الهرطقة
الأفنومية
Eunomian
الهرطقة
الأفنومية
: نسبة إلى إفنوميوس أسقف سيزيكوس الذى كان أنومياً (كلمة يونانية
بمعنى غير مساوى أى الابن غير مساوى للآب) فى مبادئه وكان ينادى بأن هناك جوهر واحد
سامى ولكن بلا تمايز فى الخواص. وأن الابن ليس مولوداً من الآب بل ناتجاً عنه. وأن
الروح القدس كان أول المخلوقات التى عملها الابن بالقدرة الخالقة التى أعطاها له
الآب. (
Michael
O’Caroll,
Trinitas)
***************************************************************************
الأربعتعشرية
Quartodecimans
هم المسيحيون الذين يحتفلون بعيد القيامة يوم 14
نيسان من كل عام بغض النظر عن اليوم الذى يقع فيه من الأسبوع. (The Oxford
Dictionary of World Religions
وقد أعتمدت حسابات الأربعة عشرية على ناموس موسى
Law of Moses كما جاء فى الكتاب المقدس كما فعل اليهود
طيلة 1700 سنة حيث أن حساباتهم تقضى بأن يكون عيد الفصح ( القيامة ) 14 نيسان , وقد
قام هيبوليتوس أسقف روما
Hippolytus was the bishop of Rome بإتباع طريقة جديدة لحساب عيد
القيامة , وقد أتهم الأربعتعشرية بالهرطقة .
والحسابات اليهودية تنتهى
بأن يكون عيد القصح اليهودى فى ايام مختلفة فسنة يمكن أن ياـى يوم ألثنين أو أى يوم
آخر من أيام ألسبوع والكنيسة تريد دائماً تثبت عيد القيامة بأن يقع عيد القيامة يوم
الأحد دائماً قى كل سنة حيث هو ذات اليوم الذى قام فيه الرب يسوع وقد قررت الكنيسة
الجامعة فى مجمع نيقية بإلزام كنيسة الأسكندرية بحسابات عيد القيامة فى كل سنة .
********************************************************************************
المصلينMassalians
أو الأوخيطين Euchites
ويعرفون أيضاً بالأوخيطيين وهم طائفة تؤمن أن
الصلاة الدائمة والعميقة فقط هى التى تزيل الآلام والرغبات التى يسيطر بها للشيطان
على الإنسان. وهم يرفضون العمل ويعيشون على العطايا. (Encyclopedia of Early
Christianity)
Euchites. Doctrines and Practices.—At the
beginning of the last quarter of the 4th cent. or a little earlier, fanatics
made their appearance in Syria, whose manner of life was said to have been
introduced from Mesopotamia, and who were known by the Syriac name of Messalians
or Massalians (מְצָלין), praying people. צְלָא oravit is found in the Chaldee
(Dan. vi. 11; Ezra vi. 10). Epiphanius, whose account of them is the last
article (80) of his work on heresies, translates the name (εὐχόμενοι), but in
the next generation the Messalians had obtained a technical name in Greek also,
and were known as Euchites (εὐχήται or εὐχῖται). They professed to give
themselves entirely to prayer, refusing to work and living by begging; thus
differing from the Christian monks, who supported themselves by their labour.
They were of both sexes, went about together, and in summer weather slept in the
streets promiscuously, as persons who had renounced the world and had no
possession or habitation of their own. Epiphanius dates the commencement of this
sect from the reign of Constantius (d. a.d. 361). Theodoret (H. E. iv. 11; Haer.
Fab. iv. 10; Rel. Hist. iii., Vit. Marcian. vol. iii. 1146) dates its beginning
a few years later under Valentinian. There seems no foundation for the charge
that the Euchites were derived from the Manichees. Epiphanius connects them with
heathen devotees whom he calls Euphemites, and who it seems had also been known
as Messalians. The Euchites appear never to have made any entrance into the
West, but in the East, though probably at no time very numerous, they are heard
of for centuries; and when the Bogomiles of the 12th cent. appeared, the name
Messalian still survived, and the new heretics were accounted descendants of the
ancient sect.
