"Having obtained a share in the birth of Christ let us renounce the works of the flesh." ~ The Ancient Church Fathers on the Nativity of Christ

Fresco portrait of Pope Saint Leo the Great (enhanced) from the Church of Santa Maria
Antiqua in Rome, dated to the early 8th century—about 350 years after his death.

As explained in a previous post, the Nativity of Jesus has been celebrated by Christians on December 25 since antiquity. The feast of the Nativity has always been an opportunity for homiletic fireworks on a grand scale, and the Fathers of the Church took full advantage of the sacred day to wax eloquent.

In keeping with this theme, here are a few excerpts from some of the earliest extant homilies delivered by various Church Fathers to commemorate the birth of Jesus Christ, Son of the Living God.

The first comes from Pope Liberius who reigned in the mid-4th century AD. You may remember from a previous post, that Liberius was ejected from the papal see by the Roman Emperor Constantius II, son of Constantine the Great, for the crime of being insufficiently tolerant of Arianism. 

The excerpt below from Liberius was recorded by Saint Ambrose in a letter to his sister Marcellina. Pope Liberius had delivered this sermon on the occasion of Marcellina taking the veil as a consecrated virgin—an event which apparently took place on Christmas day, likely in AD 353 or there abouts. In the sermon, Liberius leans heavily into the nature of the incarnation of Christ, and one can clearly discern the familiar echoes of the Nicene Creed and its refutation of Arianism: 

"Today, indeed, He was born after the manner of men, of a Virgin, but was begotten of the Father before all things, resembling His mother in body, His Father in power. Only-begotten on earth, and Only-begotten in heaven. God of God, born of a Virgin, Righteousness from the Father, Power from the Mighty One, Light of Light, not unequal to His Father; nor separated in power, not confused by extension of the Word or enlargement as though mingled with the Father, but distinguished from the Father by virtue of His generation." [Pope Liberius (AD 352-366), as quoted by St. Ambrose in a letter to his sister Marcellina]

This next excerpt is from Saint Ephraim the Syrian who flourished the mid-4th century. Ephraim is known particularly for his hymns, and the excerpt below is taken from one of the score or so that he wrote for the celebration of the Nativity of Christ. Interestingly, this hymn seems to indicate that the birth of Christ happened at about the same time as the winter solstice (December 21) when "He came forth from the womb in this month in which the sun gives longer light."  

"At the birth of the Son the king was enrolling all men for the tribute-money, that they might be debtors to Him: the King came forth to us Who blotted out our bills, and wrote another bill in His own Name that He might be our debtor. The sun gave longer light, and foreshadowed the mystery by the degrees which it had gone up. It was twelve days since it had gone up, and today is the thirteenth day: a type exact of the Son's birth and of His Twelve.

Moses shut up a lamb in the month Nisan on the tenth day; a type this of the Son that came into the womb and shut Himself up therein on the tenth day. He came forth from the womb in this month in which the sun gives longer light.

The darkness was overcome, that it might proclaim that Satan was overcome; and the sun gave longer light, that it might triumph, because the First-born was victorious. Along with the darkness the dark one was overcome, and with the greater light our Light conquered!" [Saint Ephraim the Syrian, Fourth Hymn on the Nativity of Christ, written prior to AD 373]

Scenes from the Nativity and infancy of Christ from the Ivory throne
of Maximianus, Archbishop of Ravenna, early 6th century AD.

This next excerpt is from the aforementioned Saint Ambrose of Milan and may be traced back to AD 377, a mere three years after he had been made bishop by acclamation even prior to his baptism, having been baptized and ordained bishop on the same day. This tract demonstrates that he had successfully made the  transition from able Roman provincial administrator, to spiritual father of a major metropolitan see, while retaining his well-known and appreciated humility: 

"Therefore Christ became a little one, He became a child, so that you might become a perfect man. H was wrapped in swaddling bands, so that you might be freed from the bonds of death. He lay in a manger so that you might be raised to the altar. He dwelt on earth so that you might live among the stars. There was no room for him at the inn, this was so that you might have many rooms in the heavenly mansions. 'He who was rich made himself poor for your sake, so that you might be rich.' (1 Cor 8:9). The Lord's poverty is my inheritance and His weakness is my strength. For Himself He preferred poverty and want, so that for others He might have abundant wealth. It is I who am washed by those tears that He shed as a crying infant, it is my sins that are wiped away by those tears. [St. Ambrose of Milan, from Commentary of Saint Ambrose on the Gospel of Luke, Book II, Chapter 41]

Finally, given the regnal title of the reigning pontiff, we present a passage taken from a sermon given by the original, Pope Saint Leo the Great about 75 years after Saint Ambrose. In this excerpt, Leo wraps up his Christmas sermon with an admonition to his flock to adhere to the moral commands of Christ and resist the urge to live according to the desires of the flesh—a fair warning to all Christians, ancient and modern alike:

