The auncient ecclesiasticall histories of the first six hundred yeares after Christ, wrytten in the Greeke tongue by three learned historiographers, Eusebius, Socrates, and Euagrius. Eusebius Pamphilus Bishop of Cæsarea in Palæstina vvrote 10 bookes. Socrates Scholasticus of Constantinople vvrote 7 bookes. Euagrius Scholasticus of Antioch vvrote 6 bookes. VVhereunto is annexed Dorotheus Bishop of Tyrus, of the liues of the prophetes, apostles and 70 disciples. All which authors are faithfully translated out of the Greeke tongue by Meredith Hanmer, Maister of Arte and student in diuinitie. Last of all herein is contayned a profitable chronographie collected by the sayd translator, the title whereof is to be seene in the ende of this volume, with a copious index of the principall matters throughout all the histories

CAP. XXXII.

Of Anastasius the Priest who was the occasion that Nestorius fell into such extreame impietie.

COmmonly we say that such as are geuen to drunkennesse are neuer to seeke for the cupp, and busie bodies neuer want woe: Nestorius who endeuored with might and mayne to be∣reaue others of their Churches was by chaunce thrust out of the Churche him selfe, the oc∣casion was as followeth. Anastasius the priest who came with him thither from Antioch: kept him* 1.1 alwayes companye: was highly esteemed of him and his chiefe counselour in all his affayres, taught on a certaine tyme in the Church that none ought to call Marie, the mother of God, be∣cause that she was but a woman and that God could not be borne of a woman. These words of his disquieted out of measure the mindes both of clergie and laytie. for they had learned of olde that Christ was true God and not to be seuered because of the misterie of his incarnation, as man alone from his diuinitie, and that according vnto the minde of the Apostle where he sayth: Although we* 1.2 haue knowen Christ after the fleshe, yet novve doe vve knovve him so no more. Wherefore for this cause let vs ceasse to reason any longer of Christ, but let vs endeuer to attayne vnto his perfe∣ction. When as schisme and contention was hereof risen (as I sayd before) in the Church, Nesto∣rius going about to confirme the opinion of Anastasius (for he woulde in no wise haue him whome he made so much of to be rebuked as one that had vttered blasphemies against Christ) discoursed very oft of that matter as he preached in the Churche: layde downe very contentiously certayne

positions and condemned vtterly the clause that signified the bearing of god. And because that di∣uers men to a diuers ende & purpose disputed of this question, the church was deuided & the mem∣bers parted asunder. for much like blind folded persons & men brawling and fighting in the darke they were caried here and there, now they affirmed this, anone they sayd that, and loke what they auoutched a litle before, the same they denied immediatly after. Many thought that Nestorius was of the opinion that Christ was but onely man and that he went about to reuyue and to rayse vp a fresh the heresie of Paulus Samosatenus and of Photinus. there was so much adoe about this matter that the summoning of a generall councell seemed needefull for the deriding of the controuersie & the appeasing of the people. I of mine owne part by perusing the works of Nestorius, doe finde the man ignorant and altogether vnlearned, I speake this from the hart and vnfainedly. far it is not of hatred I owe him that I fall a ripping of his crymes and infamie, neyther haue I determined by flattery and feeding of some mens humors to report lesse of him then I founde true. Nestorius in mine opinion followeth neither Paulus Samosatenus, neither Photinus, neither thinketh he that our* 1.3 Lord Iesus Christ is onely man: but onely auoideth this clause the mother or bearing of God as a sraying ghost. This befell vnto him for his palpable error and ignorance. for though of nature he had a smoth and an eloquent tongue and therefore was thought learned, yet to say the trueth he was altogether vnlearned. Moreouer he disdained to peruse the works of the auncient fathers. he so vaimted him selfe with his rolling congue and eloquent speach, that in maner he contemned the olde writers and preferred him selfe before them all. Againe he was ignorant of that which was* 1.4 written in the olde coppies of S. Iohns Catholick epistle: euery spirite which deuideth Iesus is not of God. As many as went about to seuer the diuinitie from the humanitie of Christ, sticked not to rase and blot this sentence out of the auncient coppyes. Wherefore the olde writers signified no lesse then that certaine men had corrupted that epistle, to the ende they might deuide the humani∣tie of Christ from the diuinitie of God. his manhoode is ioyned with the godhead, neyther are they two but one, in which sense the aūcient writers were not affraid to call Marie, the mother of god, Euen so wrote Eusebius Pamphilus in his third booke of the life of Constantine. God among vs was* 1.5 borne on earth for oursakes, & the place of his natiuitie is called of the Hebrewes after a proper name Bethleem. VVherefore Helen the most holy Empresse hath set forth the trauailing of the mother of God with goodly ornaments, & bedecked that hollowe rocke with sundry notable monuments. Origen hath written no lesse in the first come of his commentaries vpon the epistle of S. Paul vnto the Romaines, where he discourseth at large of this matter, and alleadgeth the cause why Marie was called the mother of God. Therefore Nestorius seemeth neuer to haue read the wor••s of the auncient fathers, and therefore he inueyed only (as I said before) agaynst this clause the mother of God. For he saith not that Christ is onely man as Photinus and Paulus Samosate∣nus affirmed: neither taketh he away y^• subsistencie of the sonne of God but confesseth euery where that he hath his being and that he is in the trinitie: neither denieth he his essence as Photinus and Samosatenus did (so did also the Manichees and Montanists) as it appeareth by the sermous which he published vnto the world. But though I finde that Nestorius was of that opinion, partly by his bookes which I haue perused, and partly by the report of his familier friendes, yet his foolish and fonde doctrine disquieted not a litle the whole worlde.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Anastasius.
• * 1.2

  2. Corinth. 5.
• * 1.3

  The opinion of Nestorius the heretick.
• * 1.4

  1. Ioh. 4.
• * 1.5

  Euseb. lib. 3. de vit. Const.