Chrysostom. Erasmus even admires his
style above that of all the other fathers, saying, it hath nothing rugged or
difficult, like that of Tertullian, nothing laboured or embarrassed, like that
of St. Hilary, nothing studied, like that of St. Gregory Nazianzen; no windings
and turnings, like that of St. Austin, or of St. Chrysostom: for it is every
where beautiful, elegant, easy, florid, and admirably adapted to whatever
subject he treats: though in some of his works it wants the finishings which
more leisure would have given it. Cosmas, an ancient monk, used to say, “When
you find any thing of the works of St. Athanasius, if you have no paper, write
it on your clothes.” (Prat. Spir. c. 40.)
The first of his works
is, his Discourse against the Pagans. In it he displays a most extensive human
learning, shows the origin, progress, and folly of idolatry: and raises men to
the knowledge of the true God, first from the sentiment of their own soul, and
secondly, from visible things. The discourse On the Incarnation, is a
continuation of the same work, and proves, first, that the world must have had
its beginning by creation; and secondly, that only the Son of God, by his
incarnation, could have delivered man from the death which he had incurred by
sin. The saint composed these two pieces before the origin of Arianism, about
the year 318, when he was not above twenty-two years of age. The Exposition of
Faith is an explanation of the mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation,
against the Arians. The treatise on those words: All things have been
given, me by my Father; the Letter to the Orthodox Bishops, against the
illegal intrusion of Gregory into his see, in 341; his Apology against the
Arians, consisting chiefly of authentic memoirs for his own justification
against their slanders, composed after his second exile, in 351; his treatise, On
the Decrees of Nice, against the Eusebians; his Apology for the Doctrine of St.
Dionysius of Alexandria, whom the Arians quoted in favour of their error; and
his circular letter to the bishops of Egypt and Lybia, when George was coming
to Alexandria, to intrude himself into his see, were compiled against the
Arians. His great work against those heretics are, his Four Orations against
the Arians. He composed them whilst concealed among the anchorets. Photius
admires the beauty, strength, and just reasoning of this excellent performance,
which entirely beats down that heresy; and says, that from this fountain St.
Gregory Nazianzen and St. Basil the Great drew that torrent of eloquence with
which they gloriously defended the Catholic faith. Dialectic is employed here
with admirable art, but the oracles of holy scripture are, as it were, the
sinews of the work. Dracontius, a holy abbot, was chosen bishop of Hermopolis:
but fled and hid himself, refusing to submit to that yoke. The letter of St.
Athanasius to him is a tender persuasive to accept that charge. His letter to
Serapion, bishop of Thmuis, on the death of Arius, shows his modesty in the
moderation with which he speaks of that tragical misfortune. We have four other
letters of our saint to the same Serapion, to prove the divinity of the Holy
Ghost, written in 360, or thereabouts. The Letter to the Solitaries, in 358, is
a confutation of the Arians, with some account of the persecution under George.
His Apology to the emperor Constantius, written in the desert, among the wild
beasts, in 356, seems the most eloquent and finished piece of all his works.
His Apology for his flight, in 357, is in merit little inferior to it. He shows
that it is lawful, and sometimes even a precept, to fly under persecutions. His
treatise On Synods, in 359, gives some account of what had passed in those of
Seleucia and Rimini. His tome, or Letter, to the Church of Antioch, was written
by him from his council at Alexandria, in 362, to exhort all to union, and to
receive the Arians who were converted, only requiring from them a profession of
the Nicene faith, and of the divinity of the Holy Ghost. The life of St. Antony
was written in 365. His letter to the emperor Jovian, two letters to St.
Orsisius, abbot of Tabenna, and several other epistles, are extant. His book,
On the Incarnation and against the Arians, proves also the divinity of the Holy
Ghost; and was written after the year 360. His two books against Apollinaris,
appeared about the year 372. His imperfect commentary On the Psalms shows his
extraordinary abilities for that kind of writing. The fragments On St. Matthew
are judged genuine by Montfaucon, (in Collect. Patr.) but appear doubtful to
Tournely and some others. The book, On the Incarnation of the Word of God:
that, For the Consubstantiality of the Three Persons: that, On Virginity, an
excellent work: the Synopsis of the Scriptures, also very well penned, and
judged genuine by Tillemont, &c., are usually ranked among his doubtful
works. The history of a crucifix bleeding, when pierced by the Jews of Berytua,
is a mean performance; Baronius attributes it to one Athanasius of Syria. The
Creed which bears the name of St. Athanasius, can only deserve that title,
because it explains the mystery of the Trinity, which he expounded and
maintained with such zeal. It was compiled in Latin in the fifth century. Dr.
Waterland hath made a learned collection of what several judicious critics have
written on this subject, in his dissertation concerning this Creed. [back]
Rev. Alban
Butler (1711–73). Volume V: May. The Lives of the Saints. 1866.
SOURCE : http://www.bartleby.com/210/5/021.html
Peter Paul Rubens (1577–1640), St. Athanasius defeating Ariu / Atanasio di Alessandria, 1620, 64,4 x 49,6, Museo ducale, Gotha
Athanasius
Athanasius Patriarch of
Alexandria, was born in that city about A.D. 296. The precise date is not
known, nor have we any accurate knowledge of his family or of his earlier
years. It is clear, however, that he was brought up and educated with a view to
the Christian ministry by Alexander, bishop of Alexandria, and gave promise of
his future eminence in early youth. When a young man, he became very intimate
with the hermit Anthony (q.v.), whose life he afterward wrote. His intellect
matured so early that before he was twenty- four he wrote the treatises Against
the Greeks, and Concerning the Incarnation of the Word (of which
see an account below). While only a deacon he was sent to the Council of Nice
(A.D. 325), where he contributed largely to the decision against the Arians,
and to the adoption of the Nicene Creed. SEE NICE, Council of. It
was the great task of his whole after life to defend this creed against the
Arians and other heretical sects. On the death of Alexander (A.D. 326), he was
made bishop of Alexandria by the voice of the people as well as of the
ecclesiastics. He discharged his duties with exemplary fidelity; but the Arians
soon commenced a series of violent attacks upon him, which embittered all his
remaining life. About 331, Arius, who had been banished after his condemnation
by the Council of Nice made a plausible confession of faith, and Constantine
recalled him, directing that he should be received by the Alexandrian Church.
But Athanasius firmly refused to admit him to communion, and exposed his
prevarication. The Arians, upon this, exerted themselves to raise tumults at
Alexandria, and to injure the character of Athanasius with the emperor. In 334
a synod of hostile bishops was called to meet at Caesarea. To this council
Athanasius was summoned to defend himself against the charge of having murdered
a certain Meletian bishop called Arsenius; but, knowing the enmity entertained
by all the members of the council against him, he refused to attend. In the
following year a more important council was convoked at Tyre, at which sixty
Arian bishops were present, and many of the orthodox faith. No accusation was
brought against the faith of Athanasius, but the old charge of the murder of
Arsenius was renewed, and he was also accused of having violated the person of
a virgin. The first accusation was most clearly refuted by the appearance of
Arsenius himself before the synod; and the falsehood of the second as clearly
proved by the woman (who was, in fact, a common prostitute, and who had never
before seen the bishop) fixing, by mistake, upon another man, Timotheus, who
stood near Athanasius, and declaring that it was he who had committed the sin.
But Athanasius, seeing that his condemnation was resolved on by the majority,
left the council. Athanasius was deposed, fifty bishops, however, protesting
against the judgment. Athanasius went at once to the emperor, and laid his
complaint before him, upon which, in 336, Constantine called the leaders of the
opposing party before him, who, seeing that some new charge must be trumped up
to support their conduct, declared that Athanasius had threatened that he would
prevent the yearly export of corn from Alexandria to Constantinople; upon which
the emperor exiled him to Treves. At the expiration of a year and six months,
i.e. in June, 337, Constantine the Great being dead, Athanasius was restored to
his see. In 340 Constantine the younger, who was the friend of Athanasius, was
killed; and in 341 Athanasius was again deposed in a synod held at Antioch, and
Gregory of Cappadocia was elected to succeed him. — In the mean time Athanasius
betook himself to Rome, where Pope Julius declared his innocence in a synod
held in 342. At Rome or in the West he remained till the Synod of Sardica, in
347, had pronounced his acquittal of all the charges brought against him; after
which the emperor Constantius, at the entreaty of his brother Constans,
recalled him to his see (A.D. 349). In the very next year Constans was slain by
Magnentius in Gaul, and in him Athanasius lost his protector. Constantius, now
sole emperor, soon gathered the Arians around him, and the court determined to
ruin Athanasius. New accusations were trumped up, and he was condemned by a
council convened at Arles (353), and by another at Milan (355), and was a third
time obliged to flee into the deserts of Thebais. His enemies pursued him even
here, and set a price upon his head. In this situation Athanasius composed his
most important writings to strengthen the faith of believers, and expose the
falsehood of his enemies. He returned with the other bishops whom Julian the
Apostate recalled from banishment, and in A.D. 362 held a council at
Alexandria, where the belief of a consubstantial Trinity was openly professed.
Julian soon became alarmed at the energy with which Athanasius opposed
paganism, and banished him, even (according to Theodoret) threatening him with
death. He escaped to the desert (A.D. 362). The accession of Jovian brought him
back in 363; but Jovian died in 364, and Valens, being an Arian, compelled him
to retire from his see (A.D. 367). He hid himself in his father's tomb at the
gates of Alexandria for four months. At last Valens (according to one account,
for fear of the people of Alexandria, who took arms in favor of Athanasius) recalled
the heroic bishop, and he was permitted to sit down in quiet and govern his
affectionate Church of Alexandria until his death, May 2, 373 (according to
Baronius, 372). Of the forty-six years of his official life he spent twenty in
banishment. Athanasius was perhaps the greatest man in the early church.
"With the most daring courage and perseverance of purpose, he combined a
discreet flexibility, which allowed him after defeats to wait for new
contingencies, and prepare himself for fresh exertions. He was no less calm and
considerate than determined; and while he shunned useless danger (see his
'Apology for his Flight'), he never admitted the slightest compromise of his
doctrine, nor attempted to conciliate by concession even his imperial adversaries.
'In his life and conduct,' says Gregory of Nazianzus, 'he exhibited the model
of episcopal government — in his doctrine, the rule of orthodoxy.' Again, the
independent courage with which he resisted the will of successive emperors for
forty-six years of alternate dignity and misfortune introduced a new feature
into the history of Rome. An obstacle was atonce raised against imperial
tyranny: a limit was discovered which it could not pass over. Here was a
refractory subject who could not be denounced as a rebel, nor destroyed by the
naked exercise of arbitrary power; the weight of spiritual influence, in the
skillful hand of Athanasius, was beginning to balance and mitigate the temporal
despotism, and the artifices to which Constantius was compelled to resort, in
order to gain a verdict from the councils of Aries and Milan, proved that his
absolute power had already ceased to exist. Athanasius did not, indeed, like
the Gregories, establish a system of ecclesiastical policy and power — that
belonged to later ages and to another climate — but he exerted more extensive
personal influence over his own age, for the advancement of the church, than
any individual in any age, except perhaps Bernard. 'In all his writings,' says
Photius, 'he is clear in expression, concise, and simple; — acute,
profound, and very vehement in his disputations, with wonderful fertility of
invention; and in his method of reasoning he treats no subject with baldness or
puerility, but all philosophically and magnificently."'
