Baring-Gould’s sources: Roman Martyrology, Ado, Usuardus, &c. Authorities: — Sozomen, the Letters of S. Athanasius and S. Jerome, Anastasius Bibliothecarius.] Constantius, sole master of the Roman empire, on the death of Constans, was resolved to establish [July ap.
…throughout it the supremacy of Arianism [followers of Arius, who taught that the Son is a created being, not fully God]. He sent his agent, Eusebius [Eusebius of Caesarea (d. c. 339), the first historian of the Church] the Eunuch, to Rome, to persuade, threaten, or bribe the Roman Pontiff, Liberius, into an alliance with heresy. The promises of Eusebius were coldly listened to, his threats did not shake the pope, the presents he left on the altar of S. Peter; Liberius ordered, them to be cast forth from the sanctuary. Then Liberius pronounced a solemn anathema against all Arian heretics. Constantius, furious at being opposed by a subject, ordered his instant seizure. Rome rose to defend her prelate. Liberius was secretly apprehended and conveyed to the emperor at Milan. With him appeared the aged, orthodox, all-but-martyr for the faith, Hosius of Cordova, and many of the most distinguished bishops of the West, Eusebius of Vercelli, the uncompromising Hilary of Poitiers, the zealous, if indiscreet, Lucifer of Cagliari. Constantius insisted on the condemnation of S. Athanasius [bishop of Alexandria (d. 373), great defender of the Nicene faith] by a Council of the Church. Liberius remained unshaken, u If I were the sole friend of Athanasius,” he said, “yet would I adhere still to the righteous cause.”
Constantius sent him into banishment to Thrace. He indignantly rejected the money offered him by the emperor, to pay his expenses on his journey. But two years of exile, in the bleak inhospitable Thrace, broke his spirit; and he consented to sign the semi-Arian creed of Sirmium, and to renounce communion with S. Athanasius. He was exiled in 355, he returned in 357. During his exile a fresh pope had been elected, by orders of the Arian Emperor, a pope whom he hoped would prove more compliant than Liberius had proved before his banishment. Felix was chosen pope in his room — according to S. Athanasius — “ by three eunuchs, in place of all the people, and ordained by three spies, S. Felix //.
they deserve not the name of bishops, in the palace, because the people refused to allow the consecration to take place in the churches!” 1 S. Jerome [translator of the Bible into Latin (d. 420)] adds that the clergy of Rome took an oath not to recognise Felix.
S. Athanasius regarded this atrocious act as a crime worthy of Antichrist. Theodoret 3 says that though Felix adhered to the creed of Nicaea, yet he communicated with Arians. Socrates 3 condemns him as infected with Arian heresy, but Sozomen says 4: — “ It is said that Felix always continued in adherence to the Nicene faith; and that, with respect to his conduct in religious matters, he was blameless. The only thing alleged against him was that, prior to his ordination, he held communion with the heterodox.” In 357, the ladies of Rome entreated the emperor to recall Liberius, they expatiated on the hostility of the people of Rome to the intruded pope, their abstension from his religious acts. Constantius was disposed to relent, Liberius had suddenly become submissive to the imperial will, and Felix, exalted on the supposition that he was Arian at heart, had adopted an attitude of rigid orthodoxy. Constantius issued an edict declaring that the two bishops should rule with conjoint authority, each over his respective community. He hoped that the great majority of clergy and people who had adhered to Liberius would be duped into adhesion to his Arianism, and that the repudiated Felix would be the 1 “ Epist. ad Soletar.”
3 Hist. Ecci. ii. 37. But only hesitatingly. “The adherents of Ursacius appointed Felix to succeed Liberius. He had been a deacon in the Church of Rome, but on embracing the Arian heresy was elevated to the Episcopate. Some, however, assert that he was not favourable to that opinion, but was constrained by force to receive the ordination of bishop,” discredited pope of a thin congregation of Catholics. The edict was read in the circus, where the Romans were eagerly watching a race. “ What !” exclaimed the scoffing spectators, “because we have two factions here, distinguished by their colours, shall we' have two factions, two colours in the Church !” The whole audience burst into an indignant shout of “ One God ! One Christ ! One Bishop !”
Liberius returned, and his return was an ovation. The people thronged forth, as of old, to meet some triumphant consul, or Cicero on return from exile. The rival bishop, Felix, fled before his face; but Felix and his party would not altogether abandon the coequal dignity assigned him by the decree of Constantius, and confirmed by the Council of Sirmium. He returned; and at the head of a body of faithful ecclesiastics, celebrated divine worship in the basilica of Julius, beyond the Tiber. He was driven out by the populace and patricians in arms. A tradition recorded in the Pontifical Annals records a massacre. The streets, the churches, ran with blood, — the streets, where the partisans of the rival popes met in arms and fought with fury; the churches — where they fiercely interrupted each other’s services. Felix himself escaped; aud lived some years in peace, on an estate near the road to Portus. He died in retirement the year before Liberius.
Felix is inserted in the Martyrologies as a martyr, an inscription — “ Corpus Felicis Papae et Martyris qui damnavit Constantium ” — is said to have been discovered; but if Felix had been martyred, some mention of it would assuredly have found its way into the histories of the time. The designation martyr is used doubtless in the general sense of a witness to the.S’. Lupus.
orthodox faith against Pope Liberius. But Liberius, on his return to Rome, showed no disposition to countenance Arianism.
