LUCAS OF TUY (TUDENSIS): Spanish bishop; b. at Leon (112 m. n. of Salamanca) is the latter part of the twelfth century; d. at Tuy (80 m: n. of Oporto) 1250. After officiating as a canon. in his native city, he went to Tuy as s deacon, and in 1227 made a pilgrimage to Palestine, visiting Gregory IX. and Elise of Cottons, the general of the Franciscans, in the course of his travels. In 1239 he was consecrated bishop of Tuy, where he spent the remainder of his life. Lucas was the compiler of an exhaustive chronicle of Spain, the first two books containing the history of Isidore with additions, and the last two that of Ildefoneus and Julian, together with a supplement of his own to 1238. He likewise wrote s refutation of the Albigenses and other heretics, consisting chiefly of excerpts from Gregory the Great and Isidore, but important for the history of sects in Spain and southern France. In this work he assailed those who denied the future life and he likewise rejected as heretical representations of God and the Trinity in human form, se well as crucifixes having both feet of Christ pierced with a single nail. It is uncertain whether the book on the miracles of St. Isidore which he mentions in the preface of his polemics is to .be identified with the Vita laidori edited by the Bollandiata (ASB, Apr., i. 330).

(R. Schmid.)

Bibliography: H. Florea, Eepafia saprada, vol. x:oi. 108 sqq., :acv. 383-384, Madrid, 1754 sqq.; J. A. Fabricius, Bibliotheca Latina mediæ et inflma ætatis, iii. 883, 8 vols., Hamburg, 1734-48; RL, viii. 192.

LUCIAN THE MARTYR: Presbyter of Antioch; b. probably at Samosata about the middle of the third century; d. at Nicomedia, Bithynia, 312. Of his life few details are known. He was educated at Edeesa, and he may have studied at Cæsarea as well. He finally nettled at Antioch, where he founded a school of exegesis. In the autumn of 311 MA=:msnua became sole emperor and immediately resumed his persecution of the Christians, although in the spring of the same year he had signed the edict of toleration promulgated by his colleague Galerius. Lucian, whose prominence rendered him especially odious to the emperor, was taken from Antioch to Nicomedia, where Masiminus himself was then residing. His profession of faith, though it made an impression on his hearers, was unavailing, and he suffered martyrdom early in the following year, the Church at Antioch celebrating the anniversary of his death on Jan. 7. His corpse was taken by the Christians to the city of Drepanum, which Constantine rebuilt in his honor, though he called it Helenopolia after his mother.

The scantiness of the data concerning Lucian receives, at least a partial explanation from his dootrinal views. Alexander of Alexandria expressly states that Lucian accepted the teachings of Ebioa, Artemas, sad especially his fellow townsman Paul of Samoeata, and consequently withdrew from the Church of Antioch during the bishoprics of Domnus, Timeeus, and Cyrillus. It is probable_ that Lucian left the Church when Paul was deposed about 288, and the two were evidently in sympathy in their Christological views, so that, when Paul died, Lucian became the head of the nationalistic Syrian ecclesiastical party as opposed to the Greco-Roman faction. On the other hand, the agreement between these two teachers was neither complete nor lasting, and Lucian's doctrine of the antemuadane creation of the Logos and its perfect incarnation in Jesus was s later development of his thought. His chief importance, however, lies in the feat that he was the real founder of Arianism, as was ad-

54

mitted by Arius himself, who was one of his numerous pupils, declared in a letter to Eusebius of Nicomedia, also a scholar of Lucian's school. Although it is clear from the statements of Alexander that Lucian returned to orthodoxy before he died, Epiphanius says that he was reckoned a martyr by the Arians, and Philoatorgius, who praises him highly, declares that almost all the important Arian and semi-Arian theologians of the first half of the fourth century were pupils of Lucian. Nevertheless, his theological opponents were not altogether blind to his virtues. Eusebius, who mentions him but twice (Hist. eccl., viii. 13, ix. 8), praises the purity of his life, his knowledge of the Scriptures, and his noble martyrdom; the pseudo-Athanasius terms him a great and holy ascetic and martyr; Chrysostom delivered a eulogy upon him; and the Church finally recognized the martyrdom of St. Lucian, especially as it was contained in the calendar of Nicomedia, the prototype of all Greek calendars.

Of the literary activity of Lucian scant remains survive. Jerome mentions his recession of the manu scripts of the Bible (his chief work), as do Suidas and Simeon Metaphraetes, and Jerome also alludes to his treatises on faith and his letters, to which must be added his defense preserved by Refines. A fragment of a letter is contained in the Chronicon P aschale (p. 277, ed. Ducange), describing the martyrdom of Bishop Anthimus, Paris, 1648 sqq. Lucian's apology (Refines, ed. Cacciari, i. 515) reveals the Christological standpoint of its author, postulating that "there is one God, revealed to us through Christ and inspired in our hearts by the Holy Spirit." The importance of Christ is restricted to his office as a teacher and lawgiver, who gave mankind an example of patience by his incarnation and death. Scarcely a trace of Lucian's writings on faith hex survived, although they may form the basis of the statement of Epiphanies that Lucian and his followers affirmed that Christ had only a human body, but not a human soul, all human emotions being ascribed directly to the Logos, so that the Son was inferior to the Father, evidently a cardinal doctrine in his system. The creed adopted by the bishops assembled at Antioch in 341 is as cribed to Lucian by some writers of the early Church as well as by-the semi-Arias Synods of Seleucia (359) and Caria (367), but this can at most mean little more than that part of his doctrines were accepted with many interpolations and additions. According to Jerome, Lucian's version of the Sep tuagint was received from Constantinople to An tioch, but varied widely from the current text. Of the recession of the New Testament Jerome speaks in terms of disapproval, and its use was forbidden by the Decretusn. Gelaaiantcm. It was formerly sup posed that in his New Testament Lucian adhered closely to the Peshitto, but it now seems inadvisable to attempt to trace any family of manuscripts to his work (see Bible Versions, A, I., 1, 15). Practically nothing is known concerning Lucian's exegetical treatises, although it is probable that he wrote on hermeneutics.

(A. Harnack.)

Bibliography: DOB, iii. 748-749; NPNF, 2 eer., i. 380, ool. i., note 4; Jerome, De vir. ill., Ixxvii.