<GetPassage xmlns:tei="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns="http://chs.harvard.edu/xmlns/cts">
            <request>
                <requestName>GetPassage</requestName>
                <requestUrn>urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:T.theophilus_7</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:T.theophilus_7</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text xml:base="urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1"><body xml:lang="eng" n="urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1"><div type="textpart" subtype="alphabetic_letter" n="T"><div type="textpart" subtype="entry" xml:id="theophilus-bio-7" n="theophilus_7"><head><persName xml:lang="la"><surname full="yes">Theo'philus</surname></persName></head><p>6. Bishop of Alexandria, in the latter part of the fourth and the beginning of the fifth
      centuries of our era, is distinguished for his persecutions of the Origenists, for his
      hostility to Chrysostom, and as being altogether one of the most violent and unscrupulous even
      among the ecclesiastics of the fifth century. His life belongs rather to ecclesiastical than
      to literary history, and therefore only a very brief account of it is required here. He
      succeeded Timotheus, as bishop of Alexandria, in A. D. 385 (Socrat. <hi rend="ital">H. E.</hi>
      5.12; not 387, as the date is given by Theophanes, p. 60b., and Sozomen, <hi rend="ital">H.E.</hi> 7.14; see Clinton, <hi rend="ital">Fasti Rom. s. a. 387</hi>). Soon after his
      elevation to the episcopal throne, he secured the favour of the emperor by a most
      characteristic manoeuvre. When the fate of the empire was suspended on the battle which was to
      decide between Maximus and Theodosius, <date when-custom="388">A. D. 388</date>, he sent his legate,
      Isidorus, to Rome, provided with letters to both, the one or the other of which he was to
      deliver, with certain presents, according to the issue of the battle (Sozom. <hi rend="ital">H. E.</hi> 8.2). He also emulated the zeal of Theodosius against heathenism ; and having in
       <date when-custom="391">A. D. 391</date> obtained the emperor's permission to take severe measures
      with the pagans in his diocese, he proceeded to destroy their temples, and to seize their
      property, until, after Alexandria had been troubled with insurrections and bloodshed, most of
      them were driven out of Egypt (Socrat. <hi rend="ital">H. E.</hi> 5.16). How little this
      religious zeal proceeded from the dictates of conscience or of calm judgment may be seen by
      the pains which Theophilus afterwards took to force the bishopric of Cyrene upon Synesius, in
      spite of his avowed devotion to the heathen Greek philosophy. [<hi rend="smallcaps">SYNESIUS</hi>.]</p><p>His behaviour to the different sects, into which the Christians of his diocese were divided,
      was marked by the same unscrupulous inconsistency. He appears to have passed a part of his
      early life among the monks of Nitria, who were divided among themselves upon the chief
      controversy of the day, some being Origenists, and others Anthropomorphites. The ignorance of
      the latter party he must therefore have well known, and he was far too strong-minded to share
      their prejudices; while, on the other hand, he was quite capable of appreciating the works of
      Origen, with which it is evident that he was well acquainted. At first, he declared himself
      decidedly against the Anthropomorphites, and in opposing them he sided openly with the
      Origenists, and drew his arguments from the works of Origen. When, however, it became evident
      that the majority of the Egyptian monks were Anthropomorphites, and when that party had shown
      their strength by the tumults which they stirred up, about <date when-custom="399">A. D. 399</date>,
      Theophilus went over to their side, condemned the writings of Origen, and comnanded all his
      clergy to condemn them, and commenced a cruel persecution of the monks and others who opposed
      the Anthropomorphites; and all this, while he himself continued to rend the works of Origen
      with admiration. In <date when-custom="401">A. D. 401</date>, he issued a violent paschal or
      encyclical letter. in which he condemned the writings of Origen, and threatened his adherents;
      and in the following year he sent forth another letter of the same character, to the unbounded
      delight of Jerome, who had been long intimate with Theophilus, and who writes to him on the
      occasion in terns of exultation and flattery, which are absolutely disgusting (<hi rend="ital">Epist. 57,</hi> ed. Mait., 86, ed. Vallars.). By these proceedings, and by his general
      character, Theophilus well earned the name of <foreign xml:lang="grc">Ἀμφαλλάξ</foreign>,
      which we find applied to him (Pallad. apud <hi rend="ital"/> Montfauc. vol. xiii. p. 20). The
      persecuted monks of the Origenist party fled for refuge to Constantinople, where they were
      kindly received by Chrysostom, against whom Theophilus already had a grudge, because
      Chrysostom had been made bishop of Constantinople in spite of his opposition. The subsequent
      events, the call of Theophilus to Constantinople by the empress Eudoxia, and his success in
      procuring the deposition and banishment of Chrysostom (A. D. 403), are related under <hi rend="smallcaps">CHRYSOSTOMUS</hi> [Vol. I. p. 704a.] During the tumult which followed the
      deposition of Chrysostom, Theophilus made his escape secretly from Constantinople, and
      returned to Alexandria, where, in the following year (A. D. 404) he issued a third paschal
      letter against the Origenists, and where he closed his turbulent career in <date when-custom="412">A. D. 412</date>.</p><div><head>Works</head><p>The works of Theophilus mentioned by the ancient writers are :--</p><div><head>Against the Origenists</head><p>One against the Origenists, which is quoted by Theodoret (<hi rend="ital">Dial. 2,</hi> p.
        191), under the title of <foreign xml:lang="grc">προσφωνητικὸν πρὸς τοὺς φρονοῦντας
         τὰ Ὠριγένονς</foreign>, and which Gennadius (33) calls <title xml:lang="la">Adversus
         Origenem unum et grande volumen</title>.</p></div><div><head>Letter to Porphyry</head><p>A <title>Letter to Porphyry, bishop of Antioch</title>, quoted in the <title>Acta Concil.
         Ephes.</title> pt. 1.100.4.</p></div><div><head>The Three Paschal Letters</head><p>The three Paschal Letters, or episcopal charges, already mentioned, and one more; and some
        other unimportant orations. letters, and controversial works.</p><div><head>Editions</head><p><bibl>The <title>Paschal Letters</title> are still extant in a translation by Jerome, and
          are published in the <title>Antidot. contra divers. omnium seculorum heresias,</title>
          Basil. 1528, fol.</bibl>.</p></div></div></div><div><head>Edition</head><p><bibl>The whole of his extant remains are contained in Gallandii <hi rend="ital">Biblioth.
         Patr.</hi> vol. vii. pp. 603, foll.</bibl></p></div><div><head>Further Information</head><p>Socrat. <hi rend="ital">H. E.</hi> 6.7-17; Sozom. <pb n="1086"/>
       <hi rend="ital">H. E.</hi> 8.11-19; Cave, <hi rend="ital">Hist. Litt. s.a. 385,</hi> pp. 279,
       280; Fabric. <hi rend="ital">Bibl. Graec.</hi> vol. vii. pp. 108, foll.; Murdock, note to
       Mosheim, <hi rend="ital">Eccl. Hist.</hi> vol. i. p. 444, Engl. ed.; Gieseler, <hi rend="ital">Eccl. Hist.</hi> vol. i. pp. 364-367, Davidson's transl.; Clinton, <hi rend="ital">Fast. Rom. s. aa. 385, 387, 401, 402, 404.</hi></p></div></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>