Introduction, Part 2

And as for the cup of the mysteries, what was it, and where did Macarius break it? For this is the story they are spreading everywhere. As for Athanasius, not even his accusers would have dared to blame him if these men had not put them up to it. Even so, they make him the source of the offense, although it ought not to be laid even at the door of Macarius, who is innocent of it. And they are not ashamed to parade the sacred mysteries before catechumens, and, worse still, even before pagans. Yet they ought to pay attention to what is written, “It is good to keep hidden the secret of a king,” and to what the Lord has commanded us, “Do not give what is holy to the dogs, and do not throw your pearls before pigs.” So we ought not to parade the holy mysteries before the uninitiated, or the pagans in their ignorance may mock them, and the catechumens, being too curious, may take offense. But what was the cup, and where was it broken, and in front of whom? The ones making the accusation are the Melitians, who do not deserve the least belief. They have been schismatics and enemies of the church, not just lately but ever since the time of the blessed Peter, bishop and martyr. They formed a conspiracy against Peter himself; they slandered his successor Achillas; they accused Alexander even before the emperor. Being so practiced in these arts, they have now turned their hostility on Athanasius, acting entirely in keeping with their old wickedness. As they slandered those who came before him, so now they have slandered him. But their slanders and false accusations never prevailed against him until now, when they have gained Eusebius and his party as their helpers and patrons. These men are their patrons because of the impiety they have taken up from the Arian madmen, and that impiety has led them to conspire against many bishops, Athanasius among them. [a]

Now the place where they say the cup was broken was not a church. No presbyter was in charge of the place. And the day on which they say Macarius did the deed was not the Lord’s day. Since, then, there was no church there, no one to perform the sacred office, and the day did not call for its use, what was this cup of the mysteries, and when or where was it broken? There are many cups, of course, both in private houses and in the public market, and if someone breaks one of them, he is not guilty of impiety. But the cup that belongs to the mysteries, the one that makes a person impious if he breaks it on purpose, is found only among those who lawfully preside. This is the only description that can be given of this kind of cup; there is no other. This is the cup you lawfully give the people to drink; this you have received according to the canon of the church; this belongs only to those who preside over the catholic church. For to you alone it belongs to administer the blood of Christ, and to no one else. But if the one who breaks the cup of the mysteries is impious, much more impious is the one who treats the blood of Christ with contempt, and that is what someone does who “does this” against the rule of the church. (We say this not as though Macarius broke even a cup belonging to the schismatics, for there was no cup there at all. How could there be, where there was no house of the Lord and nothing belonging to the church, and it was not even the time for celebrating the mysteries?) Now just such a person is the notorious Ischyras. He was never appointed to his office by the church. When Alexander admitted the presbyters who had been ordained by Melitius, Ischyras was not even counted among them, and so he did not receive ordination even from that quarter.

How, then, did Ischyras become a presbyter? Who ordained him? Was it Colluthus? That is the only possibility left. But it is well known, and no one doubts it, that Colluthus died a presbyter, that every ordination he performed was invalid, and that all whom he ordained during the schism were reduced to the rank of laymen and appear in the congregation in that rank. How, then, can anyone believe that a private person, living in a private house, had a sacred chalice in his keeping? The truth is that at the time they gave the name of presbyter to a private person, favoring him with the title to back him in his wicked conduct toward us. And now, as the reward for his accusations, they are getting a church built for him. So this man had no church then, but now, as the reward for his malice and for serving them by accusing us, he receives what he did not have before. Indeed, perhaps they have even paid him for his services with the office of bishop, for that is what he goes about saying, and he treats us with great insolence accordingly. These are the kinds of rewards that bishops now hand out to accusers and slanderers. And yet it is reasonable enough, in the case of an accomplice, that as they made him a partner in their proceedings, they should also make him a colleague in their own office of bishop. But that is not all. Listen further to what they did at that time. [g]

They could not prevail against the truth, though they had drawn up their ranks against it. Ischyras had proved nothing at Tyre and had been shown to be a slanderer, and the slander was wrecking their plot. So they postponed the proceedings to look for fresh evidence, and announced that they would send some of their party to the Mareotis to look carefully into the matter. Accordingly, with the help of the civil authorities, they secretly sent off men to whom we openly objected on many grounds, as being of Arius’s party and therefore our enemies: Theognis, Maris, Theodore, Macedonius, and two others young in both years and mind, Ursacius and Valens from Pannonia. These men, having made that long journey in order to sit in judgment on their enemy, now set out again from Tyre for Alexandria. Although they were the judges, they did not shrink from becoming witnesses themselves. They openly used every means to advance their design, and took on any labor or journey whatever to bring the conspiracy then under way to a successful end. They left Bishop Athanasius held in a foreign country, while they themselves entered their enemy’s city, as if to hold their revels against both his church and his people. And what was more outrageous still, they took the accuser Ischyras with them but would not let Macarius, the accused, go with them; they left him in custody at Tyre. For “Macarius the presbyter of Alexandria” was made to answer for the charge far and near. [h]

