Council of Milan

The Council of Milan was convened by Emperor Constantius II in 355 during the Arian dispute .

Athanasius of Alexandria , a staunch opponent of Arianism and of all theological positions that rejected the Confession of Nicaea (325), was deposed as bishop at the Synod of Arles in 353 at the instigation of Emperor Constantius II , when an edict was passed, which u . a. included his earlier deposition at the Synod of Tire (335). But the once again absent Athanasius refused to recognize the judgment and together with Liberius , the Bishop of Rome, demanded a new council , citing a canon of the Council of Serdica . Liberius sent an embassy to Constantius, who, among others, included the bishops Lucifer of Calaris and Eusebius of Vercelli .

In 355 Constantius convened the required synod in Milan , where he was residing at the time. So it was possible that the emperor himself was present at the council. At his instigation, the only item on the agenda was the Athanasius case. Eusebius of Vercelli, a supporter of Athanasius, suggested that the bishops should have an opportunity to sign the Nicaea Confession , and Bishop Dionysius of Milan had already had copies made for the bishops. This proposal led to disputes with the Arian bishops: Valens of Mursa stole his copy of the confession from Eusebius and tore it up before his eyes. In response to the unrest, the Emperor Constantius moved the council from the church where the bishops had gathered to his own palace, where he attended the sessions as the accuser of Athanasius.

When the followers of Athanasius still refused to sign the condemnation of Athanasius, Constantius reacted with massive pressure: He threatened anyone who did not want to sign the judgment with draconian punishments. Thereupon almost all of the 300 or so bishops present decided to condemn Athanasius as a high treason. Only Lucifer of Calaris, Dionysius of Milan, Eusebius of Vercelli, Paulinus of Trier and two legates of Liberius refused and were then banished.

The Council of Milan is not recognized by today's churches.

literature

Pedro Barceló : Constantius II and his time. The beginnings of the state church . Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart 2004, ISBN 3-608-94046-4 , pp. 115-117.

Remarks

^ Hanns Christof Brennecke , Annette von Stockhausen, Christian Müller, Uta Heil, Angelika Wintjes (eds.): Athanasius works. Third volume, first part. Documents on the history of the Arian dispute. 4th delivery: Up to the Synod of Alexandria 362 . Walter de Gruyter, Berlin / Bosten 2014, p. 359, p. 366; Stefan Klug: Alexandria and Rome. The history of the relationship between two churches in antiquity . Aschendorff Verlag, Münster / Westphalia 2014, p. 214ff .; Hans Christof Brennecke, Two Apologies from Athanasius to Emperor Constantius II. In: Zeitschrift für antikes Christianentum , 2006, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp. 67–85, here pp. 71f.
↑ Lucifer of Calaris, moriendum esse pro dei filio 1; 4th
↑ Athanasius, historia Arianorum 31-33; 46; 76; apologia de fuga 4.

[1] Hanns Christof Brennecke , Annette von Stockhausen, Christian Müller, Uta Heil, Angelika Wintjes (eds.): Athanasius works. Third volume, first part. Documents on the history of the Arian dispute. 4th delivery: Up to the Synod of Alexandria 362 . Walter de Gruyter, Berlin / Bosten 2014, p. 359, p. 366; Stefan Klug: Alexandria and Rome. The history of the relationship between two churches in antiquity . Aschendorff Verlag, Münster / Westphalia 2014, p. 214ff .; Hans Christof Brennecke, Two Apologies from Athanasius to Emperor Constantius II. In: Zeitschrift für antikes Christianentum , 2006, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp. 67–85, here pp. 71f.

[2] Lucifer of Calaris, moriendum esse pro dei filio 1; 4th

[3] Athanasius, historia Arianorum 31-33; 46; 76; apologia de fuga 4.