Gregory of Nazianzus has
an oration on Athanasius, from which the following passage is given by
Cave (Lives of the Fathers, vol. 2): "He was one that so
governed himself that his life supplied the place of sermons, and his sermons
prevented his corrections; much less need had he to cut or lance where he did
but once shake his rod. In him all ranks and orders might find something to
admire, something particular for their imitation: one might commend his
unwearied constancy in fasting and prayer; another, his vigorous and incessant
persevering in watchings and praise; a third, his admirable care and protection
of the poor; a fourth, his resolute opposition to the proud, or his
condescension to the humble. The virgins may celebrate him as their bridesman,
the married as their governor, the hermits as their monitor, the cenobites as
their lawgiver, the simple as their guide, the contemplative as a divine, the
merry as a bridle, the miserable as a comforter, the aged as a staff, the youth
as a tutor, the poor as a benefactor, and the rich as a steward. He was a
patron to the widows, a father to orphans, a friend to the poor, a harbor to
strangers, a brother to brethren, a physician to the sick, a keeper of the
healthful, one who 'became all things to all men, that, if not all, he might at
least gain the more.'... With respect to his predecessors in that see, he
equalled some, came near others, and exceeded others; in some he imitated their
discourses, in others their actions; the. meekness of some, the zeal of others,
the patience and constancy of the rest; borrowing many perfections from some,
and all from others; and so making up a complete representation of virtue, like
skillful limners, who, to make the piece absolute, do first from several
persons draw the several perfections of beauty within the idea of their own
minds; so he, insomuch that in practice he outdid the eloquent, and in his
discourses outwent those who were most versed in practice; or, if you will, in
his discourses he excelled the eloquent, and in his practice those who were
most used to business; and for those that had made but an ordinary advance in
either, he was far superior to them, as being eminent but in one kind; and for
those who were masters in the other, he outdid them in that he excelled in
both." The aptitude of his remarkable intellect for grappling with the
deepest problems is shown in all his writings, even in the earliest (λόγος κατὰ
τῶν ῾Ελλήνων, Oration against the Greeks), an apologetic work to
refute the Grecian attacks on Christianity, which evinces his culture in Greek
learning, as well as rare metaphysical acuteness, written as it was before the
author was twenty-five (A.D. 318?) The treatise De Incarnatione
verbi appeared about the same time, and, indeed, is cited by Jerome as the
same work. It treats of the deepest themes, God, creation, .anthropology, and
Christology. His other most important writings are Epistola de decretis
Nicence Synodi contra Ariaios; Epist. de sententia Dionysii; Orationes contra
Arianos; 'Epistolce od Serapionem; Epistola ad Epictetum; Epistola ad Adelphum;
Contra Apollinarium. Besides these are Apologia de Fuga sua (to
justify his flight from persecution); Epistola ad Monachos, written
by request of certain monks, to give an account of his sufferings and of the
Arian heresy. The first, or dogmatical part, is lost. The following passage
from this book manifests the modest 'humility of a grand intellect. Speaking of
his attempts to explain the doctrine of the Logos, he says: "The
more I think on the subject, the more incomprehensible it appears to me; and I
should abandon it entirely were it not for your importunity and the
blasphemy of your opponents. I therefore think it ploper to say something on
the subject; for, though it be impossible to comprehend what God is, yet
it is possible to tell what he is not. In like manner, though it is
impossible fully to explain the nature of the Logos, yet it is easy
to condemn and refute what his adversaries have said against him." After
having made this apology, he begs them to return the letter after they had read
it, without either copying or permitting it to be copied, as it was at least
but an inadequate defense of that a great truth, and was too inconsiderable to
deserve being transmitted to posterity. In this epistle his views on
persecution contrast nobly with those of Augustine's later years.
"Nothing," he observes, "more forcibly marks the weakness of a
bad cause. Satan, who has no truth to propose to men, comes with axe
and sword to make way for his errors. The method made use of by Christ to
persuade men to receive his beneficent religion is widely different, for
.ie teaches the truth, and says, If any man WILL come after
in me, and be my disciple, etc. When he comes to the heart he uses
no violence, but says, Open to me, my sister, my spouse; if
we open, he comes in; if we will not open, he retires; for the truth
is not preached with swords and spears, nor by the authority of soldiers, but
by counsel and persuasion. But of what use can persuasion be where the imperial
terror reigns? And what place is there for counsel where resistance to the
imperial authority in these matters must terminate in exile or death? It is the
property of the true religion to have no recourse to force, but to
persuasion. But the state makes use of compulsion in matters of religion, and
what is the consequence? Why, the church is filled with hypocrisy and impiety,
and the faithful servants of Christ are obliged to hide themselves in caves and
holes of the earth, or to wander about in the deserts." The Orationes
contra Arianos, four in number, were written, it is supposed, during the
stay of Athanasius in Egypt. In the first discourse he answers the
objections which the Arians brought against what is now commonly termed
the Eternal Sonship of Christ. In the second he shows the
dignity of Christ's nature, and its superiority to that of angels and to all
created beings, and explains several portions of Scripture, especially Proverbs
8, which he applies to Christ, pointing out what parts relate to his divine
nature, and those which are to be understood of his human nature. The third may
be divided into three parts. In the first he shows the
essential unity and identity of the Father and Son; in
the second he explains certain passages of Scripture which relate
only to the human nature of Christ, and which the Arians had
perverted by applying them to his divinity, in order the better to
serve their own cause; in the third part he answers their objections;
in the fourth discourse Athanasius shows the unity of the divine
nature, and, at the same time, the distinct personality of the Father and the
Son. Most of this oration refers to other heresies than Arianism. "We do
not hesitate to affirm that the four orations of Athanasius against the Arians
contain a dialectics as sharp and penetrating, and a metaphysics as
transcendental as any thing in Aristotle or Hegel" (Shedd, History of
Doctrines, 1, 73). Bishop Kaye gives a digest of the four orations in
his Council of Nicea (Lond. 1853, pt. 2).
The Epistolae ad Serapionem (four
in number) were written in reply to Serapion, an Egyptian bishop, who asked
Athanasius to answer certain heretics who maintained that the Holy Spirit was
a creature, and one of the ministering spirits of God, different from
angels only in rank, but not in nature. "If," say
they, "the Holy Spirit be neither an angel nor created being, if he
proceed from the Father, he is his Son, and the Logos and
he are brothers; if so, how can the Logos be called
the only son of God? If they be equal, why is he called the Holy
Spirit, and not Son; and why is it that he is not also said to have
been begotten by the Father?" To show them the futility of such
objections, which suppose that, in speaking of God and his son Jesus, we must
be governed by the ideas of natural generation, Athanasius asks in his turn,
"Who, then, is the father of the Father, the son of the Son? who the
grandchildren, seeing, among men, father implies father
antecedent, and son implies son consequent, and so
on ad infinitum? Son among men is only a portion of his father; but
in God, the Son is the entire image of the Father, and always Son, as the
Father is always Father; nor can the Father be the Son, nor the Son the Father.
We cannot, therefore, speak of God as having brother or ancestor of any kind,
seeing the Scriptures speak of no such thing; nor do they ever give the Holy
Spirit the name of Son, but only that of the Spirit of the Father and
the Spirit of the Son. The holy Trinity has one and the same godhead or
divinity; it is all but one God; we must not attach the idea of
creature to it; human reason can penetrate no further; the cherubim cover the
rest with their wings." In the second letter Athanasius combats
those who place the Son in the rank of created beings, and advances the proofs
of his divinity. The third letter shows that what the Scriptures say
of the Son as to his divine nature, they say the same also of the Holy Spirit;
and that the proofs which establish the divinity of the one, establish also the
divinity of the other. In the fourth letter he shows how the Holy
Spirit cannot be termed Son, and insists on the necessity of saying nothing of
God but what he has revealed concerning himself; and that we must not judge of
the divine nature by what we see in men; and that the mystery of the Trinity
cannot be fathomed by human wisdom. As Serapion had asked his opinion
concerning that text, He who blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost hath no
forgiveness, neither in this world nor in that which is to come, he
employs the conclusion of this letter in discussing this point. Origen and Theognostus, he
observes, asserted that the sin against the Holy Ghost was apostasy after
baptism. This Athanasius denies, because the words were addressed to
the Pharisees, who had not been baptized, and yet are charged with
having committed this sin; he then asserts that as the Jews had seen the
miracles which Christ wrought, and attributed them to the power of Beelzebub,
thereby denying his divinity, that this alone constitutes the sin against the
Holy Ghost. Those, says he, who consider only the human acts of
Christ, and suppose him, therefore, to be a man only, are in some
sort excusable. Those also who, seeing his miracles, doubted whether
he was a man, could scarcely be deemed culpable; but those who, seeing his
miracles and divine actions, obstinately' attributed them to the power of the
devil, — as the Pharisees did, committed a crime so enormous that there is
reason to fear such a sin is unpardonable. This, therefore, is the sin against
the Holy Ghost of which Christ speaks. The treatise against
Apollinaris and the Epistle to Epictetus treat with unrivalled
skill and acumen of the true doctrine of the humanity of Christ.
The Athanasian
Creed, so called, is not the work of Athanasius. SEE CREED,
ATHANASIAN. For the doctrinal views of Athanasius, and for his great
services to the church in settling the scientific doctrine of the Trinity, see
Shedd, History of Christian Doctrine, bk. 3, ch. 3; bk. 5, ch. 6;
Smith's Hagenbach, History of Doctrines, § 87-105; Neander, History
of Dogmas, 2, 290 sq. Bishop Kaye's Account of the Council of
Nicea (Lond. 1853, 8vo) gives a history of the Arian heresy from its rise
to the death of Athanasius, and also a digest of the "Four Orations
against the Arians." See also the articles SEE ARIANISM;
SEE TRINITY.
Athanasius brought
against the Arian and other heresies three classes of arguments: (1) from the
authority of preceding writers and the general sense of the church; (2)
philosophical and rational arguments; (3) scriptural and exegetical proofs. In
each of these fields he showed entire mastery of the material. But the great
merit of his position was his assertion of the supreme authority of Scripture
as against the assertions or presuppositions of reason. The Arians, Sabellians,
etc. were simply precursors of the modern Rationalism; Athanasius, on the other
hand, maintained that the mind of man is not, and cannot be, the I measure of
the universe, still less of God, the creator of the universe. Neander sums up
his share in the Arian controversy as follows: When the Arians maintained that
the Son of God was only distinguished from other created beings by the fact
that God created him first of all, and then all other beings by him;
Athanasius, on the contrary, said It is a narrowminded representation that God,
must require an instrument for creation; it looks as if the Son of God came
into existence only for our sakes; and by such a representation we might be led
to regard the Son of God, not as participating immediately in the divine
essence, but as requiring an intermediate agency for himself. What, then, could
that agency be between him and God? Grant that such existed, then that would be
the Son of God in a proper sense; nothing else, indeed, than the divine essence
communicating itself. If we do not stand in connection with God through the Son
of God as thus conceived of, we have no true communion with him, but something
stands between us and God, and we are, therefore, not the children of God in a
propersense. For, in reference to our original relation, we are only creatures
of God, and he is not in a proper sense our Father; only so far is he our
Father as we are placed in communion with the Father through Christ, who is the
Son of God by a communication of the divine essence: without this I doctrine it
could not be said that we are partakers of the divine nature (Orat. contr.