So they entered Alexandria alone with the accuser, who shared their lodging, their table and their cup. Taking with them Philagrius, the prefect of Egypt, they went on to the Mareotis, and there they carried on the so-called investigation by themselves, entirely their own way, with the man we have mentioned. The presbyters repeatedly begged to be present, but they would not allow it. The presbyters both of the city and of the whole district wanted to attend, so that they might expose who the people were whom Ischyras had put up to false testimony, and where they came from. But they barred the clergy from being present while they examined matters concerning a church, a cup, a table and the holy things before pagans. Worse still, they called pagan witnesses in an inquiry about a cup of the mysteries. And there were certain persons who, they claimed, had been put out of the way by Athanasius through a summons from the receiver general, and whom they said they could not find anywhere in the world. These same persons they brought forward before themselves and the prefect alone, and openly used their testimony, the very people they shamelessly claimed Bishop Athanasius had hidden away. [k]

But here too their one aim is to bring about his death, and so once again they pretend that people are dead who are still alive, by the same method they used in the case of Arsenius. For these men are alive and can be seen in their own country. But to you, who are far from the spot, they make a great stir about the matter, as though the men had vanished, so that, with the evidence so far away from you, they may falsely accuse our fellow minister of using violence and the civil power. Yet they themselves have done everything by means of that power and the backing of others. For what they did in the Mareotis matched what they did at Tyre. There a count attended with soldiers and would allow nothing to be said or done that did not please them; so here too the prefect of Egypt was present with a band of men, frightening all the members of the church and allowing no one to give true testimony. And strangest of all, those who came, whether as judges or as witnesses, or, more likely, to serve their own purposes and those of Eusebius, lived in the same place as the accuser, even in his house, and there seemed to carry on the investigation as they pleased.

We suppose you are not unaware of the outrages they committed at Alexandria, for they are being reported everywhere. Drawn swords were at work against the holy virgins and the brothers. Whips were at work on their bodies, though these are people honored in the sight of God, so that their feet were lamed by the blows, while their souls are whole and sound in purity and every good work. The tradesmen were stirred up against them, and the pagan crowd was set on to strip them naked, to beat them, to insult them wantonly, and to threaten them with their altars and sacrifices. And one coarse fellow, as though the prefect had now given them license so as to please the bishops, took a virgin by the hand and dragged her toward an altar that happened to be nearby, imitating the way people were forced to offer sacrifice in time of persecution. When this happened the virgins fled, and the pagans raised a shout of laughter against the church. The bishops were on the spot, staying in the very house where this was going on, and it was from there, to win their favor, that the virgins were attacked with drawn swords and exposed to every kind of danger, insult and wanton violence. And they suffered this on a fast day, at the hands of men who were themselves feasting indoors with the bishops. [n]

Foreseeing these things, and reflecting that the entry of enemies into a place is no ordinary disaster, we protested against this commission. And Alexander, bishop of Thessalonica, thinking the same, wrote to those who were there, exposing the conspiracy and bearing witness to the plot. They do reckon him one of themselves and count him a partner in their designs, but all they prove by this is the violence they have used on him. For even the unprincipled Ischyras himself was brought to go ahead with the matter only by fear and violence, and was forced to take up the accusation. As proof of this, he himself wrote to our brother Athanasius, admitting that nothing of the kind alleged had happened there, but that he had been put up to making a false statement. He made this declaration although Athanasius had never admitted him as a presbyter, nor granted him such a title as a favor, nor rewarded him with the building of a church; nor did Ischyras expect a bishopric from him as a bribe; all of these he received from them in return for taking up the accusation. Moreover, his whole family was in communion with us, which they would not have been if they had been wronged in the slightest. [p]

Now, to prove that these things are facts and not mere assertions, we have the testimony of all the presbyters of the Mareotis, who always accompany the bishop on his visits, and who also wrote against Ischyras at the time. But neither were those of them who came to Tyre allowed to declare the truth, nor could those who stayed in the Mareotis get permission to refute the slanders of Ischyras. The copies of the letters of Alexander, of the presbyters and of Ischyras will also prove the same thing. We have also sent the letter of the father of the emperors. In it he expresses his indignation that anyone should be charged with the murder of Arsenius while the man was still alive, and also his astonishment at how their accusations about the cup kept shifting and contradicting one another: at one time they accused the presbyter Macarius of breaking it with his own hands, at another Bishop Athanasius. He declares, on the one hand, that the Melitians are slanderers and, on the other, that Athanasius is entirely innocent. [q]

And are not the Melitians slanderers, and above all John? He came into the church and was in communion with us; he condemned himself and no longer took any part in the business about the cup. Yet when he saw Eusebius and his party zealously backing the Arian madmen, though they did not dare to work with them openly but were trying to use others as their masks, he took on a role, like an actor in the pagan theaters. The plot of the play was a contest of Arians. The real purpose of the piece was their success, but John and his partisans were put on the stage to play the parts, so that under cover of them the Arians’ supporters, dressed as judges, might drive out the enemies of their impiety, firmly establish their impious doctrines, and bring the Arians into the church. And those who want to drive out true religion strive in every way they can to prevail by impiety. Those who have chosen the side of that impiety which wars against Christ try to destroy its enemies as though they were the impious ones. And they lay the breaking of the cup to our charge so as to make it appear that Athanasius is as guilty of impiety toward Christ as they are themselves.

