The Church Fathers Library

Library › Filed under Aetius of Antioch

Socrates on Aetius (Church History 2.35)

Written about 439 to 443, probably in Constantinopolis (now Istanbul, Turkey). The date is the usual view of scholars; some doubt it.

Aetius of Antioch did not write this text. Another person wrote it about Aetius of Antioch, or wrote down what Aetius of Antioch said.

One chapter of Socrates that tells how Aetius rose at Antioch and what he taught.

Testimony · first written in Greek

This is not a work by Aetius. It is what the historian Socrates wrote about him about 80 years later. The catalog files it under Aetius and its folder name carries the year of the events, not of the writing.

Translated by A. C. Zenos (1890). Socrates, Church History, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, series 2, vol. 2 (1890); an extract Public domain. Source and rights

About this text (3 notes)

- ecf:record:5bd0efff-44fa-4e89-9366-03a3f28ed55f, file 0360_Socrates_HE_II35_Aetius_English.txt

A historian's passage about the man, not his own work.

This is not a work by Aetius. It is what the historian Socrates wrote about him about 80 years later. The catalog files it under Aetius and its folder name carries the year of the events, not of the writing.

How we know the date and place
Date written probable
Socrates finished his Church History in or soon after 439 (its last event) at Constantinople (NPNF 2.2, introduction)
Place written probable
Socrates finished his Church History in or soon after 439 (its last event) at Constantinople (NPNF 2.2, introduction); site: https://pleiades.stoa.org/places/520998

619 words. 1 section.

Chapter XXXV. Of Aëtius the Syrian, Teacher of Eunomius.

§ 35

At Antioch in Syria another heresiarch sprang up, Aëtius, surnamed Atheus. He agreed in doctrine with Arius, and maintained the same opinions: but separated himself from the Arian party because they had admitted Arius into communion. For Arius, as I have before related,386 entertaining one opinion in his heart, professed another with his lips; having hypocritically assented to and subscribed the form of faith set forth at the council of Nicæa, in order to deceive the reigning emperor. On this account, therefore, Aëtius separated himself from the Arians. He had, however, previously been a heretic, and a zealous advocate of Arian views. After receiving some very scanty instruction at Alexandria, he departed thence, and arrived at Antioch in Syria, which was his native place, was ordained deacon by Leontius, who was then bishop of that city. Upon this he began to astonish those who conversed with him by the singularity of his discourses. And this he did in dependence on the precepts of Aristotle's Categories; there is a book of that name, the scope of which he neither himself perceived, nor had been enlightened on by intercourse with learned persons: so that he was little aware that he was framing fallacious arguments to perplex and deceive himself. For Aristotle had composed this work to exercise the ingenuity of his young disciples, and to confound by subtle arguments the sophists who affected to deride philosophy. Wherefore the Ephectic academicians,387 who expound the writings of Plato and Plotinus, censure the vain subtlety which Aristotle has displayed in that book: but Aëtius, who never had the advantage of an academical preceptor, adhered to the sophisms of the Categories. For this reason he was unable to comprehend how there could be generation without a beginning, and how that which was begotten can be co-eternal with him who begat. In fact, Aëtius was a man of so superficial attainments, and so little acquainted with the sacred Scriptures, and so extremely fond of caviling, a thing which any clown might do, that he had never carefully studied those ancient writers who have interpreted the Christian oracles; wholly rejecting Clemens and Africanus and Origen, men eminent for their information in every department of literature and science. But he composed epistles both to the emperor Constantius, and to some other persons, wherein he interwove tedious disputes for the purpose of displaying his sophisms. He has therefore been surnamed Atheus. But although his doctrinal statements were similar to those of the Arians, yet from the abstruse nature of his syllogisms, which they were unable to comprehend, his associates in Arianism pronounced him a heretic. Being for that reason expelled from their church, he pretended to have separated himself from their communion. Even in the present day there are to be found some who from him were formerly named Aëtians, but now Eunomians. For some time later Eunomius, who had been his amanuensis, having been instructed by his master in this heretical mode of reasoning, afterwards became the head of that sect. But of Eunomius we shall speak more fully in the proper place.388

3 notes
  1. 386 I. 26.
  2. 387 Diogenes Laertius, Proem. XI (16), says: Philosophers were generally divided into two classes,—the dogmatics, who spoke of things as they might be comprehended; and the ephectics, who refused to define anything, and disputed so as to make the understanding of them impossible.' The word ephectic' is derived from the verb epecho, to hold back,' and was used by the philosophers to whom it is applied as a title because they claimed to hold back their judgment, being unable to reach a conclusion. Cf. also the name skeptic,' from skeptomai . See Zeller, Stoics, Epicureans, and Skeptics, p. 525.
  3. 388 IV. 7.