In the time of Epiphanius the Messalians scarcely were a sect, having no settled
system nor recognized leader; and Epiphanius imputes to them no error of
doctrine, but only criticizes their manner of life.
Two accounts of Euchite doctrine are apparently of greater antiquity than the
authors who preserve them. One is given by Timotheus (de Receptione Haer. in
Cotelier's Mon. Ecc. Gr. iii. 400). This writer was a presbyter of
Constantinople in the 6th cent. His coincidences with Theodoret are too numerous
to be well explained except on the supposition of common sources. These sources
probably were the Acts of the councils of Antioch and Side, which contained
summaries of Messalian doctrine. Theodoret may possibly also have used a
Messalian book called Asceticus, the doctrines of which, Photius tells us, had
been exposed and anathematized at the council of Ephesus in 431. Probably that
book furnished the "heads of the impious doctrine of the Messalians taken from
their own book" given by Joannes Damascenus (de Haer. ap. Cotelier, Mon. Ecc.
Gr. i. 302, and Opp. Le Quien, i. 95), but which would seem also (see Wolf,
Hist. Bogomil. p. 11) to have been separately preserved in two MSS. at Leipzig
(Acta Eruditorum, 1696, p. 299; 1699, p. 157; and in the Bodleian, Cod. Barocc.
185).
They held that in consequence of Adam's sin every one had from his birth a
demon, substantially united to his soul, which incited him to sin, and which
baptism was ineffectual to expel. Dealing only with past sin, baptism did but
shear off the surface growth, and did not touch the root of the evil. The true
remedy was intense, concentrated prayer, continued till it produced a state from
which all affections and volitions were banished (ἀπάθεια). In this the soul
felt as sensible a consciousness of union with its heavenly bridegroom as an
earthly bride in the embraces of her husband. Then the demon went out in the
spittle or in the mucus of the nose, or was seen to depart in smoke or in the
form of a serpent, and there was in like manner sensible evidence of the
entrance of the Holy Spirit. St. Augustine (Haer. 57), who had some source of
information independent of Epiphanius, ascribes to them a fancy that the Holy
Spirit might be seen to enter in the appearance of innocuous fire, and the demon
to pass out of the man's mouth in the form of a sow with her farrow. Possibly
language intended by them metaphorically was misunderstood; for they described
the soul of him who had not Christ in him as the abode of serpents and venomous
beasts. They further thought that he who had arrived at the passionless state
could see the Holy Trinity with his bodily eyes; that the three hypostases of
the Trinity coalesced into one, which united itself with worthy souls. This
doctrine no doubt furnishes the key to the account given by Epiphanius of the
effacement of the sense of distinct personality in members of this 307sect. They
held the possibility in the passionless state of a perfection in which sin was
impossible; such a man needed neither instruction for his soul nor fasting to
discipline his body, for delicate food and luxurious living could stir no evil
desire in him. It is probably a misconception to suppose that they claimed that
he could be guilty of licentious conduct without falling from perfection. The
soul of him who was "spiritual," as they boasted themselves to be, was changed
into the divine nature; he could see things invisible to ordinary men; and so
some of them used to dance by way of trampling on the demons which they saw, a
practice from which they were called Choreutae. The things they saw in their
dreams they took for realities, and boasted that they then acquired a knowledge
of future events, could see the condition of departed souls, and could read
men's hearts. Both sexes might partake of this divine illumination, and they had
female teachers, whom they honoured more than the clergy. The use of the Lord's
Supper they regarded as a thing indifferent: it could neither benefit the worthy
nor harm the unworthy receiver; but there was no reason for separating from the
church by refusing it. They disparaged all the ordinary forms of Christian
charity as compared with the merit of bestowing alms on one of their members.
They had speculations about our Lord's humanity, of which the most intelligible
is that the body which He assumed had been full of demons which it was necessary
for Him to expel.