"Let us then, dearly beloved, give thanks to God the Father, through His Son, in the Holy Spirit, 'Who for His great mercy, wherewith He has loved us, has had pity on us: and when we were dead in sins, has quickened us together in Christ' (Ephesians 2:4-5), that we might be in Him a new creation and a new production. Let us put off then the old man with his deeds: and having obtained a share in the birth of Christ let us renounce the works of the flesh. Christian, acknowledge your dignity, and becoming a partner in the Divine nature, refuse to return to the old baseness by degenerate conduct. Remember the Head and the Body of which you are a member. Recollect that you were rescued from the power of darkness and brought out into God's light and kingdom. By the mystery of Baptism you were made the temple of the Holy Ghost: do not put such a denizen to flight from you by base acts, and subject yourself once more to the devil's thralldom: because your purchase money is the blood of Christ, because He shall judge you in truth Who ransomed you in mercy, who with the Father and the Holy Spirit reigns for ever and ever. Amen." [Pope Saint Leo the Great, Sermon 21, mid-5th century AD]

"Dread Gehenna, and hold fast to Christ" ~ November 13, feast of Sts. Arcadius, Paschasius, Probus and Eutychianus

Funerary mosaic of Natalica, a Christian girl of 10, from 5th century
Roman or Vandal north Africa.

November 13 is the feast day of Saints Arcadius, Paschasius, Probus and Eutychianus. These four Spanish Roman martyrs were put to death by the cruel Vandal king, Geiseric, after he had completed his conquest of Roman Africa. Their martyrdom took place about AD 437 and their crime was refusing to accept the Arian heresy which was favored by the Vandals.

Writing in the mid-5th century, not many years after the events described, the chronicler Prosper of Aquitaine recorded the following about these martyrs:

In Africa, Geiseric, King of the Vandals, wanted to use the Arian impiety to undo the Catholic faith within the regions where he resided. He persecuted some of our bishops….In the same period, four Spaniards, Arcadius, Paschasius, Probus and Eutychianus were formerly considered by Geiseric to be valued and distinguished by virtue of their wisdom and faithful service. To make them even more esteemed, he commanded them to convert to the Arian heresy. But as they most steadfastly rejected this wickedness, the barbarian was roused to a most furious anger. First, their property was confiscated. Next, they were driven into exile, then tortured severely, and finally, suffering death in various ways, they succumbed wonderfully to a most glorious martyrdom.” [Taken from Eric Fournier: "The Vandal Conquest of North Africa: The Origins of a Historiographical Persona" in The Journal of Ecclesiastical History]. 

To one of these martyrs, Saint Arcadius, a remarkable letter was sent by Honoratus Antoninus, Bishop of Constantina in Africa. This letter urged the tortured man to constancy and pleaded with him to set aside the allurements of the world in favor of the Heavenly Kingdom. It reads, in part, as follows:

"The company of martyrs, thy predecessors, are waiting for thee. They guard thee, they hold out to thee the crown. I beseech thee, hold fast to what thou hast and let no other take away thy crown….Fear, then, the eternal punishments, where the fire always burns, where both body and soul are tortured in the darkness, where, with the devil, soul and body are consumed eternally. Dread Gehenna, and hold fast to Christ."

The persecution of Catholics by the Vandals in their newly won north African kingdom was brutal and thorough-going, though little remembered in our own time. I hope to write more about it in forthcoming posts. In the mean time, here is a previous post on the Vandalic conquest of Rome's north African provinces, as recorded by an eye-witness:

• 5th century bishop, Possidius of Calama, describes the last days of St. Augustine and the Vandal Conquest of Roman Africa

"The ship was utterly consumed with all on board" ~ The persecutions of the Arian Emperor Valens

Eighty orthodox clerics are burnt to death by the order of the Emperor Valens
in this 18th century etching.

The Roman Emperor Valens is an enigmatic and paradoxical historical figure. Placed on the throne of the Eastern Empire by his brother, Valentinian I in AD 364, Valens was a reasonably effective ruler for much of his reign, but lacked much of the political, military and religious acumen of his elder sibling. In his Ecclesiastical History, Hermias Sozomen compares the religious views of the two brothers as follows:

Valens, when he was baptized, employed Eudoxius as his initiator, and was zealously attached to the doctrines of Arius, and would readily have compelled all mankind by force to yield to them. Valentinian, on the other hand, maintained the faith of the council of Nicæa, and favored those who upheld the same sentiments, without molesting those who entertained other opinions. [Ecclesiastical History of Sozomen, Book VI, Chapter 6]

As an Arian and an active persecutor of the orthodox Nicean Christians, Valens occasionally attempted to enforce his will with brutal tactics reminiscent of his pagan predecessors like Diocletian, Decius and Valerian. One such instance occurred after rioting broke out in Constantinople between Arian and orthodox factions over the election of a new bishop for the city. Having been thoroughly beaten and abused by the ascendant Arians, eighty clerics of the orthodox faction approached Valens in Nicomedia with a petition for redress. Sozomen describes Valens reaction as follows:

Click for more info.