For what does this talk of a cup of the mysteries mean, coming from them? Where does this reverence for the cup come from, among people who back impiety toward Christ? How is it that Christ’s cup is known to those who do not know Christ? How can those who claim to honor that cup dishonor the God of the cup? Or how can those who mourn over the cup try to murder the bishop who celebrates the mysteries with it? For they would have murdered him if they could. And how can those who mourn the loss of the throne with its bishop’s covering try to destroy the bishop who sat on it, so that the throne may be left without its bishop and the people robbed of godly teaching? So it was not the cup, nor the murder, nor any of those monstrous deeds they talk about, that drove them to act this way, but the heresy of the Arians we have mentioned. For its sake they conspired against Athanasius and other bishops, and they still go on waging war against the church.

Who are the people who have really caused murders and banishments? Is it not these men? Who are the ones who, relying on outside support, conspire against the bishops? Are not Eusebius and his party the men, and not Athanasius, as they say in their letters? Both he and others have suffered at their hands. Even at the time we are speaking of, four presbyters of Alexandria were banished through their doing, though they had not even gone to Tyre. Who, then, are the ones whose conduct calls for tears and mourning? Is it not they, who after committing one round of persecution do not hesitate to add a second, and who resort to every kind of falsehood in order to destroy a bishop who will not give way to their impious heresy? This is the source of the hostility of Eusebius and his party. This is the source of their proceedings at Tyre, of their pretended trials, and now also of the letters they have written even without any trial, expressing the utmost confidence in their statements. This is the source of their slanders before the father of the emperors, and before the most religious emperors themselves.

For you need to know what is now being reported to the discredit of our fellow minister Athanasius, so that it may lead you to condemn their wickedness, and so that you may see that they want nothing else but to murder him. The father of the emperors gave a quantity of grain for the support of certain widows, some of Libya and some from Egypt. They have all received it up to now, while Athanasius has had nothing from it but the trouble of helping them. But now, although the recipients themselves make no complaint and acknowledge that they have received it, Athanasius has been accused of selling all the grain and keeping the profits for himself. And the emperor wrote to this effect about it, charging him with the offense because of the slanders that had been raised against him. Now who are the people who raised these slanders? Is it not those who, after committing one round of persecution, do not hesitate to start another? Who wrote those letters that are said to have come from the emperor? Is it not the Arians, who are so zealous against Athanasius and do not hesitate to say and write anything against him? No one would pass over people who have acted as they have in order to suspect others. Indeed, the proof of their slander seems perfectly plain, for under cover of it they are eager to take the grain away from the church and give it to the Arians. This circumstance, more than any other, brings the matter home to the authors of this scheme and to those behind them. They did not hesitate to start a charge of murder against Athanasius as a base way of turning the emperor against him, nor to take away from the clergy of the church the means of supporting the poor, so that in fact they might profit the heretics.

We have also sent the testimony of our fellow ministers in Libya, Pentapolis and Egypt, from which you can likewise learn of the false accusations brought against Athanasius. And they do these things so that those who profess true godliness may be frightened into keeping quiet from now on, and the heresy of the impious Arians may be brought in in its place. But thanks be to your piety, dearly loved, that you have often anathematized the Arians in your letters and have never admitted them into the church. Eusebius and his party are also easily exposed. For look: after their earlier letters about the Arians, of which we have also sent you copies, they are now openly stirring up the Arian madmen against the church, though the whole catholic church has anathematized them. They have appointed a bishop over them. They throw the churches into confusion with threats and alarms, so as to win helpers for their impiety everywhere. Moreover, they send deacons to the Arian madmen, who openly join their assemblies. They write letters to them and receive answers from them, so making schisms in the church and holding communion with them. And they send everywhere, commending their heresy and rejecting the church, as you will see from the letters they have addressed to the bishop of Rome, and perhaps to you as well. You see, then, dearly loved, that these things deserve vengeance: they are truly dreadful and foreign to the teaching of Christ. [t]

That is why we have gathered together and written to you, to ask your Christian wisdom to receive this declaration of ours, to sympathize with our brother Athanasius, and to show your indignation against Eusebius and his party, who have attempted such things, so that such malice and wickedness may no longer prevail against the church. We call on you to avenge such injustice, and we remind you of the apostle’s command, “Put away that wicked person from among yourselves.” Their conduct is wicked indeed, and unworthy of your communion. So pay no more attention to them, even if they write to you against Bishop Athanasius again (for everything that comes from them is false), not even if they sign their letter with the names of Egyptian bishops. For it will plainly not be we who write, but the Melitians, who have always been schismatics, and who to this day stir up disturbances and raise factions in the churches. For they ordain unfit persons, all but pagans, and they are guilty of deeds that we are ashamed to put in writing, but which you can learn from those we have sent to you, who will also deliver our letter to you.

So wrote the bishops of Egypt to all bishops, and to Julius, bishop of Rome.