History.—The first whom we read of as a leader of the sect is Adelphius; hence
"Adelphians" was one of their many names. He was a layman of Mesopotamia.
Epiphanius speaks of them in his time as having no recognized leader. Theodoret
tells that Flavian bp. of Antioch sent monks to bring the Messalian teachers at
Edessa to Antioch. They denied their doctrines, and charged their accusers with
calumny. Flavian then used an artifice afterwards repeated by Alexius Comnenus
in the case of the Bogomiles. He affected to take their part, treated the aged
Adelphius with great respect, and led him to believe that he would find in an
aged bishop one able to understand and sympathize with views which younger men
rejected only from want of experience. Adelphius, having been thus enticed into
a full disclosure of his sentiments, was rebuked in the words addressed by
Daniel to the wicked elder (Susanna, 52) and punished as convicted out of his
own mouth. He and his party were beaten, excommunicated, and banished, and were
not allowed, as they wished, the alternative of recantation, no confidence being
felt in their sincerity, especially as they were found communicating in friendly
terms with Messalians whom they had anathematized. Probably it was on this
occasion that Flavian held a synod against them (Photius, 52), attended by three
other bishops (Bizus of Seleucia, a Mesopotamian bishop, Maruthas, described by
Photius as bp. of the Supharenians, and Samus) and by about 30 clergy. With
Adelphius there were condemned two persons named Sabas, one of them a monk and a
eunuch, Eustathius of Edessa, Dadoes, Hermas, Symeon, and others. Flavian
informed the bishops of Edessa and neighbourhood what had been done, and
received an approving reply. The Messalians banished from Syria went to
Pamphylia, and there met new antagonists. They were also condemned by a council
of 25 bishops held at Side and presided over by Amphilochius of Iconium, which
sent a synodical letter to Flavian, informing him of their proceedings. In their
Acts Amphilochius gave a full statement of the Messalian tenets expressed in
their own words. Photius represents the synod at Antioch just mentioned as
having been called in consequence of the synodical letter from Side, but this is
more than doubtful, though Theodoret also, in his Eccl. Hist., mentions the
proceedings in Pamphylia before mentioning those which resulted in the
banishment of the Messalians to Pamphylia. We cannot fix the year of these
proceedings, but c. 390 will probably not be far wrong. Measures were taken
against the Messalians in Armenia also. Letoius bp. of Melitene obtained
information from Flavian as to the proceedings in Antioch. Finding some
monasteries in his diocese infected by this heresy, he set fire to them, and
hunted the wolves from his sheepfold. A less zealous Armenian bishop was rebuked
by Flavian for favour shewn to these heretics. In Pamphylia the contest lasted
for several years. The orthodox leaders were another Amphilochius, bp. of Side,
and Verinianus bp. of Perga, who were stimulated by energetic letters from
Atticus bp. of Constantinople, and later, in a.d. 426, from the synod held for
the consecration of Sisinnius, the successor of Atticus, in which Theodotus of
Antioch and a bishop named Neon are mentioned by Photius as taking active parts.
Messalianism had probably at that time given some trouble in Constantinople
itself. Nilus (de Vol. Paup. ad Magnam, 21) couples with Adelphius of
Mesopotamia, Alexander, who polluted Constantinople with like teaching, and
against whom he contends that their idleness, instead of aiding devotion, gave
scope to evil thoughts and passions and was inimical to the true spirit of
prayer. Tillemont has conjectured that this was the Alexander who about this
time founded the order of the Acoimetae (see D. C. A. s.v.), but the
identification is far from certain. There is no evidence that the latter was a
heretic save that his name has not been honoured with the prefix of saint; and
his institution would scarcely have met with the success it did if it could have
been represented as devised by a notorious Messalian to carry out the notions of
his sect as to the duty of incessant prayer.