Arian. 1, 16) ἀνάγκη λέγειν τὸ ἐκ τῆς οὐσίας τοῦ πατρὸς ἴδιον αὐτοῦ σύμπαν
εϊvναι τὸν υἱὸν· τὸ γὰρ ὃλως μετέχεσθαι τὸν θεὸν, ϊvσὸν ἐστι λέγειν ὅτι καὶ γεννᾶ'/·
τὸ δὲ γεννᾶ'/ν τί σημαινει ἤ υἱὸν; αὐτοῦ γοῦν τοῦ υἱοῦ μετέχει τὰ πάντα κατὰ τὴν
τοῦ πνεύματος γινομἐνην παῤ αὐτοῦ χάριν, καὶ φανερὸν ἐκ τούτου γένεται, ὅτι αὐτός
μεν ὁ υἱὸς οὐδενὸς μετέχει, τὸ δὲ ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς μετχόμενον, τοῦτό ἐστι ὁ υἱός· αὐτοῦ
γάρ τοῦ υἱοῦ μετέχοντες τοῦ θεοῦ μετέχειν λεγόμεθα ( ἵνα γένητε θείας κοινωνοὶφύσεως᾿᾿
- ῾οὐκ οἴδατε, ὅτι ναὸς θεοῦ ἐστε;᾿᾿ - ῾ἡμεῖς, γὰρ ναὸς θεοῦ ἐσμεν ζῶντος,᾿᾿ 2,
59). Thus, in Athanasius, the ideas of redemption, adoption, and communion with
God were connected with the idea of Jesus as the true Son of God. As the Arians
believed that they ought to pay divine honor to Christ according to the
Scriptures, he charged them with inconsistency, since, on their principles, men
were made idolaters and worshippers of a creature. The Arians objected to the
Nicene doctrine that the idea of the Son of God could not be distinguished from
that of a created being unless anthropopathical notions were admitted,
Athanasius replied that certainly all religious expressions are symbolical, and
have something anthropopathical at their basis, which we must abstract from
them in order to get the correct idea. But the same is the case with the idea
of creation, which the Arians are willing to maintain; we should fall into
error if we tried to develop this according to human representations. In like
manner we must abstract from the ideas Son of God and begotten
of God what belongs to sensuous relations, and then there is left to us
the idea of unity of essence and derivation of nature. Athanasius objects to the
Semi- Arians that the ideas of likeness and unlikeness suit only creaturely
relations; in reference to God we can speak only of unity or diversity. It
belongs to the idea of creation. that something is created out of
nothing, ab extra, by the will of God; to the idea of the Son of God
belongs derivation from the essence of God. It was a difficulty to the
Semi-Arians in general, as well as to the Arians, that the Son of God was
asserted to maintain his existence not by a direct act of the Father's will,
and both parties urged against the Nicseans the dilemma that either God brought
the Son into being by his own will, or that he was begotten against his will by
necessity. Athanasius emphatically maintained the doctrine they impugned. If the
will of God be supposed to be the origin of the Son's existence, then the Son
of God belongs to the class of creatures. The existence of the divine Logos
precedes all particular acts of the divine will, which are all effectuated only
by the Logos, who himself is the living divine will. Our opponents think only
of the contrast between will and compulsion; they ignore what is higher,
namely, the idea of that which is founded in the divine essence. We cannot say
God is good and merciful first of all, by a special act of his will, but all
the acts of the divine will presuppose the being of God. The same holds good of
the Logos and the acts of God's will." — Neander, Hist. of
Dogmas, 1, 295.
Athanasius must be
classed among the greatest of Christian theologians. Yet in some points he was
"weak like other men;" and the ascetic and monastic spirit received a
strong impulse from his writings, and especially from his Life of St. Anthony
(q.v.). This and some other of his writings were doubtless interpolated by
later writers in the interest of Romish corruptions, yet enough remains to show
that he shared in some of the Gnostic errors, especially with regard to
religious virginity and celibacy. Thus, in his oration Against the Greeks, the
following passage occurs: "The Son of God," says Athanasius (i. 698),
"made man for us, and having abolished death, and having liberated our
race from the servitude of corruption, hath, besides his other gifts, granted
to us to have upon earth an image of the sanctity of angels, namely, virginity.
The maids possessing this (sanctity), and whom the church catholic is wont to
call the brides of Christ, are admired, even by the gentiles, as being the
temple of the Logos. Nowhere, truly, except among us Christians, is this holy
and heavenly profession fully borne out or perfected; so that we may appeal to
this very fact as a convincing proof that it is among us that true religion is
to be found." And thus, in the undoubted tract of the same father on the
Incarnation, we meet the very same prominent doctrine spoken of as a
characteristic of the Christian system, and even including the Gnostic
phrase applied to virginity, that it was an excellence obeying a rule
"above law." "Who is there but our Lord and Savior Christ that
has not deemed this virtue (of virginity) to be utterly impracticable (or
unattainable) among men, and yet he has so shown his divine power as to impel
youths, as yet under age, to profess it, a virtue beyond law?" (1, 105).
(Taylor, Ancient Christianity, 1, 222; see also Taylor's remarks on
Athanasius's Life of Anthony, p. 280.)
The most complete edition
of the works of Athanasius is that of the Benedictines (Athanasii Opera
omnia quae extant, vel quce ejus nomine circumferuntur, etc. Padua, 1777,
4 vols. fol.). Very convenient for ordinary students is Athanasii opera
dogmatica selecta, ed. Thilo, (Lips. 1853, 1000 pp. 8vo), which contains
all the really important writings of Athanasius. The Four Orations against
the Arioans were translated by S. Parker (Oxf. 1713, 2 vols. 8vo). We have
also in English, Select Treatises in Controversy with the Arians, in
the "Library of the Fathers," vols. 8, 19 (Oxf. 184244); Historical
Tracts (Lib. of Fathers, 13, Oxf. 1843). The "Festal Letters" of
Athanasius were long lost, but were edited in 1848 by Mr. Cureton, from a
newlyfound Syrian MS., and translated into German under the title Die
Fest-Briefe des Heiligen Athanasius, aus dem Syrischen fibersetzt und durch
Annmerkungen erlautert von F. Larzow (Leipzig, 1852, pp. 156); also into
English by Burgess (Oxf. 1854, 8vo, pp. 190).
See Journal of Sac.
Lit. Jan. 1855, p. 255. A complete list of the works of Athanasius,
including the doubtful and supposititious as well as the genuine, is given in
Fabricius, Bibl. Grce., ed. Harles, 7, 184-215. The sources of
information as to the life of Athanasius, besides his own writings, are the
church histories of Socrates (lib. 1, 2), Sozomen (2, 3), Theodoret (1, 2), and
the material is well arranged by Montfaucon, Vita Athanasii, prefixed
to the Benedictine ed. of his works. There is also a modern biography by
Mohler, Athanasius d. Grosse und die Kir he seiner Zeit, which gives
a careful analysis of his doctrine and writings. See also Bohninger, Kirchengeschichte
in Biographien (vol. 1, pt. 2, Zurich, 1842); Ritter, Gesch. der
Christlich. Philosophie, vol. 2; Baur, Christl. Lehre v. der
Dreieinigkeit, vol. 1; Dorner, History of the Doctrine of the Person
of Christ, vol. 1, div. 2 (Edinb. ed.); Neander, Ch. Hist. 2,
380; Murdoch's Mosheim, Ch. Hist. 1, 239; Eng. Cyclopedia; Gibbon, Decline
and Fall, ch. 21 - 24; Dupin, Eccl. Script. 1; Tillemont, Mémoires, vol.
5; Cave, Hist. Lit. anno 326; Clarke, Succession of Sacred
Literature, 1, 260; Voigt, Die Lehre d. Athanasius von Alexandrien (partly
transl. in Bibliotheca Sacra, Jan. 1864); Shedd, History of
Christian Doctrine, bk. 3, ch. 3; Kaye, Council of Nicaea (Lond.
1853, 8vo); Christian Remembrancer, Jan. 1854, art. 4; Herzog, Real-Encyklopadie, 1,
571 sq.; Villemain, Éloquence Chrét. au IVe siècle, 92 sq.
SOURCE : https://www.biblicalcyclopedia.com/A/athanasius.html
Sant' Atanasio Vescovo
e dottore della Chiesa
295 - 2 maggio 373
Vescovo di Alessandria
d'Egitto, fu l'indomito assertore della fede nella divinità di Cristo, negata
dagli Ariani e proclamata dal Concilio di Nicea (325). Per questo soffrì
persecuzioni ed esili. Narrò la vita di Sant'Antonio abate e divulgò anche in
Occidente l'ideale monastico. (Mess. Rom.)
Etimologia: Atanasio
= immortale, dal greco
Emblema: Bastone
pastorale
Martirologio
Romano: Memoria di sant’Atanasio, vescovo e dottore della Chiesa, di
insigne santità e dottrina, che ad Alessandria d’Egitto dai tempi di Costantino
fino a quelli dell’imperatore Valente combattè strenuamente per la retta fede
e, subite molte congiure da parte degli ariani, fu più volte mandato in esilio;
tornato infine alla Chiesa a lui affidata, dopo aver lottato e sofferto molto
con eroica pazienza, nel quarantaseiesimo anno del suo sacerdozio riposò nella
pace di Cristo.
L’epoca in cui visse sant’Atanasio fu di grande crisi della ortodossia, cioè della Dottrina autentica. Siamo intorno al 360. In quel periodo (così come oggi) la Verità cattolica rischiava di scomparire. Celebre è la frase di san Girolamo che descriveva quei tempi: «E il mondo, sgomento, si ritrovò ariano».
In tale contesto, sant’Atanasio non si piegò. Egli era un giovane vescovo di Alessandria d’Egitto. Rimase talmente solo a difendere la purezza della Dottrina che per quasi mezzo secolo la sopravvivenza della Fede autentica in Gesù Cristo si trasformò in una diatriba tra chi era per e chi non per Atanasio.
Qualche cenno biografico. Egli nacque ad Alessandria nel 295. Nel 325 presenziò al celebre Concilio di Nicea, in qualità di diacono di Alessandro ch’era vescovo di Alessandria. Concilio famoso quello di Nicea perché fu lì che venne solennemente proclamata la Fede nella Divinità di Cristo in quanto consustanziale al Padre. Fu lì che fu stabilita la definizione per intendere l’uguaglianza del Figlio con il Padre: homoousius, che vuol dire “della stessa sostanza”. Attenzione a questa definizione (homoousius) perché questa sarà la sostanza del contendere.
Torniamo alla vita di sant’Atanasio. Il 17 aprile del 328 morì il vescovo Alessandro e il popolo di Alessandria d’Egitto chiese a gran voce Atanasio come vescovo. Fu vescovo per ben 46 anni, ma furono 46 anni durissimi, 46 anni di lotta contro l’eresia ariana e contro gli ariani. Questi ovviamente rifiutavano proprio ciò che il Concilio di Nicea aveva detto di Gesù, il termine homoousius, che, come ho già ricordato, vuol dire: della stessa sostanza del Padre.
Il comportamento degli ariani di quel tempo è indicativo per capire quanto le vicende che toccarono a sant’Atanasio siano straordinariamente attuali. Sant’Ilario di Poitiers (315-367) racconta che gli ariani ebbero sempre la scaltrezza di rifiutare ogni scontro dogmatico in merito alla questione della natura di Gesù perché sapevano che le loro tesi non potevano essere fondate sulla Tradizione né sul Magistero definito. Si limitavano a fare ciò che solitamente fa chi non sa controbattere in una discussione: invece di rispondere sugli argomenti, calunnia. La discussione dottrinale veniva spesso trasformata in conflitto su questioni personali. Il povero sant’Atanasio fu accusato delle più grandi nefandezze: di aver imbrogliato, di aver violentato una donna, di aver ucciso, di minare all’unicità della Chiesa. Una tecnica che non passa mai di moda. D’altronde il demonio è sempre lo stesso e ha sempre la stessa monotona fantasia.
Gli ariani però non si limitarono a questo. Operarono anche con grande astuzia. Prima di tutto cercarono di occupare quante più sedi episcopali e poi lanciarono quello che successivamente è stato definito come semiarianesimo. Altra tecnica tipica delle eresie: una volta condannate, riemergono proponendo un compromesso tra la verità e l’errore. Gli ariani propagandarono la necessità di sostituire il termine stabilito dal Concilio di Nicea, homoousion, con il termine homoiousion. Differenza di una sola lettera, minimale, ma che cambiava tutto. Infatti, il primo termine (homoousion) significa “della stessa sostanza”, il secondo termine (homoiousion) significa “simile in essenza”. Traducendo si capisce quanto la differenza non sia di poco conto.
Mentre molti vescovi si lasciarono convincere da questo compromesso terminologico, che era cedimento sulla Dottrina, sant’Atanasio tenne fermo, resistette come un leone. Subì l’esilio per almeno cinque volte, ma non cedette. E – come si suol dire – non era tipo che la mandasse a dire né che parlasse alle spalle. Si sentiva il dovere di difendere le anime per cui non lesinò un linguaggio polemico per mostrare a tutti quanto fossero in errore e quanto fossero pericolosi i semiariani, che invece agli occhi di molti sembravano innocui. Se la prendeva anche con chi voleva accettare il compromesso dottrinale. Sentite cosa diceva a riguardo: «Volete essere figli della luce, ma non rinunciate ad essere figli del mondo. Dovreste credere alla penitenza, ma voi credete alla felicità dei tempi nuovi. Dovreste parlare della Grazia, ma voi preferite parlare del progresso umano. Dovreste annunciare Dio, ma preferite predicare l’uomo e l’umanità. Portate il nome di Cristo, ma sarebbe più giusto se portaste il nome di Pilato. Siete la grande corruzione, perché state nel mezzo. Volete stare nel mezzo tra la luce e il mondo. Siete maestri del compromesso e marciate col mondo. Io vi dico: fareste meglio ad andarvene col mondo ed abbandonare il Maestro, il cui regno non è di questo mondo».
