The history of the church from our Lords incarnation, to the twelth year of the Emperour Maricius Tiberius, or the Year of Christ 594 / as it was written in Greek, by Eusebius Pamphilius ..., Socrates Scholasticus, and Evagrius Scholasticus ... ; made English from that edition of these historians, which Valesius published at Paris in the years 1659, 1668, and 1673 ; also, The life of Constantine in four books, written by Eusibius Pamphilus, with Constantine's Oration to the convention of the saints, and Eusebius's Speech in praise of Constantine, spoken at his tricennalia ; Valesius's annotations on these authors, are done into English, and set at their proper places in the margin, as likewise a translation of his account of their lives and writings ; with two index's, the one, of the principal matters that occur in the text, the other, of those contained in the notes.

CHAP. XXIII. Concerning the Question then moved about Easter.

AT the same time no small controversie be∣ing raised, because the Churches of all a 1.1 Asia supposed, as from a more antient tradition, that the * 1.2 fourteenth day of the Moon ought to be ob∣served as the salutary feast of Easter, [to wit] the same day whereon the Jews were commanded to kill the Lamb, and that they ought always b 1.3 on that day, (what∣ever day of the week it should happen to be,) to put an end to their fastings: when as [notwithstanding] 'twas not the usage of the c 1.4 Churches over the rest of the world to doe after this manner; which usage, being received from Apostolick tra∣dition, and still prevalent, they observed, [to wit] that they ought not to d 1.5 put an end to their fastings on any other day, save that of the resurrection of our Saviour: upon this account Synods and assemblies of Bishops were convened. And all of them with one consent did by their letters inform the [Brethren] every where of the Ecclesiastick decree, [to wit] that the Mystery of our Lords resurrection should never be celebrated on any other day but Sunday, and that on that day onely we should observe to conclude the Fasts before Easter. There is at this time extant the Epistle of those who then were as∣sembled in Palestine, over whom e 1.6 Theophilus Bishop of the Church in Caesarea, and Narcissus [Bishop] of Jerusalem, presided. In like man∣ner, another [Epistle] of those [Assembled] at Rome concerning the same question, having Victor the Bishops name prefixt to it: also [another] of those Bishops in Pontus, over whom f 1.7 Palmas, as being the most antient, presided. Al∣so [an Epistle] of the Churches in Gallia, which Irenaeus had the oversight of. Moreover, of those in Osdroëna and the Cities there; and g 1.8 a private Letter of Bacchyllus's Bishop of the Corinthian Church; of many others also; all which having uttered one and the same opinion and sentiment, proposed the same judgment; and this we have mentioned, was their onely definitive determi∣nation.

Notes

• a 1.1

  The rea∣ding of the Maz. Med. Fuk. and Savill M. SS. is [the Churches of all Asia,] as we have translated it. Asia may be ta∣ken in a threefold sense; sometimes 'tis taken for the third part of the world; sometimes for a Province, divided into nine Jurisdictions, which was governed by a Roman Proconsul; at other times 'tis more strictly taken for that region which lies by the River Meander. In these words of Eusebius, 'tis, in my judgment, to be taken in the second sense, to wit, for a Pro∣vince which a proconsul gover∣ned. Vales.
• * 1.2

  That is, the fourteenth day after the appearance of the new Moon: for the religious part of the Jewish Calendar was concer∣ned in these appearances of the new Moon, the reports whereof were made by the country people. See the whole manner hereof de∣scribed particularly, by the Learned Doctor Cudworth, in his excel∣lent discourse concerning the true Notion of the Lords Supper, pag. 67. See also M^r Jo. Gregory of Oxford, in his discourse concerning Upper∣rooms. p. 14, &c.
• b 1.3

  The Learned Arch-Bishop Usher, in his dissertation prefixt before Ignatius's Epistles, thap. 9. says, that the Asiatics, who celebrated Easter, with the Jews, on the first day of unleavened bread, passed over that day with mourning and fasting; after which day was ended, they concluded their Lent-fast. Which opinion Eusebius does here contradict, in that he affirms expresly, that the Asiatics did put an end to their fastings on the 14^th day of the first month, although it were not Sunday. Vales.
• c 1.4

  Here Eusebius does plainly declare that the Asiatics onely did at that time celebrate Easter with the Jews; but that all the other Churches observed that festiyal on another day. Wherefore I dis∣sent from Halloixius, Arch-Bishop Usher, and others, who suppose that the Syrians, Mesopotamians, and Cilicians, did then keep Easter at the same time with the Asia••ics. 'Tis evident that the Syrians and Mesopo∣tamians, were then right in their sentiments about this matter, which appears from their councills here mentioned by Ensebius. For O••droena is a part of Mesopotamia: But afterwards they fell to the Jewish obser∣vation of this Festival, and that before the Nicene Councill, as Athana∣sius asserts. On the contrary, the Asiatics forsaking their former errour, embraced the sounder opinion in their observation of Easter; which they did before the Nicene-Councill, as appears from Constantines Epistle, which Eusebius relates B. 3. chap. 18, and 19. of Constantines life. Vales.
• d 1.5

  It was questioned amongst the An∣tients, at what hour the Fast be∣fore Easter was to be concluded; some were of opinion, that it was to be con∣tinued to the daw∣ning of Ea∣ster day, after the Cock∣crowing, as may be seen in E∣piphanius, and Cle∣mens: o∣thers thought it was to be finished on the Satur∣day▪ even∣ing before Easter-day; So Cyrill, in Homil. Paschal. Vales.
• e 1.6

  The Bishop of Caesarea, (before the Nicene Council, and a long∣time after,) had the dignity and honour of a Metropolit••••, and presided in all the Councils of Palestine, as being Bishop of the chief See. Ne∣vertheless, the Bishops of Jerusalem had a respect shown them; theirs being the Apostolick Church, which first had a Bishop. Therefore the Bishops of that See were not under the Bishops of Caesarea, but were 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, i. e. were, as to their priviledges, independent of the See of Caesarea. See the seventh Canon of the Nicene-Council. Vales.
• f 1.7

  He was Bishop of Amastris in Pontus, of whom Dionystus Bishop of Corinth makes mention, in his Epistle to the Church of Amastris, which Epistle our Eusebius speaks of B. 4. chap. 23. There was one, which bore the same name, (to wit, Palmas) of the consular order, whom Adrian commanded to be killed; so says Spartianus. Moreover, Eu∣sebius says, this Palmas presided, as being the most antient Bishop, not that he was a Metropolitan. For Heraclea not Amastris, was Me∣tropolis of the Cities of Pontus. But in the Ecclesiastick Councils the precedency was different, according to the diversity of times and places. The plainest and most reasonable cause of precedency was, that the antientest Bishop should take place of the rest. Afterwards the Bishops of the Metropolitan Churches had that honour given them▪ Vales.
• g 1.8

  Jerom (in his book de Scriptor. Ecclesiast.) expounds this place so, as if Bacchylus had convened a Council in Achaia, apart by him∣self: for in this sense he takes the term [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] here used by Eu∣sebius: But there may another sense be given hereof, to wit, that Bacchylus wrote a private Epistle in his own name concerning Easter, not a Synodicall Letter, as the rest did. Eusebius (Book 6. chap. 11.) calls a private Lettor, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Vales.