12 Athanas. de Synodd. 22, 23.
16 sunacewj: literally `congregation, 0' from sunagw; but later applied to any service held in the church. In mod. Sunacarion, `Prayer-book. 0'
17 So also Sozom. III. 7. But according to Valesius, both Socrates and Sozomen are here mistaken, and Eusebius sent the deputation before the council at Antioch, as is shown by the words of Athanasius in his Apol. contra Arian., 21.
18 See Hammond, Canons of the Church (notes on the Canons of Nicaea), for the prerogatives of the see of Rome recognized at this time.
19 342 a.d. This assassination of Hermogenes was evidently recorded in that portion of Am. Marcellinus' work which has been lost; at least a record of it is referred to in that author's Rerum Gestarum, XIV. x. 2 (ed. Eyssenhart).
20 On the gratuitous distribution of grain or bread practised under Constantine and later under Theodosius, see Cod. Theod. XIV. tit. XVI., and cf. Eunap. Aedes. par. 22.
21 Cf. Bingham, Christ. Antiq. IV. xi. 19, on the control over the appointment of bishops by the emperor at this time.
22 There is an error here, repeated also by Sozomen (III. 7), but corrected by Theodoret, H. E. II. 4 and 12, without the mention of the names of his predecessors. The error consists in the statement that Gregory was ejected at this time. It appears that he remained in his position until the Council of Sardica, by which he was deposed and excommunicated. He survived this council by six months.
24 This is the same Gregory that is mentioned in ch. 10 as violently put into possession of the sea of Alexandria by the Arians. It is evident that they were disappointed in him.
25 Julius, in his letter to the Eastern bishops (Ep. I. adv. Eusebianos, 4 and 5), mentions Athanasius and Marcellus, ex-bishop of Ancyra, as with him at this time, but does not allude to Paul; from which it has been inferred that Socrates is in error here in setting the date of Paul's visit to Rome at this time, as otherwise Julius would have named him also with Athanasius and Marcellus. Sozomen, as usual, copies the mistake of Socrates; cf. Sozom. III. 15.
26 It appears from this that there was no recognition of any special prerogative or right belonging to the bishop of Rome as yet. The position of that bishop during these agitations in the Eastern church, when the Western church was in comparative peace, seems to be that of an arbitrator voluntarily invoked, rather than of an official judge. Cf. Neander, Hist. of the Christ. Church, Vol. II. p. 171, 172.
27 i.e. in his Collection of Synodical Transactions, mentioned in chap. 17.
28 deuteroj meta basilea; not only second in rank, but first after him in power, `his right-hand man. 0' Cf. Vergil's alter ab illo, Ecl. V. 49, and VIII. 39.
29 Sozom. X. 3 follows Socrates. The contents of the letter written by Julius to the Eusebians, found in Athanasius' Apologia contra Arianos, c. 20, are different from those here given by Socrates. Julius there complains of their ignoring his invitation to the synod at Rome, but says nothing of any canon such as is mentioned here. Cf. ch. 8, note 2.
32 Constantine the Younger. See I. 38, end.
35 This creed was called makrostixoj from its length, and the date of its promulgation must be put after the Council of Sardica, according to Hefele. See Hefele, History of the Church Councils, Vol. II. p. 85, 89, and 180 (ed. T. & T. Clark).
36 Moyou estia, lit. `the hearth of Mopsus, 0' son of Apollo and Manto, daughter of Tiresias, according to the Greek mythology. Mopsuestia has become famous in the history of the church through its great citizen, Theodore. Cf. Smith and Wace, Dict. of Christ. Biog.
37 This is the end of the first creed adopted at Antioch, as given in the preceding chapter; it is couched in almost identical terms in both these versions. The rest of the version here given is the addition that constitutes the characteristic of the `Lengthy Creed. 0'
38 sunanarxon. It has been thought advisable to retain the above uncouth rendering of this word, as also of one or two others immediately following, on the ground that the etymological precision at which they aim compensates for their non-classical ring.
42 `There has arisen in our days a certain Marcellus of Galatia, the most execrable of all heretics, who with a sacrilegious mind and impious mouth and wicked argument will needs set bounds to the perpetual, eternal, and timeless kingdom of our Lord Christ, saying that he began to reign four hundred years since, and shall end at the dissolution of the present world. 0' This is the description given of the heresy here hinted at by the synodical letter of the Oriental bishops at Sardica. On Marcellus and the various opinions concerning him, see Zahn, Marcellus von Ancyra, Gotha, 1867; also monographs on Marcellus by Rettberg (1794) and by Klose (1837 and 1859). Cf. Neander, Hist. of Chr. Ch. Vol. II. p. 394.
43 Cf. Tertull. Adv. Prax. i. and ii.; Epiph. Har. LVII.
44 Prov. viii. 22. The ancient bishops quote the LXX verbatim. The English versions (Authorized and Revised) follow the Hebrew, `The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. 0'
46 Athanasius' statement is that those who were present at the Council of Sardica, together with those who afterwards subscribed the Synodical Epistle sent to them and those who before the council had written in his behalf out of Phrygia, Asia, and Isauria, were in all about three hundred and forty. So in his Apol. contra Arianos, c. 50. In his Ep. ad Solitar. c. 15, he gives the number of those who met at Sardica as about one hundred and seventy,-no more.
48 anomoiou, `different, 0' `unlike. 0'
50 There are two works of Eusebius extant against Marcellus. The one described here is de Ecclesiastica Theologia adversus Marcellum, in three books; the other is entitled contra Marcellum, and consists of two books. As there is no mention of the latter, it is doubtful whether Socrates had ever seen them. At the end of the second book, Eusebius asserts that he had written at the request of the bishops who had excommunicated Marcellus.
52 Eusebius was accustomed to end his sermons with the formula `Glory be to the unborn God through his only-begotten Son, 0' &c. So also at the end of his contra Sabell. I.