Nel 335 a Tiro, in Palestina, fu convocato un sinodo per dirimere la controversia e dunque per decidere quale atteggiamento avere nei confronti di ciò che affermava sant’Atanasio. Il concilio definì il Vescovo di Alessandria con questi termini: “arrogante”, “superbo” e “uomo che vuole la discordia”. Il papa Giulio I (?-352) cercò di difenderlo, ma poi di lì a non molto morì e il povero sant’Atanasio fu nuovamente attaccato.
Intanto anche il potere politico si accaniva contro di lui: l’imperatore Costanzo l’odiava. Fu convocato un concilio ad Arles e qui si costrinsero i vescovi a sottoscrivere una condanna di sant’Atanasio. Chi si opponeva difendendolo veniva mandato in esilio, fu il caso di Paolino di Treviri. Stessa sorte toccò anche al papa legittimo Liberio (?-366), che venne sostituito da un antipapa, Felice.
Fu allora che accadde ciò che viene ricordato come “caduta” di un Papa. Liberio, per ottenere il potere e tornare a Roma come papa legittimo, decise anch’egli di accettare l’ambigua definizione semiariana, eppure fino ad allora si era distinto per una convinta definizione dell’homoousius del Concilio di Nicea.
Altri concili segnarono il trionfo dell’eresia: quelli non ecumenici di Rimini e di Seleucia, siamo nel 359. Ma era prevedibile che per come era stato trattato sant’Atanasio e soprattutto per come era stata rinnegata la vera Fede il castigo fosse alle porte. All’imperatore Costanzo, morto nel 360, successe Giuliano detto “l’apostata” (330-363), che arrivò a ripudiare il Battesimo cercando di restaurare il paganesimo.
Non passò molto tempo e il nuovo imperatore Valente, così come il nuovo papa Damaso, capirono che sant’Atanasio aveva ragione e lo riabilitarono. L’intrepido difensore della Fede cattolica morì il 2 maggio del 373.
Ancora due cose vanno messe in rilievo. La prima: ai tempi di sant’Atanasio a
difendere la Fede ci fu solo lui e una piccola comunità, i vescovi dell’Egitto
e della Libia. Solo loro seppero mantenere accesa la luce della fede. La
seconda: è significativo che colui che combatté da solo contro l’eresia ariana,
non fu mai un teologo. La sua grande sapienza teologica, più che dagli studi,
gli venne dall’incontro con i suoi maestri cristiani che testimoniarono il
martirio durante le persecuzioni di Diocleziano; e soprattutto dall’incontro
con il grande sant’Antonio. Ario, invece, raccoglieva grande consenso per la
sua grande preparazione biblica e teologica. Era insomma come tanti teologi che
oggi vanno per la maggiore nei dibattiti, nelle prime pagine dei quotidiani e
nei talk-show televisivi. Atanasio però sapeva quanto qui stesse l’insidia del
demonio. Nella sua celebre Vita di Antonio egli riporta un insegnamento del suo
grande maestro: «[...] i demoni sono astuti e pronti a ricorrere ad ogni
inganno e ad assumere altre sembianze. Spesso fingono di cantare i salmi senza
farsi vedere e citano le parole della Scrittura. [...]. A volte assumono
sembianze di monaci, fingono di parlare come uomini di fede per trarci in
inganno mediante un aspetto simile al nostro e poi trascinano dove vogliono le
vittime dei loro inganni».
Autore: Corrado
Gnerre
Questo Padre e Dottore della Chiesa è il più celebre dei vescovi alessandrini e il più intrepido difensore della fede nicena contro l'eresia di Ario. Costui, siccome faceva del Verbo un essere di una sostanza diversa da quella del Padre e un semplice intermediario tra Dio e il mondo, praticamente negava il mistero della SS. Trinità.
S. Atanasio nacque verso il 295 ad Alessandria d'Egitto da genitori cristiani i quali gli fecero impartire un'educazione classica. Discepolo di S. Antonio abate nella gioventù, si consacrò per tempo al servizio della Chiesa, Nel 325 accompagnò come diacono e segretario il suo vescovo Alessandro al Concilio di Nicea radunato dall'imperatore Costantino, nel quale fu solennemente definita la consostanzialità del Figlio con il Padre. S. Atanasio nel 328 fu acclamato dagli alessandrini loro pastore. Di lui dicevano: "E un uomo probo, virtuoso, buon cristiano, un asceta, un vero vescovo".
La chiesa di Alessandria si trovava divisa dallo scisma non solo di Ario, ma anche di Melezio di Licopoli. Durante la persecuzione di Diocleziano (305-306), costui, approfittando dell'assenza del vescovo Pietro di Alessandria, si era arrogato il diritto di ordinare e scomunicare secondo il suo arbitrio. Nonostante fosse stato deposto da un sinodo, buona parte del clero lo aveva seguito nello scisma. In mezzo a tante divisioni il compito del giovane Atanasio si presentava quanto mai difficile.
Ben presto cominciarono difatti gli intrighi contro di lui dei vescovi di corte ariani, capeggiati da Eusebio di Cesarea, per indurlo a ricevere nella sua comunione i vescovi amici di Ario. Atanasio vi si oppose energicamente. I meleziani a loro volta l'accusarono presso Costantino di aver imposto agli egiziani un tributo di pezze di lino e di aver fatto rompere il calice di un loro vescovo. Citato al tribunale dell'imperatore a Nicomedia, non fu difficile al santo discolparsi. Accusato ancora di aver fatto assassinare Arsente, vescovo meleziano di Ipsele, non fu difficile al medesimo accrescere lo scorno dei suoi nemici facendoglielo comparire davanti vivo.
L'accusato fu di nuovo riabilitato, ma gli ariani non si diedero per vinti. Essi persuasero Ario a sottoscrivere una formula di fede equivoca. Costantino se ne accontentò e intimò a tutti i vescovi di riceverlo nella loro comunione. Essendosi Atanasio ancora una volta rifiutato, fu deposto dal concilio di Tiro (335) e relegato a Treviri, nelle Gallie, dove rimase fino alla morte dell'imperatore (337). Gli eusebiani non potendo per allora sperare nulla dal potere civile, portarono davanti al papa Giulio I l'affare di Atanasio. Furono citate le due parti ad un concilio plenario, ma gli ariani, sicuri dell'appoggio di Costanzo II, imperatore d'Oriente, invece di presentarsi, posero sulla sede di Alessandria Gregorio di Cappadocia. Il secondo esilio di Atanasio durò sei anni. A Roma (341) e a Sardica (343) fu riconosciuta la sua innocenza. Durante il soggiorno romano egli viaggiò molto, e iniziò la chiesa latina alla vita monastica quale si praticava in Egitto. Nella Pasqua del 345 si recò ad Aquileia presso Costante, imperatore d'occidente, che gli ottenne dal fratello Costanzo il permesso di tornare alla sua sede dopo la morte del vescovo intruso (345).
Seguirono per il santo dieci anni di pace relativa, di cui approfittò non solo per comporre opere dogmatiche, o di apologia personale, ma per proseguire una politica di vigile controllo e di prudente conciliazione, i cui effetti furono disastrosi per il partito ariano. Difatti, due o tre anni dopo, egli era in comunione con più di 400 vescovi, e seguito dalla massa dei fedeli. In questo periodo egli consacrò vescovo di Etiopia S. Frumenzio, vero fondatore della chiesa cristiana in quel paese.
Alla morte del suo protettore Costante (350) e del papa Giulio I (352), i nemici di Atanasio tanto brigarono da riuscire a sollevargli contro anche l'episcopato d'Occidente nel Concilio di Arles (354) e in quello di Milano (355).
L'intrepido vescovo, ripieno di amarezza, fuggì allora nel deserto, dove i monaci per otto anni lo sottrassero con cura a tutte le ricerche. Dalla solitudine egli continuò a governare la sua chiesa e scrisse i Discorsi contro gli Ariani e le 4 Lettere a Serapione che formano la sua gloria come dottore della SS. Trinità. Poté ritornare in sede nel 362 dopo la morte di Costanzo, il massacro del vescovo intruso Giorgio dì Cappadocia e la salita al trono di Giuliano, il cui primo atto fu di richiamare i vescovi esiliati dal suo predecessore.
Fu cura di Atanasio ristabilire l'ortodossia nicena e combattere l'arianesimo ufficiale che aveva trionfato nei concili di Seleucia e di Rimini (359). Riunito un concilio, prese decisioni improntate a misericordia verso coloro che si erano dati all'eresia per ignoranza, e anche sul terreno dogmatico fu largo e tollerante per quello che potevano sembrare quisquiglie o pura terminologia. Tanta attività diretta a consolidare l'unità cattolica non tornò gradita a Giuliano, intento solo a ristabilire il paganesimo. Nel 363 S. Atanasio per la quarta volta lasciò la sua sede, ma solo per pochi mesi perché, morto l'imperatore nella spedizione contro i persiani, gli successe il cristiano Gioviano, che lo richiamò. Nel 365 il Santo dovette eclissarsi alla periferia della città per la sesta volta, perseguitato dall'imperatore d'Oriente, Valente, amico degli ariani. Dopo soli quattro mesi però fu richiamato perché gli egiziani minacciavano rivolte. Non lasciò più la sua sede fino alla morte avvenuta il 2 maggio 373 dopo 45 anni di governo forte e alle volte anche duro contro i suoi avversari.
Egli meritò a buon diritto il titolo di "grande" per l'indomabile fermezza di carattere dimostrata contro gli ariani e la potenza imperiale, sovente ad essi eccessivamente ligia. A ragione fu detto che in lui, "padre dell'ortodossia", combatteva tutta la Chiesa.
Finché visse sostenne ovunque con un'attività traboccante i propugnatori della vera fede. Così impedì che i vescovi dell'Africa latina sostituissero il simbolo compilato a Nicea con quello di Rimini; spinse papa Damaso ad agire contro Ausenzio, vescovo ariano di Milano, e incoraggiò S. Basilio, che cercava un appoggio per la pacificazione religiosa dell'oriente.
Della produzione letteraria di Atanasio non esiste ancora un'edizione critica. Nelle sue opere si nota limpidezza e acutezza di pensiero, ma la materia trattata manca di ordine ed è resa pesante dalle frequenti ripetizioni e dalla prolissità.
Autore: Guido Pettinati
SOURCE : http://www.santiebeati.it/dettaglio/23100
Saint
Athanase, Fresque, église Panagia Episcope, Santorini
BENEDETTO XVI
UDIENZA GENERALE
Aula Paolo VI
Mercoledì, 20 giugno 2007
Sant’Atanasio di
Alessandria
Cari fratelli e sorelle,
continuando la nostra
rivisitazione dei grandi Maestri della Chiesa antica, vogliamo rivolgere oggi
la nostra attenzione a sant’Atanasio di Alessandria. Questo autentico
protagonista della tradizione cristiana, già pochi anni dopo la morte, venne
celebrato come «la colonna della Chiesa» dal grande teologo e Vescovo di
Costantinopoli Gregorio Nazianzeno (Discorsi 21,26), e sempre è stato
considerato come un modello di ortodossia, tanto in Oriente quanto in
Occidente. Non a caso, dunque, Gian Lorenzo Bernini ne collocò la statua tra
quelle dei quattro santi Dottori della Chiesa orientale e occidentale – insieme
ad Ambrogio, Giovanni Crisostomo e Agostino –, che nella meravigliosa abside
della Basilica vaticana circondano la Cattedra di san Pietro.