Between the accession of Sisinnius and the council of Ephesus in 431, John of
Antioch wrote to Nestorius about the Messalians, and Theodosius legislated
against them (xvi. Cod. Theod. de Haer. vol. vi. p. 187). At Ephesus Valerian of
Iconium, and Amphilochius of Side, in the name of the bps. of Lycaonia and
Pamphylia, obtained from the council a confirmation of the decrees made against
the Euchites at Constantinople in 426 and the anathematization of the Messalian
book, Asceticus, passages from which Valerian laid before the synod (Mansi, iv.
1477). Fabricius names Agapius, and Walch Adelphius, as the 308author of this
book, but the writer is really unknown. These proceedings at Ephesus were
unknown to Gregory the Great (Ep. vi. 14, ad Narsem, vol. vii. p. 361), but are
mentioned by Photius, and the decree was read at the second council of Nicaea
(Mansi, xii. 1025). The cause of Gregory's oversight may have been that his
correspondent cited to him as Ephesine the Acts of the council of Antioch. We
learn from the Ephesine decree that Messalianism had also been condemned at
Alexandria, and Timotheus mentions Cyril as an antagonist of these heretics. In
the Ep. ad Calosyrium (prefixed to the tract adv. Anthropomorph. vii. 363) Cyril
rebukes certain monks who made piety a cloak for laziness, but there is no
evidence that they were Euchites. The articles of the Asceticus were the subject
of 24 anathemas by Archelaus (bp. of Caesarea in Cappadocia some time between
the two Ephesine synods of 431 and 449), and of two letters by Heracleidas of
Nyssa (c. 440). The next Euchite leader of whom we read is Lampetius, after whom
his followers were called Lampetians, and who is said to have been the first of
the sect to attain the dignity of priesthood. He had been ordained by Alypius,
bp. of Caesarea (Cappadocia) in 458. He was accused to Alypius by the presbyter
Gerontius, superior of the monks at Glitis, of undue familiarity with women,
unseemly language, scoffing at those who took part in the musical services of
the church as being still under the law when they ought to make melody only in
their hearts, and of other Euchite doctrines and practices. The examination of
the charges was delegated by Alypius to Hormisdas bp. of Comana, and Lampetius
was degraded from the priesthood. He wrote a work called the Testament, answered
by the Monophysite Severus, afterwards bp. of Antioch. A fragment of this answer
is preserved in a catena belonging to New College, Oxford (Wolf, Anecdota
Graeca, iii. 182). It insists on the duty of praising God both with heart and
voice. The same catena contains an extract from another work of Severus against
the Euchites, an epistle to a bp. Solon. Photius tells that in Rhinocorura two
persons named Alpheus, one of them a bishop, defended the orthodoxy of
Lampetius, and were in consequence deposed. He learned this from a letter
written by Ptolemy, another bishop of the same district, to Timotheus of
Alexandria. There have been at Alexandria several bishops of that name, but
probably the Timotheus intended is the one contemporary with Lampetius
(460-482).
The next Messalian leader of whom we read (in Timotheus) is Marcian, a
money-changer, who lived in the middle of the 6th cent., and from whom these
sectaries came to be called Marcianists. The correspondence of Gregory the
Great, already referred to, arose out of the condemnation under this name,
unknown in the West, in 595, of one John, a presbyter of Chalcedon. He appealed
to the pope, who pronounced him orthodox, complaining that he had not even been
able to make out from his accusers what the heresy of Marcianism was. In the 7th
cent. Maximus, in his scholia on the Pseudo-Dionysius (II. 88), charges those
whom he calls indifferently Lampetians, Messalians, Adelphians, or Marcianists,
with giving but three years to ascetic life and the rest of their life to all
manner of debauchery.
We hear no more of the Messalians till the Bogomile heresy arose in the 12th
cent.
Of modern writers, the most useful are Tillemont, viii. 530; Walch, Hist. der
Ketz. iii. 418; and Neander, Ch. Hist. iii. 323.
[G.S.]
===
Encyclopedia
-
أنسكلوبيديا