The Council of Ariminum

The emperor was persuaded that it would not be good for the public, because of the expense, nor helpful to the bishops, because of the length of the journey, to call them all to one place to hold a council. So he wrote to the bishops who were then at Ariminum and to those then at Seleucia. He directed them first to examine the disputed questions of faith, and then to turn their attention to the complaints of Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, and of other bishops who had protested against the injustice of the sentences of deposition and banishment issued against them, and to examine whether various sentences passed against other bishops were lawful. There were, in fact, several charges pending against different bishops. George was accused by the Egyptians of plunder and violence. Finally, the emperor ordered each council to send ten deputies to him to report on its proceedings. [a]

In keeping with this edict, the bishops gathered in the appointed cities. The synod at Ariminum began its proceedings first; it had about four hundred members. Those most hostile to Athanasius were of the opinion that nothing more needed to be decreed against him. When they had begun to examine questions of doctrine, Valens and Ursacius, backed by Germinius, Auxentius, Gaius and Demophilus, stepped into the middle of the assembly. They demanded that all the statements of faith compiled before should be suppressed, and that only the one they had recently issued in Latin at Sirmium should be kept. This statement taught, according to Scripture, that the Son is like the Father, but it made no mention of the substance of God. They declared that the emperor had approved this statement, and that the council ought to adopt it rather than weigh too scrupulously the individual opinion of every member, so that disputes and divisions might not spring up if the terms were handed over to debate and exact proof. They added that it would better help those less skilled in the art of argument to think rightly of God than if novel terms were brought in, terms so close to quarrelsome trickery. By these arguments they meant to condemn the use of the term “of one substance,” because, they said, it was not found in the Holy Scriptures and was obscure to ordinary people. In its place they wanted to put the phrase “the Son is like the Father in all things,” which is supported by the Holy Scriptures. [b]

After they had read out their statement with these arguments, many of the bishops told them that no new statement of faith ought to be issued; those compiled before were quite sufficient for every purpose, and they had met for the very purpose of preventing all innovation. These bishops then pressed those who had compiled and read the statement to declare publicly that they condemned the Arian doctrine, as the cause of all the troubles that had shaken the churches everywhere. Ursacius and Valens, Germinius and Auxentius, Demophilus and Gaius protested against this demand. So the council ordered that the statements of the other heresies be read, and also the one issued at Nicaea, so that those favoring various heresies might be condemned and those agreeing with the Nicene doctrines approved. In this way there would be no further ground for dispute and no future need for councils, but a decision that would settle the matter. They remarked that it was absurd to compose so many statements of faith, as if they had only just begun to learn the faith, and as if they wished to slight the ancient traditions of the church, by which the churches had been governed by themselves and by their predecessors, many of whom had witnessed a good confession and received the crown of martyrdom. These were the arguments these bishops put forward to prove that no innovation should be attempted.

Since Valens and Ursacius and their party refused to be persuaded by these arguments and kept pressing for the adoption of their own statement, they were deposed, and it was decided that their statement should be rejected. It was pointed out that the declaration at the head of this statement was absurd: that it had been compiled at Sirmium in the presence of Constantius, “the eternal Augustus,” in the consulship of Eusebius and Hypatius. Athanasius made the same remark in a letter to one of his friends. He said it was ridiculous to call Constantius the eternal emperor and yet to shrink from acknowledging that the Son of God is eternal. He also ridiculed the date attached to the statement, as though it meant to condemn the faith of earlier ages, and all who had been initiated into the faith before that time.

After these events at Ariminum, Valens and Ursacius and their followers, angry at their deposition, hurried to the emperor.