Atanasio è stato senza
dubbio uno dei Padri della Chiesa antica più importanti e venerati. Ma
soprattutto questo grande Santo è l’appassionato teologo dell’incarnazione
del Logos, il Verbo di Dio, che – come dice il prologo del quarto Vangelo
– «si fece carne e venne ad abitare in mezzo a noi» (Gv 1,14). Proprio per
questo motivo Atanasio fu anche il più importante e tenace avversario
dell’eresia ariana, che allora minacciava la fede in Cristo, riducendolo ad una
creatura «media» tra Dio e l’uomo, secondo una tendenza ricorrente nella storia,
e che vediamo in atto in diversi modi anche oggi. Nato probabilmente ad
Alessandria, in Egitto, verso l’anno 300, Atanasio ricevette una buona
educazione prima di divenire diacono e segretario del Vescovo della metropoli
egiziana, Alessandro. Stretto collaboratore del suo Vescovo, il giovane
ecclesiastico prese parte con lui al Concilio di Nicea, il primo a carattere
ecumenico, convocato dall’imperatore Costantino nel maggio del 325 per
assicurare l’unità della Chiesa. I Padri niceni poterono così affrontare varie
questioni, e principalmente il grave problema originato qualche anno prima
dalla predicazione del presbitero alessandrino Ario.
Questi, con la sua
teoria, minacciava l’autentica fede in Cristo, dichiarando che il Logos non
era vero Dio, ma un Dio creato, un essere «medio» tra Dio e l’uomo, e così il
vero Dio rimaneva sempre inaccessibile a noi. I Vescovi riuniti a Nicea
risposero mettendo a punto e fissando il «Simbolo della fede» che, completato
più tardi dal primo Concilio di Costantinopoli, è rimasto nella tradizione
delle diverse confessioni cristiane e nella Liturgia come il Credo
niceno-costantinopolitano. In questo testo fondamentale – che esprime la fede
della Chiesa indivisa, e che recitiamo anche oggi, ogni domenica, nella
Celebrazione eucaristica – figura il termine greco homooúsios, in
latino consubstantialis: esso vuole indicare che il Figlio, il Logos, è
«della stessa sostanza» del Padre, è Dio da Dio, è la sua sostanza, e così
viene messa in luce la piena divinità del Figlio, che era negata dagli ariani.
Morto il Vescovo
Alessandro, Atanasio divenne, nel 328, suo successore come Vescovo di
Alessandria, e subito si dimostrò deciso a respingere ogni compromesso nei
confronti delle teorie ariane condannate dal Concilio niceno. La sua intransigenza,
tenace e a volte molto dura, anche se necessaria, contro quanti si erano
opposti alla sua elezione episcopale e soprattutto contro gli avversari del
Simbolo niceno, gli attirò l’implacabile ostilità degli ariani e dei
filoariani. Nonostante l’inequivocabile esito del Concilio, che aveva con
chiarezza affermato che il Figlio è della stessa sostanza del Padre, poco dopo
queste idee sbagliate tornarono a prevalere – in questa situazione persino Ario
fu riabilitato –, e vennero sostenute per motivi politici dallo stesso
imperatore Costantino e poi da suo figlio Costanzo II. Questi, peraltro, che
non si interessava tanto della verità teologica quanto dell’unità dell’Impero e
dei suoi problemi politici, voleva politicizzare la fede, rendendola più accessibile
– secondo il suo parere – a tutti i sudditi nell’Impero.
La crisi ariana, che si
credeva risolta a Nicea, continuò così per decenni, con vicende difficili e
divisioni dolorose nella Chiesa. E per ben cinque volte – durante un
trentennio, tra il 336 e il 366 – Atanasio fu costretto ad abbandonare la sua
città, passando diciassette anni in esilio e soffrendo per la fede. Ma durante
le sue forzate assenze da Alessandria, il Vescovo ebbe modo di sostenere e
diffondere in Occidente, prima a Treviri e poi a Roma, la fede nicena e anche
gli ideali del monachesimo, abbracciati in Egitto dal grande eremita Antonio
con una scelta di vita alla quale Atanasio fu sempre vicino. Sant’Antonio, con
la sua forza spirituale, era la persona più importante nel sostenere la fede di
sant’Atanasio. Reinsediato definitivamente nella sua sede, il Vescovo di
Alessandria poté dedicarsi alla pacificazione religiosa e alla riorganizzazione
delle comunità cristiane. Morì il 2 maggio del 373, giorno in cui
celebriamo la sua memoria liturgica.
L’opera dottrinale più
famosa del santo Vescovo alessandrino è il trattato su L’incarnazione del
Verbo, il Logos divino che si è fatto carne divenendo come noi per la
nostra salvezza. Dice in quest’opera Atanasio, con un’affermazione divenuta giustamente
celebre, che il Verbo di Dio «si è fatto uomo perché noi diventassimo Dio; egli
si è reso visibile nel corpo perché noi avessimo un’idea del Padre invisibile,
ed egli stesso ha sopportato la violenza degli uomini perché noi ereditassimo
l’incorruttibilità» (54,3). Con la sua risurrezione, infatti, il Signore ha
fatto sparire la morte come se fosse «paglia nel fuoco» (8,4). L’idea
fondamentale di tutta la lotta teologica di sant’Atanasio era proprio quella
che Dio è accessibile. Non è un Dio secondario, è il Dio vero, e tramite la
nostra comunione con Cristo noi possiamo unirci realmente a Dio. Egli è
divenuto realmente «Dio con noi».
Tra le altre opere di
questo grande Padre della Chiesa – che in gran parte rimangono legate alle
vicende della crisi ariana – ricordiamo poi le quattro lettere che egli
indirizzò all’amico Serapione, Vescovo di Thmuis, sulla divinità dello Spirito
Santo, che viene affermata con nettezza, e una trentina di lettere «festali»,
indirizzate all’inizio di ogni anno alle Chiese e ai monasteri dell’Egitto per
indicare la data della festa di Pasqua, ma soprattutto per assicurare i legami
tra i fedeli, rafforzandone la fede e preparandoli a tale grande solennità.
Atanasio è, infine, anche
autore di testi meditativi sui Salmi, poi molto diffusi, e soprattutto di
un’opera che costituisce il best seller dell’antica letteratura
cristiana: la Vita di Antonio, cioè la biografia di sant’Antonio abate,
scritta poco dopo la morte di questo Santo, proprio mentre il Vescovo di
Alessandria, esiliato, viveva con i monaci del deserto egiziano. Atanasio fu
amico del grande eremita, al punto da ricevere una delle due pelli di pecora
lasciate da Antonio come sua eredità, insieme al mantello che lo stesso Vescovo
di Alessandria gli aveva donato. Divenuta presto popolarissima, tradotta quasi
subito in latino per due volte e poi in diverse lingue orientali, la biografia
esemplare di questa figura cara alla tradizione cristiana contribuì molto alla
diffusione del monachesimo, in Oriente e in Occidente. Non a caso la lettura di
questo testo, a Treviri, è al centro di un emozionante racconto della
conversione di due funzionari imperiali, che Agostino colloca nelle Confessioni (VIII,6,15)
come premessa della sua stessa conversione.
Del resto, lo stesso Atanasio
mostra di avere chiara coscienza dell’influsso che poteva avere sul popolo
cristiano la figura esemplare di Antonio. Scrive infatti nella conclusione di
quest’opera: «Che fosse dappertutto conosciuto, da tutti ammirato e desiderato,
anche da quelli che non l’avevano visto, è un segno della sua virtù e della sua
anima amica di Dio. Infatti non per gli scritti né per una sapienza profana né
per qualche capacità è conosciuto Antonio, ma solo per la sua pietà verso Dio.
E nessuno potrebbe negare che questo sia un dono di Dio. Come infatti si
sarebbe sentito parlare in Spagna e in Gallia, a Roma e in Africa di
quest’uomo, che viveva ritirato tra i monti, se non l’avesse fatto conoscere
dappertutto Dio stesso, come egli fa con quanti gli appartengono, e come aveva
annunciato ad Antonio fin dal principio? E anche se questi agiscono nel segreto
e vogliono restare nascosti, il Signore li mostra a tutti come una lucerna,
perché quanti sentono parlare di loro sappiano che è possibile seguire i
comandamenti e prendano coraggio nel percorrere il cammino della virtù»
(93,5-6).
Sì, fratelli e sorelle!
Abbiamo tanti motivi di gratitudine verso sant’Atanasio. La sua vita, come
quella di Antonio e di innumerevoli altri Santi, ci mostra che «chi va verso
Dio non si allontana dagli uomini, ma si rende invece ad essi veramente vicino»
(Deus
caritas est, 42).
Saluti nelle diverse
lingue ai pellegrinin presenti nella Basilica Vaticana:
Cari pellegrini di lingua
italiana,
sono lieto di accogliervi
in questa Basilica e di rivolgere a ciascuno di voi il mio cordiale benvenuto.
Auspico che la vostra visita alle tombe degli apostoli Pietro e Paolo consolidi
la vostra fede in Cristo e il legame con la Chiesa, che nasce dalla loro
testimonianza di vita e dal loro martirio.
Assicuro la mia fervida
preghiera per voi, per i vostri familiari e per tutte le vostre intenzioni.
Tutti vi affido alla materna intercessione della Vergine Maria!
Francese:
Chers pèlerins de langue
française,
je vous accueille avec
joie auprès de la tombe de Pierre. Que la démarche spirituelle que vous
accomplissez ici affermisse votre foi au Christ et votre lien avec l’Église.
En vous confiant à
l’intercession de la Bienheureuse Vierge Marie, je vous assure de ma prière
pour vous, pour vos familles et à toutes vos intentions.
Inglese:
Dear Brothers and
Sisters,
I am happy to welcome all
the English-speaking pilgrims to this Basilica. May your visit to the tombs of
the Apostles Peter and Paul strengthen your faith in Christ and renew your love
of his Church. Commending you to the intercession of the Virgin Mary, I assure
you of my prayers for each one of you, your relatives and your friends.
Tedesco:
Liebe Pilger und Besucher
deutscher Sprache!
Ich freue mich über diese
Begegnung mit euch allen hier im Petersdom. Und jedem von euch sage ich ein
herzliches "Grüß Gott!" Zugleich möchte ich meiner Hoffnung Ausdruck
geben, daß euer Besuch an den Gräbern der Apostel Petrus und Paulus euren
Glauben an Christus und eure Verbundenheit mit der Kirche festigen wird. Die
Kirche gründet ja auf dem Lebenszeugnis und dem Martyrium dieser Apostel.
Gerne versichere ich euch
meines Gebets für euch, für eure Familien und in allen euren
Anliegen. Euch alle anempfehle ich der mütterlichen Fürsprache der seligen
Jungfrau Maria!
Spagnolo:
Saludo cordialmente a los
peregrinos de lengua española, aquí presentes en esta Basílica. Os deseo que
vuestra visita a las tumbas de los apóstoles Pedro y Pablo, así como el testimonio
de su vida y de su martirio, consolide vuestra fe en Cristo y os ayude a
sentiros más unidos con toda la Iglesia.
Al mismo tiempo, en mis
oraciones pido al Señor por todos vosotros, vuestros familiares y por vuestras
intenciones. Con afecto, os encomiendo a la intercesión maternal de la Virgen
María. ¡Que Dios os bendiga!
***
Saluti nelle diverse
lingue ai pellegrini presenti nell'Aula Paolo VI
Je salue cordialement les
pèlerins de langue française. À la lumière de l’enseignement et de la vie des
saints, puissiez-vous découvrir que ceux qui vont vers Dieu ne s’éloignent
pas des hommes, mais qu’ils se rendent au contraire vraiment proches d’eux.
I welcome the
participants in the course organized by Foyer Unitas Lay Center. My
greetings also go to the Brothers of the Poor of Saint Francis
Seraphicus. Upon all the English-speaking visitors present at today’s
Audience, especially those from England, Australia and the United States, I
invoke God’s abundant blessings.
Liebe Brüder und
Schwestern! Einen frohen Gruß richte ich an die Pilger und Besucher deutscher
Sprache. Nehmt euch die Heiligen zum Vorbild! Sie zeigen uns, wie wir in
unserem Leben dem Willen Gottes folgen können, daß es möglich ist, auf dem Weg
Gottes zu gehen und den Willen Gottes zu leben. Der Herr begleite euch auf
euren Wegen und segne euren Aufenthalt in der Ewigen Stadt!