Although exceedingly angry, the emperor did not openly manifest any wrath, but secretly commanded the prefect to seize and slay the whole deputation. But the prefect, being apprehensive that a whole popular insurrection would be excited if he were to put so many good and religious men to death without any of the forms of justice, pretended that they were to be sent into exile, and under this pretext compelled them to embark on board a ship, to which they assented with the most perfect resignation. When they had sailed to about the center of the bay, which was called Astacius, the sailors, according to the orders they had received, set fire to the vessel and leaped into the tender. A wind arising, the ship was blown along to Dacibiza, a place on the sea-coast of Bithynia, but no sooner had it neared the shore, than it was utterly consumed with all the men on board. [Eccelsiastical History of Sozomen, Book VI, Chapter 14]

On another occasion, Valens visited the city of Edessa and was infuriated to discover large crowds of orthodox Catholics worshiping in the open air outside the city walls in defiance of his edict which had stripped them of their churches. The emperor’s fury nearly turned into a wholesale slaughter, but his wrath was deflected by the willingness of the Edessenes to suffer martyrdom en masse. Sozomen describes the scene:

[Valens] beheld the members of the Catholic Church assembled for worship in the plain before the walls of the city, for there, too, they had been deprived of their houses of prayer. It is said that the emperor reproached the prefect thoroughly and struck him on the jaw with his fist for having permitted these congregations contrary to his edict. Modestus (for this was the name of the prefect), although he was himself a heretic, secretly warned the people of Edessa not to meet for prayer on the accustomed spot the next day, for he had received orders from the emperor to punish all who should be seized. He uttered such threats with the forethought that none, or at least but a few, would incur danger, and with the desire to appease the wrath of the monarch. But the people of Edessa, totally disregarding the threat, ran together with more than their customary zeal, and filled the usual place of meeting.

Modestus, on being apprised of their proceedings, was undecided as to what measures ought to be adopted, and repaired in embarrassment to the plain with the throng. A woman, leading a child by the hand, and trailing her mantle in a way unbefitting the decency of women, forced her way through the files of the soldiers who were conducted by the prefect, as if bent upon some affair of importance. Modestus remarked her conduct, ordered her to be arrested, and summoned her into his presence, to inquire the cause of her running. She replied that she was hastening to the plain where the members of the Catholic Church were assembled.

"Know you not," replied Modestus, "that the prefect is on his way there for the purpose of condemning to death all who are found on the spot?"

"I have heard so," replied she, "and this is the very reason of my haste, for I am fearful of arriving too late, and thus losing the honor of martyrdom for God."

The governor having asked her why she took her child with her, she replied, "In order that he may share in the common suffering, and participate in the same reward."

Modestus, struck with astonishment at the courage of this woman, went to the emperor, and, acquainting him with what had occurred, persuaded him not to carry out a design which he showed to be disgraceful and disastrous. Thus was the Christian faith confessed by the whole city of Edessa. [Ecclesiastical History of Sozomen, Book VI, Chapter 18]

Valens continued vacillating between persecution and mercy with regard to non-Arians throughout the remainder of his reign. According to Sozomen, his death was predicted by an orthodox monk named Isaac who warned him that victory against the Goths would only be gained if the churches which had been given over to the Arians were returned to the orthodox.

Valens refused.

Shortly thereafter, he was killed by the Goths following the disastrous Roman defeat at the Battle of Adrianople in AD 378.

The Gruesome Death of Arius, AD 336

Here is an account, from the Ecclesiastical History of Sozomen, of the horrible death of the heresiarch Arius in AD 336. It was written about a century after the event, so Sozomen was not an eye-witness (who would want to be?). However, he appends to his own account that of St. Athanasius of Alexandria--the main opponent of Arius during his lifetime and a champion of Orthodoxy.

Of special note is the extra anecdote offered by Saint Athanasius of the horror which people evinced toward the exact spot where Arius expired, and the fact that a wealthy man of the Arian persuasion later purchased the latrine and tore it down so that this foul memorial to Arius might be forgotten.

Here is Sozomen's account, taken from Book II, Chapter XXIX and XXX of his Ecclesiastical History.

Russian portrayal of St. Nicholas
striking Arius (top), and Arius
expiring in the privy (bottom).

