Sacred Texts  Christianity  Early Church Fathers  Index  Previous  Next 

Chapter XIV.—The Bishops that flourished at that Time.

At that time Xystus 2277 was still presiding over the church of Rome, and Demetrianus, 2278 successor of Fabius, 2279 over the church of Antioch, and Firmilianus 2280 over that of Cæsarea in Cappadocia; and besides these, Gregory 2281 and his brother Athenodorus, 2282 friends of Origen, were presiding over the churches in Pontus; and Theoctistus 2283 of Cæsarea in Palestine having died, Domnus 2284 received the episcopate there. He held it but a short time, and Theotecnus, 2285 our contemporary, succeeded him. He also was a member of Origen’s school. But in Jerusalem, after the death of Mazabanes, 2286 Hymenæus, 2287 who has been celebrated among us for a great many years, succeeded to his seat.

Footnotes

On Xystus II., see chap. 5, note 5.

On Demetrianus, see Bk. VI. chap. 46, note 12.

On Fabius, see Bk. VI. chap. 39, note 7.

On Firmilianus, see Bk. VI. chap. 26, note 3.

Gregory Thaumaturgus, bishop of Neo-Cæsarea in Pontus from about 233–270 (?). Upon Gregory, see Bk. VI. chap. 30, note 1.

On Athenodorus, see ibid. note 2.

On Theoctistus, see Bk. VI. chap. 19, note 27.

Of the life and character of Domnus we know nothing. So far as I am aware he is mentioned only here. His dates are uncertain, but his predecessor, Theoctistus, was still bishop in the time of Stephen of Rome (254–257; see above, Bk. VI. chap. 19, note 27), while he himself became bishop before the death of Xystus of Rome, as we may gather from this chapter, i.e. before August, 258 (see chap. 5, note 5), so that between these dates his accession must be placed. Eusebius’ words in this passage will hardly admit an episcopate of more than one or two years; possibly he was bishop but a few months.

The dates of Theotecnus are likewise uncertain. Eusebius in Bk. VII. chap. 32, says that he was acquainted with Pamphilus during the episcopate of Agapius (the successor of Theotecnus), implying that he first made his acquaintance then. It is therefore likely that Agapius became bishop some years before the persecution of Diocletian, for otherwise we hardly allow enough time for the acquaintance of Pamphilus and Eusebius who did so much work together, and apparently were friends for so long a time. Pamphilus himself suffered martyrdom in 309 a.d. Theotecnus was quite a prominent man and was present at the two Antiochian synods mentioned in chaps. 27 and 30, which were convened to consider the heresy of Paul of Samosata.

On Mazabanes, see Bk. VI. chap. 39, note 5.

According to the Chron. of Eusebius, Hymenæus was bishop of Jerusalem from 265–298. It is expressly stated in the Chron. that the dates of the earlier Jerusalem bishops are not known (see Bk. V. chap. 12, note 1); but with the dates of the bishops of the latter part of the third century Eusebius can hardly have been unacquainted, and that Hymenæus was bishop at any rate as early as 265 is proved by chaps. 27 and 30 (see the note on Mazabanes referred to just above). The dates given in the Chron. may therefore be accepted as at least approximately correct.