Saludo cordialmente a los
visitantes de lengua española, venidos de Latinoamérica y de España. En
particular, saludo a los distintos grupos parroquiales y escolares de España;
así como a los peregrinos de Honduras, México y otros Países Latinoamericanos.
Que vuestra visita a Roma consolide vuestra fe en Cristo, iluminados por el
testimonio de vida y del martirio de los apóstoles Pedro y Pablo, y sintiéndoos
cada vez más en comunión con toda la Iglesia. ¡Que Dios os bendiga!
Caríssimos Amigos de
língua portuguesa, Saúdo e desejo a todos felicidades, paz e graça no Senhor!
De modo particular saúdo os peregrinos vindos de Portugal e do Brasil: sede
bem-vindos! Que a luz de Cristo anime sempre vossa fé, esperança e caridade,
numa vida digna, cristã e repleta de alegrias. E dou-vos de coração, extensiva
aos vossos familiares e pessoas amigas, a minha Bênção.
Saluto in lingua polacca:
Pozdrawiam serdecznie
Polaków, a szczególnie młodzież, która wkrótce rozpoczyna wakacje. Niech
ten czas odpoczynku jeszcze bardziej zbliży was do Boga. Życzę byście wrócili z
wakacji ubogaceni i piękni duchowo. Wam wszystkim tu obecnym, waszym rodzinom,
dzieciom i młodzieży serdecznie błogosławię. Niech będzie pochwalony Jezus
Chrystus.
Traduzione italiana del
saluto in lingua polacca:
Saluto cordialmente tutti
i polacchi ed in particolare modo i giovani che, fra qualche giorno,
incominceranno le loro vacanze estive. Che questo tempo di riposo vi avvicini
ancora di più a Dio: vi auguro che torniate dalle ferie arricchiti ed imbelliti
spiritualmente. A tutti voi qui presenti, alle vostre famiglie, ai bambini
ed ai giovani, una benedizione di cuore. Sia lodato Gesù Cristo.
Saluto in lingua croata:
Srdačno pozdravljam sve
hrvatske hodočasnike, a posebno bračne parove iz župa Stolac, Studenci i
Mostar. Neka vaše obitelji prati Božji blagoslov, kako bi vaša uzajamna ljubav
i vjernost bile živa slika odnosa između Krista i njegove Crkve. Hvaljen Isus i
Marija!
Traduzione italiana del
saluto in lingua croata:
Saluto cordialmente i
pellegrini croati, particolarmente i coniugi provenienti dalle parrocchie di
Stolac, Studenci e Mostar. La benedizione di Dio accompagni le vostre famiglie,
affinché il vostro amore e la vostra fedeltà reciproci siano viva immagine del
rapporto tra Cristo e la sua Chiesa. Siano lodati Gesù e Maria!
Saluto in lingua lettone:
Sirsnīgi sveicu
svētceļniekus no Latvijas. Dārgie draugi, pateicos par jūsu vizīti. Vēlot,
lai tā stiprina jūsu gribu liecināt par Kristu, dodu jums, jūsu ģimenēm un jūsu
Dzimtenei savu svētību. Lai ir slavēts Jēzus Kristus!
Traduzione italiana del
saluto in lingua lettone:
Rivolgo un cordiale
benvenuto ai pellegrini provenienti dalla Lettonia. Cari amici, vi ringrazio
per la vostra visita e, mentre auspico che essa susciti in voi un rinnovato
desiderio di testimoniare Cristo, invoco su di voi, sulle vostre famiglie e
sulla vostra Patria la mia Benedizione. Sia lodato Gesù Cristo!
Saluto in lingua lituana:
Nuoširdžiai sveikinu
piligrimus iš Lietuvos. Brangūs bičiuliai, Jus raginu būti visuomet drąsiais
Kristaus liudytojais. Prašau Viešpaties laiminti Jus, Jūsų artimuosius ir Jūsų
Tėvynę. Garbė Jėzui Kristui!
Traduzione italiana del
saluto in lingua lituana:
Rivolgo un cordiale
saluto ai pellegrini provenienti dalla Lituania. Cari amici, vi esorto ad
essere sempre coraggiosi testimoni di Cristo. Invoco su di voi, sulle persone
care e sulla vostra Patria la Benedizione del Signore. Sia lodato Gesù
Cristo!
Saluto in lingua
slovacca:
S láskou vítam pútnikov z
farností Skalica a Štefanov. Bratia a sestry, modlite sa za vašich novokňazov,
vysvätenych v tomto mesiaci, aby verne hlásali evanjelium a slávili Božie
tajomstvá. Ochotne žehnám vás aj všetkých novokňazov. Pochválený buď Ježiš
Kristus!
Traduzione italiana del
saluto in lingua slovacca:
Con affetto do un
benvenuto ai pellegrini provenienti dalle parrocchie Skalica a Štefanov.
Fratelli e sorelle, pregate per i vostri sacerdoti novelli, ordinati in questo
mese, perché fedelmente annunzino il Vangelo e celebrino i misteri divini.
Volentieri benedico voi e tutti sacerdoti novelli. Sia lodato Gesù Cristo!
Saluto in lingua russa:
Сердечно приветствую
Делегацию Парламента Российской Федерации. Заверяю вас и ваших
соотечественников в моей усердной молитве и от всего сердца благословляю вас
всех!
Traduzione italiana del
saluto in lingua russa:
Rivolgo un deferente
saluto alla Delegazione del Parlamento della Federazione Russa. Assicuro
per voi e per i vostri connazionali la mia fervida preghiera. Di cuore tutti vi
benedico!
Saluto in lingua
ungherese:
Szeretettel köszöntöm a
magyar híveket, elsősorban azokat, akik Győrből és Szombathelyről jöttek. Szent
Atanázhoz hasonlóan mi is ragaszkodjunk a hit tisztaságához. Ezzel a
jókívánsággal adom áldásomat Rátok és családjaitokra. Dicsértessék a Jézus
Krisztus!
Traduzione italiana del
saluto in lingua ungherese:
Un saluto cordiale ai
fedeli ungheresi, specialmente a quelli che provengono da Győr e da
Szombathely. Prendendo esempio da Sant’Atanasio siamo anche noi fermi nella
fede. A voi e a tutti coloro che vi sono cari, imparto la Benedizione
Apostolica. Sia lodato Gesù Cristo!
* * *
Rivolgo ora un cordiale
benvenuto ai pellegrini di lingua italiana. Saluto in particolare i Cappellani
del Sovrano Militare Ordine di Malta, i Soci del Motoclub di Castellazzo
Bormida e gli alunni della Scuola Elementare di Alberobello. Vi ringrazio
tutti, cari amici, per la vostra visita ed invoco su di voi e sulle vostre
Comunità copiosi doni celesti per una sempre più solida testimonianza
cristiana.
Saluto, inoltre, i giovani,
i malati e gli sposi novelli. Domani celebreremo la memoria
liturgica di san Luigi Gonzaga, mirabile esempio di austerità e purezza
evangelica. Invocatelo, cari giovani, perché vi aiuti a costruire
un'intima amicizia con Gesù che vi renda capaci di affrontare con serietà la
vostra vita. Questo giovane santo sia per voi, cari malati, sostegno nel
trasformare le sofferenze e le prove quotidiane in privilegiate occasioni per
cooperare alla salvezza delle anime e renda voi, cari sposi novelli,
testimoni di un amore casto e generoso. A tutti auguro ogni bene. Grazie per la
vostra presenza!
APPELLO
Oggi si celebra la Giornata
Mondiale del Rifugiato, promossa dalle Nazioni Unite perché non venga meno
nella pubblica opinione l’attenzione verso quanti sono stati costretti a
fuggire dai loro Paesi a seguito di reali pericoli di vita. Accogliere i
rifugiati e dar loro ospitalità è per tutti un doveroso gesto di umana solidarietà,
affinché essi non si sentano isolati a causa dell’intolleranza e del
disinteresse. Per i cristiani è, inoltre, un modo concreto di manifestare
l’amore evangelico. Auspico di cuore che a questi nostri fratelli e sorelle
duramente provati dalla sofferenza siano garantiti l’asilo e il riconoscimento
dei loro diritti, e invito i responsabili delle Nazioni ad offrire protezione a
quanti si trovano in così delicate situazioni di bisogno.
© Copyright 2007 -
Libreria Editrice Vaticana
SOURCE : http://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/it/audiences/2007/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20070620.html
Procession avec la statue de Saint Athanase, Bellante, Abruzzo
ATANASIO, santo
di Angelo Riganti - Enciclopedia
Italiana (1930)
ATANASIO ('Αϑανάσιος, Athanasius),
santo. - Vescovo di Alessandria d'Egitto, dottore della Chiesa. Nacque,
probabilmente ad Alessandria, tra il 293 e il 295, e ricevette dai genitori
educazione cristiana e istruzione classica. Ancora giovane, entrò in relazione
con i monaci del deserto egiziano, e forse passò ivi qualche tempo presso S.
Antonio abate; più tardi s'iscrisse nel clero di Alessandria, fu lettore dal
312 al 318, e in quest'anno fu ordinato diacono. Ingegno acuto e vivace,
intraprese assai presto quella lotta contro il travolgente arianesimo (v.),
nella quale egli doveva divenire il campione della fede cattolica e il nome suo
simbolo dell'ortodossia trinitaria. A 23 anni iniziò la sua carriera di
apologista della fede con le due opere Λόγος κατὰ 'Ελλήνων (Oratio contra
gentes) e Λόγος περὶ τῆς ἐνανϑρωπήσεως τοῦ Λόγου (Oratio de incarnatione
Verbi), e nel 325 seguì al concilio di Nicea il suo vescovo Alessandro. Alla
morte di questo, nel 328, fu eletto a succedergli dal popolo, che salutava in lui
"un uomo probo e virtuoso, un asceta, un vero vescovo". Ma la fazione
dei meleziani (v.), che pur si era sottomessa ad Alessandro, ricusò di
riceverlo e si unì con gli ariani per combatterlo. Accusato dapprima presso
Costantino, egli nel 331 si difese abilmente, riuscendo anche ad acquistarsi la
benevolenza dell'ìmperatore. Ma quando si rifiutò di riammettere nella Chiesa
Ario, riabilitato da Costantino nel 333, ariani e meleziani ripresero ardire,
guidati da Eusebio di Nicomedia. Un sinodo adunato contro A. a Cesarea non
ottenne nulla; in un nuovo sinodo, adunato a Tiro nel 335 al quale A. stesso
dovette intervenire, gli vennero mosse diverse accuse, come l'uccisione del
vescovo meleziano Arsenio, la rottura del calice d'Ischyras, ecc. A. si difese,
ma Costantino, senza tuttavia deporlo, lo mandò in esilio a Treviri. Morto
Costantino nel 337, ottenne da Costanzo di ritornare alla sua sede, e vi fu
accolto in trionfo. Ma gli eusebiani non disarmavano: si guadagnarono l'animo
di Costanzo, accusarono A. presso il papa Giulio I, e, senza attendere da
questo alcuna sentenza, collocarono sulla sede di Alessandria Gregorio di
Cappadocia, costringendo con la violenza Atanasio alla fuga. Egli si
rifugiò presso il papa a Roma. Giulio I, in un concilio adunato a Roma nel 341,
riconobbe l'innocenza di A., ma non poté ottenere il suo ritorno ad
Alessandria. Con l'aiuto però di Costante, che dopo la morte del fratello
Costantino II governava tutto l'Occidente e desiderava pacificare tutto
l'Impero, fu adunato un concilio a Sardica nel 343. Vi fu riconosciuto il
diritto di appello al papa, proclamata di nuovo l'innocenza di A., condannato
l'arianesimo, riconfermata la fede nicena. Ma la persecuzione ariana divenne
più fiera in Oriente, e specialmente ad Alessandria. Solo il contegno fermo di
Costante poté ottenere il ritorno di A. nel 346. I dieci anni che seguirono
furono per lui anni di relativa quiete, e soprattutto di una grande operosità.