After the Synod of Jerusalem, Arius went to Egypt, but as he could not obtain permission to hold communion with the Church of Alexandria, he returned to Constantinople. As all those who had embraced his sentiments, and those who were attached to Eusebius, bishop of Nicomedia, had assembled cunningly in that city for the purpose of holding a council, Alexander, who was then ordering the see of Constantinople, used every effort to dissolve the council. But as his endeavors were frustrated, he openly refused all covenant with Arius, affirming that it was neither just nor according to ecclesiastical canons, to make powerless their own vote, and that of those bishops who had been assembled at Nicæa, from nearly every region under the sun. When the partisans of Eusebius perceived that their arguments produced no effect on Alexander, they had recourse to contumely, and threatened that unless he would receive Arius into communion on a stated day, he should be expelled from the church, and that another should be elected in his place who would be willing to hold communion with Arius. 

They then separated, the partisans of Eusebius to await the time they had fixed for carrying their menaces into execution, and Alexander to pray that the words of Eusebius might be prevented from being carried into deed. His chief source of fear arose from the fact that the emperor had been persuaded to give way. On the day before the appointed day he prostrated himself before the altar, and continued all the night in prayer to God, that his enemies might be prevented from carrying their schemes into execution against him. 

Late in the afternoon, Arius, being seized suddenly with pain in the stomach, was compelled to repair to the public place set apart for emergencies of this nature. As some time passed away without his coming out, some persons, who were waiting for him outside, entered, and found him dead and still sitting upon the seat. When his death became known, all people did not view the occurrence under the same aspect. Some believed that he died at that very hour, seized by a sudden disease of the heart, or suffering weakness from his joy over the fact that his matters were falling out according to his mind; others imagined that this mode of death was inflicted on him in judgment, on account of his impiety. Those who held his sentiments were of opinion that his death was brought about by magical arts. 

It will not be out of place to quote what Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, stated on the subject. The following is his narrative: 

"Arius, the author of the heresy and the associate of Eusebius, having been summoned before the most blessed Constantine Augustus, at the solicitation of the partisans of Eusebius, was desired to give in writing an exposition of his faith. He drew up this document with great artfulness, and, like the devil, concealed his impious assertions beneath the simple words of Scripture. The most blessed Constantine said to him, ‘If you hold any other doctrines than those which are here set forth, render testimony to the truth. but if you perjure yourself, the Lord will punish you,’ and the wretched man swore that he held no sentiments except those specified in the document.

Soon after he went out, and judgment was visited upon him, for he bent forwards and burst in the middle. With all men life terminates in death. We must not blame a man, even if he be an enemy, merely because he died, for it is uncertain whether we shall live till the evening. But the end of Arius was so singular that it seems worthy of some remark. The partisans of Eusebius threatened to reinstate him in the church, and Alexander, bishop of Constantinople, opposed their intention. Arius placed his confidence in the power and menaces of Eusebius. It was Saturday, and he expected the next day to be re-admitted into the church. The dispute ran high. The partisans of Eusebius were loud in their menaces, while Alexander had recourse to prayer. The Lord was the judge, and declared himself against the unjust. A little before sunset Arius was compelled by a want of nature to enter the place appointed for such emergencies, and here he lost at once both restoration to communion and his life.

The most blessed Constantine was amazed when he heard of this occurrence, and regarded it as the punishment of perjury. It then became evident to every one that the menaces of Eusebius were absolutely futile, and that the expectations of Arius were vain and foolish. It also became manifest that the Arian heresy had met with condemnation from the Savior as well as from the pristine church. Is it not then astonishing that some are still found who seek to exculpate him whom the Lord has condemned, and to defend a heresy of which the author was not permitted by our Lord to be rejoined to the church? We have been duly informed that this was the mode of the death of Arius. It is said that for a long period subsequently no one would make use of the seat on which he died. Those who were compelled by necessities of nature to visit the public place, always avoided with horror the precise spot on which the impiety of Arius had been visited with judgment. At a later epoch a certain rich and powerful man, who had embraced the Arian tenets, bought the place of the public, and built a house on the spot, in order that the occurrence might fall into oblivion, and that there might be no perpetual memorial of the death of Arius."

Saint Athanasius's account also survives in a letter he wrote to Serapion regarding the death of Arius. In that document, Athanasius says that although he wasn't in Constantinople when Arius died, he received this account of the heresiarch's death via a priest named Macarius who was present when it happened.

That heretics should die such hideous deaths would have been no surprise to 4th and 5th century Christian Romans. It was a common view that pagans and heretics who persecuted orthodox Christians would come to horrifically bad ends as God made manifest His justice on earth in real time. Writing in the early 4th century immediately after the end of the last empire-wide persecution of Christians, Lactantius’s book, On the Death of the Persecutors, details the dramatic and gruesome ends of persecuting emperors such as Nero, Domitian, Decius, Valerian and many others. Sozomen himself relates additional stories in that vein when discussing the demise of the pagan emperor Julian the Apostate and the Arian emperor Valens in his Ecclesiastical History.