LUCIDUS, hi'sid-us: A Gallic priest of the second half of the fifth century. He held decided predestinarian views, going further even than Auguatine and believing that at the fall man had utterly lost the freedom of his will, that God had determined beforehand that some were to be damned and others saved, and hence that Christ did not die for all but only for the elect, and finally that a " vessel unto dishonor " can never become a " vessel unto honor." A synod was summoned in 475 at Arles to condemn his views, and also one at Lyons in 476. Lucidus was compelled to recant chiefly through the influence of Faustus of Riez (q.v.), who, being a friend of Lucidus and also one of the most important members of the synod, had a lengthy correspondence with him on the subject. A letter to Lucidus by Faustus is in DIPL, liii. 683.
LUCIFER (Hebr. Held, "Shining one," R. V.
" Day star "): A term applied by Isaiah to the
king of Babylon
(
LUCIFER OF CALARIS AND THE LUCIFERIANS: Bishop of Calaria (the modern Cagliari) in Sardinia, and his followers. The dates of Lucifer are uncertain; he died perhaps 371. He first appears in history as the envoy of Pope Tiberius (q.v.) to the Emperor Constantius to urge the calling of a new synod. At the Synod of Milan, 355, he stood with the opposition, held firm with a few others, and, like these, was exiled. For a while he then lived at Germanicia in Commagene; next, at Eleutheropolis in Palestine, and afterward in the Thebaid. During his exile, he wrote some vehement polemics (ed. Hartel, in CSEL, vol. xiv., Vienna, 1886) against Emperor Constantius, as a patron of heretics and the enemy of the true faith. These writings may, with some degree of probability, be arranged in the following order: De non conveniendo cum hterdicis, de regtbus apostaCicis, de Afhanaaio 1 and 11., all prior to the autumn of 358; De non Parcendo in Deurn delinquentx'6na, after June, 359; Mariendum ease pro Des Filio, 360 at the earliest, perhaps not until 361. Copious Biblical quotations give these documents no little value as bearing on the text of the Bible before Jerome sad on the history of the canon. But, in other aspects, they are diffuse and repetitious, void of literary originality, and omit giving credit to authors from whom citations are made. Yet Lucifer's writings afford a vivid picture of the narrow yet honest zeal of a man loyal to his convictions.
The death of Conetantius and the advent of Julian ended Lucifer's exile. In 362 he was at Antioch, trying unsuccessfully to settle the state of confusion there (see Meletius of Antioch). He combated with especial severity the lenient treatment of ecclesiastics who had become compromised by their defection from the right faith under Conatantius, and insisted that they be stripped of their ecclesiastical offices. When at Naples, he refused church fellowship to Bishop Zoaimus. He retired, eventually, and in sullen temper, to Calaris; where he lived revered, indeed, for his confessional constancy and his austere conversation, but in separation from a Church that he believed to be stained by indulgence of heretical doctrine. He was ever afterward the " Holy Sardinian"; and in 1623 his remains were deposited in the cathedral of Cagliari.
After his death Sardinia continued the center of the Luciferian coterie, a sect persistently entan gling itself in the thought that the Church had be come a harlot. The Luciferians were not confined to Sardinia, however. In Spain they reverenced Bishop Gregory of Elvira (q.v.); at Treves, their ideas were advocated by the Presbyter Bonosus; in Rome itself there was a Luciferian party (not to be confused with the followers of Ursinus, q.v.), against which Jerome wrote his Altercatio Lticir feriani d orthodoxt (MPL, xxiii. 153-182); and Hilarius, the Roman deacon (q.v.), was a Luciferian. Epheaius, on a journey to the East (382 or 383), fell in with some Luciferiana at Oxyrhyn choa (Heptanomos, Egypt), who had for their bishop a monk Heraclidaa, titular of Eleutheropolis (Pales tine). And at Eleutheropolia were the two pres byters, Faustinus and Marcellinus, charged with holding assemblies for divine worship in the houses of their associates and opposed by the resident bishop. They complained against the bishop, and not in vain, to the Emperor Theodosius (see Faustinus), since a rescript of 384 forbade the persecution of those who stood in ecclesiastical fellowship with the Spaniard Gregory, and the oriental Heraclidas. By the irony of history, this imperial edict is the last intelligence concerning the Luciferiana.Bibliography: The four most important treatments of the subject are: G. Krüger, Lucifer, Bischof you Cakais,
57 |
![]() | Calvin College. Last modified on 08/11/06. Contact the CCEL. | ![]() |