In questo tempo egli consacrò vescovo e rimandò in Etiopia Frumenzio, l'apostolo
dell'Abissinia. Ma nel 350 moriva l'imperatore Costante, suo protettore, e nel
352 anche il papa Giulio I. Divenuto Costanzo solo imperatore dell'Oriente e
dell'Occidente, le lotte contro A. ricominciarono. Papa Liberio, per calmare
l'imperatore, propose un nuovo concilio: Costanzo accettò, ma, nei due sinodi
da lui convocati arbitrariamente ad Arles (353) e a Milano (355), impose la
condanna di A.; coloro che non vollero acconsentire, quali Eusebio di Vercelli,
Dionigi di Milano, Lucifero di Cagliari, Osio di Cordova, Ilario di Poitiers e
lo stesso Liberio, furono esiliati. Atanasio si salvò con la fuga presso i
monaci del deserto, nel 356: in quell'anno stesso perdeva il suo grande amico
Antonio. La fedeltà e abilità dei monaci lo nascosero a tutte le ricerche
dell'imperatore, e dal deserto egli continuò a governare la sua chiesa,
presente ovunque con la vigilanza e gli scritti, divenuto anzi quasi il
patriarca invisibile dell'Egitto. La morte di Costanzo ridiede anche a lui la
libertà; ma l'operosità di A., che, se era principalmente antiariana, si
esplicava con altrettanto successo contro il paganesimo morente, non poteva
esser gradita al nuovo imperatore Giuliano, il quale bandì nuovamente Atanasio.
Otto mesi dopo, alla morte di Giuliano (363), A. ritornò, ma per lasciare una
quinta volta la città nell'ottobre del 365, a causa della persecuzione di
Valente anch'egli ariano. Questa volta però non si allontanò dalla città; si
disse che rimanesse nascosto nel sepolcro di suo padre e quattro mesi dopo poté
rientrare in Alessandria e rimanervi indisturbato fino alla morte, avvenuta il
2 maggio 373. Fu uno dei primi vescovi non martiri che ebbero un culto
pubblico.
Tutte queste vicende
mostrano già la tempra dell'uomo. Ingegno vivo e penetrante, in un tempo in cui
certi dogmi non avevano ancora trovato la loro espressione teorica, egli seppe
enunziarli nettamente. La parola ὁμοούσιος "consustanziale", detta
del Verbo in rapporto al Padre, non ebbe un più saldo difensore; tuttavia A.
non fu schiavo della parola, e quando Basilio d'Ancira usò le parole οὐσία e ὁμοιούσιος,
egli, intravedendovi la possibilità di un'identica fede sotto la diversità
della parola, aprì l'animo alla speranza; ma la parola fu dai semiariani
rigettata insieme col concetto. Degno della sua mente fu il cuore: nella lotta
fu talvolta contro i nemici assai severo, specie coi meleziani, come tendono a
provare papiri scoperti di recente, ma anche largo di compatimento.
Caratteristico il contegno con Costanzo: non gli negò obbedienza, ma seppe anche
dirgli apertamente che s'occupasse delle cose dell'Impero, lasciando ai vescovi
le cose della Chiesa.
Opere: Si possono
dividere in: a) Apologetiche: le due già citate Contra
gentes e De incarnatione Verbi (intitolate da S.
Girolamo Adversus gentes libri duo); b) Opere
dogmatico-polemiche: Contra arianos orationes quatuor, opera composta
durante il terzo esilio nel deserto; quattro lettere a Serapione vescovo di
Tmuis, scritte durante la stessa epoca, e indirizzate contro coloro che
ammettevano la divinità del Verbo ma negavano quella dello Spirito
santo; De Spiritu Sancto, di argomento affine (esistente solo nella
versione latina); le lettere a Epitteto, vescovo di Corinto, al vescovo e
confessore Adelfio contro gli ariani, al filosofo Massimo, scritte nel
371; c) Opere storico-polemiche: le tre Apologie, contro gli ariani
(350?), contro l'imperatore Costanzo, e quella intorno alla sua fuga (ambedue
del 357); una lettera enciclica a tutti i vescovi (341), e una ai vescovi
dell'Egitto e di Libia (356), nelle quali mette a nudo l'indegno procedere
degli avversarî; l'Historia arianorum, lettera ai monaci d'Egitto, di cui manca
il principio, contenente la storia degli ariani dal 335 al 357; d) Opere
esegetiche: frammenti di commenti ai Salmi, a Giobbe, al Cantico
dei cantici, al primo e terzo Vangelo, ecc.; e) Opere ascetiche:
la Vita di S. Antonio, scritta intorno al 357 (o 365) per
l'Occidente, e con intendimenti più ascetici che storici: tradotta da Evagrio
di Antiochia in latino contribuì molto a diffondere l'entusiasmo per la vita
monastica in Occidente; a questa classe si possono anche ascrivere parecchie
lettere a monaci; f) Lettere festali (eortastiche)
o pasquali, per annunciare ai fedeli le prossime feste pasquali. Abbiamo
qualche frammento greco e la versione siriaca di 15, preceduta da
un Index; sono documento importantissimo per la cronologia (ed. W.
Cureton, Londra 1848). Altre opere sono dubbie o sicuramente spurie.
Edizioni: Dopo quella di
Heidelberg ex officina Commeliana, 1600-1601, ripetuta a Parigi 1627, a
Colonia 1686, la migliore è dei maurini I. Lopin e B. de Montfaucon, Parigi
1698; più ricca è quella del Giustiniani, Padova 1777, riprodotta con
l'aggiunta dei nuovi ritrovamenti in Patrol. Graeca, XXV-XXVIII;
edizioni parziali: I. C. Thilo, Lipsia 1853; Robertson, De incarnatione
Verbi, Londra 1882; una nuova edizione per la collezione berlinese di scrittori
cristiani greci si sta preparando, utilizzando codici inediti del M. Athos,
fotografati da studiosi americani (v. K. Lake e R. P. Casey, in Haward
Theolog. Rev., XIX [1926], p. 173 [per il De Virginitate, spurio, ma
collegato con opere autentiche]).
Bibl.: O.
Bardenhewer, Gesch. der altkirchl. Lit., III, 2ª ed., Friburgo in B. 1912,
pp. 44-77; H. Voigt, Die Lehre des A. von Alex., Brema 1861; L.
Atzberger, Die Logoslehre des hl. A., Monaco 1880; K. Bornhäuser, Die
Vergöttungslehre des A. und Joh. Damascenus, Gütersloh 1903; G. Bardy, St.
A., Parigi 1914. V. anche arianesimo.
SOURCE : http://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/santo-atanasio_(Enciclopedia-Italiana)/
Église
Sant'Atanasio dei Greci (en français : église saint Athanase des Grecs)
est
une église romaine dédiée à saint Athanase d'Alexandrie située dans
le rione de Campo Marzio. C'est une des églises nationales de la Grèce dont le culte est célébré selon le rite byzantin de l'église grecque-catholique hellène.
Depuis 1962, elle est le siège du titre cardinalice de Sant'Atanasio.
Église
Sant'Atanasio dei Greci (en français : église saint Athanase des Grecs)
est
une église romaine dédiée à saint Athanase d'Alexandrie située dans
le rione de Campo Marzio. C'est une des églises nationales de la Grèce dont le culte est célébré selon le rite byzantin de l'église grecque-catholique hellène.
Depuis 1962, elle est le siège du titre cardinalice de Sant'Atanasio.
Originalità della
dottrina cristiana della creazione e risposte ai filosofi
Atanasio di Alessandria
373
L’Incarnazione del Verbo,
I, 2-3
Con un linguaggio che
mantiene inalterata la sua attualità, Atanasio contraddice quei filosofi del
suo tempo che ritenevano che il mondo fosse sorto per caso e non rispondesse ad
alcuna progettualità intenzionale. Egli biasima parimenti coloro che ritenevano
la materia preesistente ed increata ed affermavano al tempo stesso l’esistenza
di Dio. Ad essi Atanasio oppone la dottrina biblica, mostrandone la
ragionevolezza anche per la filosofia: la Scrittura «insegna che il mondo non è
venuto all'esistenza spontaneamente, perché è ordinato da una provvidenza, né
da una materia preesistente perché Dio non è debole; ma che dal nulla, e senza
che prima esistessero in alcun modo, Dio ha portato all'esistenza tutte le cose
mediante il Verbo».
2. La costruzione del mondo
e la creazione dell'universo molti l'hanno intesa in maniere diverse e ciascuno
l'ha definita a suo piacimento. Alcuni affermano che l'universo è venuto
all'esistenza spontaneamente e per caso. Tali sono gli epicurei, i quali
immaginano che nel mondo non vi sia la provvidenza facendo delle affermazioni
direttamente contrarie a quanto chiaramente appare. Infatti, se tutto è venuto
all'esistenza spontaneamente e senza provvidenza, come essi dicono, tutti gli
esseri dovrebbero essere assolutamente simili e senza differenza. Infatti, come
in un unico corpo tutti gli esseri dovrebbero essere sole o luna e negli uomini
tutto il corpo dovrebbe essere mano, occhio o piede. Ma non è così; e noi
vediamo da una parte il sole e da un'altra parte la luna o la terra, e allo
stesso modo nei corpi umani vediamo da una parte il piede e da un'altra la mano
o la testa. Orbene, tale ordine indica che quegli esseri non sono venuti
all'esistenza per caso e dimostra che all'origine della loro esistenza c'è una
causa, a partire dalla quale si può conoscere Dio che ha ordinato e creato
l'universo.
Altri, tra i quali si
annovera anche Platone che è grande tra i Greci, spiegano che Dio ha creato
l'universo da materia preesistente ed increata. Secondo loro Dio non potrebbe
fare nulla se non esistesse prima la materia, come deve esistere in precedenza
il legno perché un artigiano lo possa lavorare. Ma non sanno che con queste
affermazioni attribuiscono a Dio la debolezza. Infatti, se non è egli stesso
causa della materia, ma si limita a fare le cose con materia preesistente, si
scopre che è debole, non potendo creare, senza la materia, alcuna delle cose
che esistono. Come è certamente segno di debolezza per l'artigiano il non poter
fabbricare nessun oggetto necessario senza il legname. Se per ipotesi non
esistesse la materia, Dio non potrebbe far nulla. Ma come si può ancora
definire creatore ed ordinatore se la sua facoltà di creare dipende da un altro
essere, cioè dalla materia? Se le cose stanno così, se lavora una materia
preesistente senza essere causa egli stesso della materia, Dio secondo loro
sarà un semplice artefice e non il creatore che dà l'essere. Non si può affatto
dire creatore, se non crea la materia, dalla quale sono venuti all'esistenza
gli esseri creati.
Gli eretici immaginano
per loro conto un creatore di tutte le cose diverso dal Padre del nostro
Signore Gesù Cristo, rivelando in queste parole una grande cecità. Se i1
Signore disse ai Giudei: «Non avete letto che all'inizio il creatore li fece
maschio e femmina?»; e aggiunse: «Per questo l'uomo lascerà il padre e la madre
e si unirà alla moglie, e i due saranno una sola carne », e poi indicando il
creatore soggiunge: «Quello dunque che Dio ha congiunto l'uomo non lo separi»
[Mt 19,46], – come possono introdurre una creazione estranea al Padre? Se,
come dice Giovanni riassumendo tutto, «tutto è venuto all'esistenza per mezzo
di lui e senza di lui nulla è venuto all'esistenza» [Gv 1,3], come può
esistere un altro creatore all'infuori del Padre di Cristo?
3. Queste sono le loro
false opinioni. Ma l'insegnamento divino e la fede conforme a Cristo denunciano
come un'empietà queste loro vane parole. Esso insegna che il mondo non è venuto
all'esistenza spontaneamente, perché è ordinato da una provvidenza, né da una
materia preesistente perché Dio non è debole; ma che dal nulla, e senza che
prima esistessero in alcun modo, Dio ha portato all'esistenza tutte le cose
mediante il Verbo come dice per mezzo di Mosè: «All'inizio Dio fece il cielo e
la terra» [Gen 1,1], e ancora per mezzo dell'utilissimo libro del Pastore
[il Pastore di Erma]: «Prima di tutto credi che uno solo è Dio, colui che ha
creato ed organizzato tutte le cose e le ha fatte passare dal nulla
all'esistenza» [Erma, Il Pastore, I,1]. Lo indica anche Paolo dicendo:
«Per fede sappiamo che i mondi furono formati dalla parola di Dio, sì che le
cose visibili sono venute all'esistenza da ciò che non si vede» [Eb 11,3].
