3. Activity in Arian Controversy

Hosius subscribed; the appearance of the Homoiousians at the Synod of Ancyra; the struggle of Basil of Ancyra, Eustathius of Sebaste, and Eleu sius of Cyzicus with the court bishops; the reception of the consecration formula at the Synod of Sirmium in 358; the recrudescence of the Ariani zing tendency; and the plans for a new council in Nicomedia. At this time Hilary had news at last from Gaul, where the orthodox faith was prevailing; the Sirmian formula had been rejected at a synod held simultaneously with that of Ancyra, and Saturninus of Arles had not improved his position in the three intervening years. The plan for calling a new council, to which also some Gallic bishops were invited, troubled him, because he knew that his friends in Gaul believed that orthodoxy dwelt there alone, and was afraid that discord would arise between them and the Homoiousians, out of which only the extreme Arians could make profit. When the plan of holding two synods, one at Ancyra and one at Rimini, was adopted, Hilary addressed both the Gallic bishops and the Homoiousians in his De synodis, a document which was intended to unite all the anti-Arians, the Homoousians of the West and the Homoiousians of the East, in opposition to the graver danger by explaining the position of each to the others. He was somewhat in advance of his time, and zealous Westerns, especially Lucifer of Calaris, attacked him, so that he was compelled to write an Apologetics ad reprehensores libri de synodis responaio, of which only a few fragments remain. Even before writing this, probably, he took practical steps in the same direction. Attending the Synod of Beleucia, he maintained friendly relatior.ci with the Homoiousians, and accompanied their deputies to the capital at the close of the sessions. He remained here while the delegates from Seleucia met with those .from Rimini (among whom seems to have been his antagonist Saturninus of Arles), and were compelled to agree on a bare Homoian formula. He was still in Constantinople during the synod of January and February, 360, and then wrote his second book, Ad Constantium. After boldly pointing out the evils of the existing confusion, and strongly reprobating Homoianism, he asked leave to confront Saturninus in the emperor's presence and debate the question with him. Immediately after this he was allowed to return to Gaul--either because he was considered a disturber of the peace of the East or his exile being terminated.

The mood in which he came back is evidenced by his indignant letter to the Gallic bishops under the title of Contra Constantium

4. Later Life in Gaul

to the death, and makes his policy, especially the Homoianism introduced by him, responsible for the troubles and the degradation of the Church. When Hilary returned to Poitiers-in 360 or more probably in 361-is uncertain; but it was he who beat down heresy in Gaul. His spirit breathes through the letter of the Synod of Paris (361) which excommunicated Saturninus. Nor did he confine his efforts to Gaul alone. In Italy he supported Eusebius of Vercelli, now also returned from exile; but their chief opponent, Auxentius of Milan, Be lated them to the new emperor, Valentinian, as dis turbers of the peace, and Valentinian forbade them to trouble the church of Milan, which he regarded as orthodox. Hilary made countercharges against Auxentius, and after a personal hearing before court officials, the latter, as a point of policy, acknowledged the homoousion-though he repudiated it again not later than the following spring-and threw fresh odium on Hilary and Eusebius. Hil ary, attempting to expose his duplicity, was or dered to leave Milan, and in his book Contra Au xentium gave a full account of these proceedings to

284

all the orthodox bishops and laity. This date (365) is the last certain one in his life.

Several of his most important works, as enumer ated in the list given by Jerome (De vir. ill., c.), have already been dealt with in their chronological connection. Of the others mentioned by him there are still extant a commentary on part of the Psalms, a portion of the Liber mysteriorum, and fragments of the Liber hymnorum and the commentary on Job. The work on the Psalms is even more exten sive than in Jerome's specification, covering Ps. i., ii., ix., xiii., xiv., li.-lxix., cxi., and cxviii.cl. The Liber mysteriorum was long supposed to be lost, but in 1887 Gamurrini discovered a manu script which, though incomplete, he identified with this treatise, and found to contain a treatment of the.mysteries of Old Testament typology. Of the commentary on Job, which Jerome calls a free ren dering of Origen's, two fragments are preserved by Augustine; its dependence on Origen places it in the period after Hilary's banishment. There has been much discussion on the difficult question as to the existence of remains of what Jerome de scribes as Liter adversum Valentem et Ursacium, his toriam Ariminensis et Seleuciensis synodi eontinens. Fifteen "fragments" preserved in the manuscripts perhaps belong to this work, and scholars have held very divergent views about the authenticity of them, together or severally; but until further evidence is presented the hypothesis which re gards them all as genuine and belonging to this book seems the least open to objection.

(F. Loofs.)

Bibliography: The best edition of the works is the Bene dictine of Constant, Paris, 1693, reprinted with additions by Maffei, Verona, 1730, and in MPL, ix.-x. Earlier and less valuable are those by B. Asoensius, Paris, 1510, and by Erasmus, Basel, 1523. Hilary's principal work on the Trinity and several other tracts and homilies are in NPNF, 2d ser., vol. ix. The Vita by Venantius Fortunatus. ed. B. Krusch, is in MGH, Auct. ant., iv. 2 (1885), 1-11; an early Vita is in vol. i. of Maffei's ed. and in vol. ix. of MPL. His life is given also by Jerome in De vir. ill., chap. c. An ex cellent and detailed introduction to Hilary's life and wri tings and theology is in NPNF, ut sup. Consult: J. H. Reinkens, Hilarius von Poitiers, Schaffhausen, 1864; J. B. WirthmOller, Die Lehre des . . . Hilarius von Poitiers, Regensburg, 1865; K. R. Hagenbacb, Hist. of Christian Doctrines, i. passim, ii. 82, Edinburgh, 1880; O. Bardenhewer, Patrologie, Freiburg, 1894; G. Dreves, in ZHT, xii (1888), 358-361; Baltzer, Die Christologie des heiligen Hilarius von Poitiers, Rottweil, 1889; F. W. Farrar, lives of the Fathers, i. 426-467, New York 1889; A. Ebert, Allgemeine Geschichte der Literatur des Mittel alters, i. 143-145, Leipsic, 1889; S. W. Teuffel, Geschichte der römischen Literatur, pp. 1053-1057, ib. 1890; H. Lindemann, Hilary von Poitiers, liber mysteriorum, Mun ster, 1905; Wilmars, in Revue 56nMictine, April and July, 1907; Ceillier, Auteurs sacrés, iv. 1-89, 566-576 et passim, consult index; 1Ceander, Christian Church, ii. 618-622 et passim; Schaff, Christian Church, iii. 589, 664, 959-961; DCB, iii. 54-56.