Dio è buono, o piuttosto
la fonte della bontà; e chi è buono non può avere invidia di nulla. Perciò, non
invidiando l'esistenza di nessuna cosa, ha creato dal nulla tutte le cose
mediante il suo proprio Verbo, il nostro Signore Gesù Cristo. Tra tutti gli
esseri che vivono sulla terra ebbe pietà del genere umano e vedendo che non era
in grado di durare sempre in ragione della sua propria origine, gli fece un
dono più grande: gli uomini non si limitò a crearli, come tutti gli altri
viventi irrazionali che sono sulla terra, ma li fece secondo la sua immagine,
rendendoli partecipi anche della potenza del suo proprio Verbo, affinché avendo
in sé alcune ombre del Verbo e divenuti razionali, potessero durare nella
beatitudine, vivendo nel paradiso la vera vita, che è quella propria dei santi.
D'altra parte, sapendo che la volontà umana può volgersi da una parte o dall'altra,
fortificò in precedenza, assegnando loro una legge e un luogo determinato, la
grazia che aveva dato. Dopo averli introdotti nel paradiso, dette loro la
seguente legge: se avessero custodito la grazia e fossero rimasti virtuosi,
avrebbero goduto nel paradiso di una vita senza tristezza dolore o
preoccupazione, oltre ad avere la promessa della incorruttibilità nei cieli; se
invece avessero trasgredito la legge e, voltatisi indietro, fossero divenuti
cattivi, avrebbero conosciuto di essere soggetti per natura alla corruzione che
si compie nella morte, e che non sarebbero piú vissuti nel paradiso, ma morendo
poi fuori del paradiso sarebbero rimasti nella morte e nella corruzione. Questo
appunto preannuncia la divina Scrittura in nome di Dio: «Potrai mangiare di
ogni albero del paradiso, ma dell'albero della conoscenza del bene e del male
non dovete mangiare, perché nel giorno in cui ne mangiaste, morreste a causa
della morte» [Gen 2,16-17]. Ora, «morire a causa della morte» significa
precisamente non solo il morire ma anche il rimanere nella corruzione della
morte.
da L’Incarnazione
del Verbo, I, 2-3; tr. it. a cura di Enzo Bellini, Città Nuova, Roma 1976, pp.
39-43.
SOURCE : http://www.disf.org/atanasio-originalit%C3%A0-della-dottrina-cristiana
Il Logos come musico: la
metafora della creazione come un coro sinfonico
Riprendendo una metafora
di origine greco-platonica, ma recuperandola nell’orizzonte della visione
cristiana della creazione, Atanasio descrive il ruolo esemplare del Verbo
nell’origine del creato, come fondamento e principio dell’unità sinfonica
formata dal coro delle creature.
Atanasio di Alessandria
373
Contro i pagani, 42-44
È lui, il Verbo santo del Padre, onnipotente
ed assolutamente perfetto, che si estende su tutte le cose ed ovunque infonde
la sua potenza, che illumina tutte le cose, visibili ed invisibili,
contenendole e riunendole in lui. Egli non ne lascia alcuna al di fuori della
sua potenza, ma vivifica e guarda tutte le cose, ciascuna isolatamente e tutto
l'universo insieme. Egli mescola i principi di tutta la sostanza sensibile, il
caldo e il freddo, l'umido e il secco, per farne un solo essere; egli impedisce
loro di contrastarsi reciprocamente, facendone un accordo armonioso. Grazie a
lui ed alla sua presenza, il fuoco non lotta contro il freddo, né l'umido
contro il secco; al contrario, elementi di per sé stessi opposti, si riuniscono
come amici e fratelli, donano la vita agli esseri visibili e sono per tutti i
corpi i principi dell'esistenza.
L'obbedienza a questo Dio
Verbo dona la vita agli esseri terrestri e riunisce quelli che sono nei cieli.
Per lui il mare tutt'intero ed il grande oceano contengono i loro movimenti nei
limiti che sono stati ad essi assegnati e la terra intera, come si è detto, si
ricopre d'una chioma verdeggiante di diverse piante di tutte le specie. E per
non attardarmi a nominare ciascuno degli esseri visibili, non c'è nulla di ciò
che esiste e nasce che non nasca e non sussista in lui, come ha affermato il
Teologo: In principio era il Verbo e il Verbo era presso Dio e il Verbo
era Dio. Tutto è stato fatto per lui e senza di lui niente è stato fatto ( Gv 1,
1-3).
Come un musico che
accorda la sua lira ed avvicina abilmente i suoni gravi delle note acute ed i
medi delle altre, per eseguire una sola melodia, allo stesso modo la saggezza
di Dio, tenendo l'universo come una lira, avvicina gli esseri che sono
nell'aria a quelli che sono sulla terra e quelli che sono nei cieli a quelli
che sono nell'acqua; adattando l'insieme alle parti e tutto guidando attraverso
il suo comando e la sua volontà, egli produce nella bellezza e nell'armonia un
mondo unico ed un solo ordine del mondo; lui stesso resta immobile presso il
Padre, muovendo tutte le cose per mezzo dell'ordine che viene da lui, secondo
ciò che piace al Padre suo.
Ciò che è ammirevole
della sua divinità è che con un solo e medesimo comandamento, egli guida tutte
le cose nello stesso tempo, e non per intervalli, ma tutte insieme, quelle che
vanno secondo un movimento rettilineo e quelle che si muovono in tondo, quelle
in alto, quelle in mezzo, quelle in basso, le cose umide, le fredde, le calde,
le visibili e le invisibili, egli le mette in ordine, ciascuna secondo la sua natura.
Nello stesso tempo e con il medesimo comandamento che da lui proviene, ciò che
è diritto, si muove rettilineamente; ciò che è rotondo, si muove in circolo;
ciò che costituisce una via di mezzo fra i primi due, si muove anch'esso
secondo la propria natura; il caldo riscalda ed il secco dissecca; tutti gli
esseri, secondo la loro natura, da lui ricevono vita e sussistenza, mentr'egli
realizza così un'armonia mirabile e veramente divina.
Per far comprendere con
un esempio una realtà così grandiosa, rappresentiamo tutto ciò che abbiamo
appena descritto con l'immagine d'un grande coro. Esso è composto da differenti
esecutori, uomini, bambini, donne e vecchi e giovani. Al segnale d'un solo
direttore, ciascuno di essi canta secondo la sua natura e le sue capacità:
l'uomo con una voce d'uomo, il bambino da bambino, il vecchio da vecchio, il
giovane da giovane; e tutti eseguono la medesima armonia. Od ancora, valga come
esempio la nostra anima che, nello stesso tempo, muove tutti i nostri sensi
secondo la virtù di ciascuno e, in presenza d'uno stesso oggetto, li muove
tutti assieme: l'occhio per vedere, l'orecchio per ascoltare, la mano per
toccare, l'odorato per sentire, il gusto per gustare e sovente, anche gli altri
membri del corpo, come i piedi ch'essa fa muovere per camminare. Od infine, per
illustrare con un terzo esempio quanto abbiamo affermato, la realtà descritta
rassomiglia alla vita di una città assai grande, amministrata personalmente dal
capo o dal re che l'ha fondata. Quando costui è presente ed impartisce egli
stesso le direttive, tenendo d'occhio ogni cosa, tutti obbediscono: gli uni se
ne vanno ai campi, gli altri si affrettano per andare ad attingere l'acqua agli
acquedotti; un altro se ne va a far la spesa, uno si mette in cammino verso il
Senato, un altro verso l'assemblea; il giudice va a giudicare, l'arconte ad
emanare leggi; l'artigiano si accinge al suo lavoro manuale, il marinaio va
verso il mare, il carpentiere si dedica al suo mestiere, il medico va a curare
i suoi malati, l'architetto si dirige verso le sue costruzioni. Uno se ne va ai
campi, un altro ne torna adesso; alcuni circolano all'interno della città,
altri ne escono per poi ritornarvi. Tutto ciò avviene e si svolge alla presenza
d'un solo capo e sotto il suo governo. Per mediocre che possa essere il
paragone citato si deve prenderlo in senso più largo e rendersi conto che le
cose vanno allo stesso modo in tutta la creazione. Dietro l'unico impulso e
comandamento del Dio Verbo, tutte le cose sono messe in ordine, ciascuna opera
ciò che le è proprio e, nello stesso tempo, realizzano tutte assieme un
medesimo ordine.
Così grazie alla potenza
e alla volontà del Verbo divino, del Verbo del Padre, che comanda e dirige
tutto, il cielo gira, gli astri si muovono, il sole brilla, la luna compie le
sue evoluzioni, l'aria è illuminata dal sole, l'etere è riscaldato ed i venti
soffiano. Le montagne si drizzano verso l'alto, il mare si gonfia e nutre gli
esseri viventi che porta, la terra resta immobile e reca frutti, l'uomo nasce,
vive e quando sopravviene la sua ora, muore. Tutti gli esseri, in una parola,
sono dotati di vita e di movimento. Il fuoco riscalda, l'acqua raffredda, le
sorgenti zampillano, i fiumi scorrono, i tempi e le stagioni si susseguono, le
piogge cadono, le nuvole si riempiono, si forma la grandine, la neve ed il
ghiaccio si irrigidiscono, gli uccelli volano, i serpenti strisciano, gli
animali acquatici nuotano; si naviga sul mare, si semina la terra che porterà
frutti a suo tempo; le piante crescono, alcune affatto giovani, altre in punto
di morire; quando diventano adulte, cominciano ad appassire ed infine muoiono;
alcune spariscono, altre nascono e riappaiono di nuovo.
Tutte queste cose, e
molte altre ancora (tante ve ne sono che non possiamo descriverle tutte), è il
Verbo di Dio, autore di questi miracoli e di queste meraviglie, fonte di luce e
di vita, a metterle in movimento e ad ordinarle con la sua volontà, realizzando
un unico cosmo. Egli non lascia estranee alla sua opera le potenze invisibili:
anche queste, essendo il loro Creatore, egli abbraccia con tutto l'universo,
conservandole e donando loro la vita grazie alla sua volontà e alla sua
provvidenza.
Come la sua provvidenza
fa crescere i corpi, dà movimento all'anima razionale, provvedendola di
movimento e di vita (e tutto ciò non ha bisogno di grandi dimostrazioni, dal
momento che vediamo noi stessi questi fenomeni), non diversamente è ancora una
volta lui, il Verbo di Dio, che con un solo e semplice movimento della sua
potenza, dà impulso al mondo visibile ed alle forze invisibili, conservandole e
distribuendo loro il potere che è proprio a ciascuna di esse in maniera che gli
esseri divini operino più divinamente e la realtà visibile si realizzi nel modo
che noi stessi constatiamo. È lui che, in tutte le cose, essendo il capo ed il
re e la sintesi di tutti gli esseri, tutto opera per la gloria e la conoscenza
del Padre, ammaestrandoci attraverso le sue opere e dicendoci: La
grandezza e la bellezza delle creature fanno conoscere per analogia il loro
Creatore ( Sap 13, 5).
da Contro i pagani,
42-44, tr. it. di Mario Spinelli in La teologia dei Padri , Città
Nuova, Roma 1981, vol. I, pp. 121-123.
SOURCE : https://disf.org/atanasio-logos-come-musico
Textes de Saint Athanase
et sur Saint Athanase : http://www.patristique.org/+-Athanase-d-Alexandrie,55-+
Atanasio di
Alessandria. La Vita di Antonio : http://www.gspa.it/work/Benedettine/PDF/Atanasio.pdf
The
Works of Athanasius in Chronological Order
Aaron West on 22 Jul 2008 : https://web.archive.org/web/20081228011941/http://www.fourthcentury.com/index.php/athanasius-chart
