Arsacius
Arsacius, the intruding archbp. of Constantinople, after the violent expulsion
of Chrysostom (A.D. 404). He was the
brother of Nectarius, Chrysostom's predecessor, and had served as archpresbyter
under Chrysostom (Photius C. 59). In earlier life his brother had selected him for
the bishopric of Tarsus, and had attributed his refusal to an ambitious design of
becoming his successor at Constantinople. On this, Palladius asserts, he swore voluntarily
that he would never accept the see of Constantinople (Pallad. c. xi.). After he
had passed his 80th year, the success of the base intrigue of Eudoxia and Theophilus
against Chrysostom opened an unexpected way for his elevation to the archiepiscopal
throne. Eudoxia and the party now triumphant wanted for their new archbishop a facile
tool, under whose authority they might shelter the violence of their proceedings.
Such an instrument they had in Arsacius. Moreover, his hostility to Chrysostom had
been sufficiently testified at the synod of the Oak, when he appeared as a witness
against him and vehemently pressed his condemnation.
52He was consecrated archbishop on June 27, 404. Chrysostom, on hearing
of it, denounced him "as a spiritual adulterer, and a wolf in sheep's clothing"
(Ep.. cxxv.). The diocese soon made it plain that they regarded the new archbishop
as an intruder. The churches once so thronged became empty; with the exception of
a few officials, the dependants of the court party, and the expectants of royal
favour, the people of Constantinople refused to attend any religious assembly at
which he might be expected to be present. Deserting the sacred edifices, they gathered
in the outskirts of the city, and in the open air. Arsacius appealed to the emperor
Arcadius, by whose orders, or rather those of Eudoxia, soldiers were sent to disperse
the suburban assemblies. Those who had taken a leading part in them were apprehended
and tortured, and a fierce persecution commenced of the adherents of Chrysostom.
[Olympias (2)].
We learn from Sozomen (H. E. viii. 23) that Arsacius was not personally responsible
for these cruel deeds; but he lacked strength of character to offer any decided
opposition to the proceedings of his clergy. They did what they pleased, and Arsacius
bore the blame. His position became intolerable. In vain all the bishops and clergy
who, embracing Chrysostom's cause, had refused to recognize him were driven out
of the East (Nov. 18, 404). This only spread the evil more widely. The whole Western
episcopate refused to acknowledge him, and pope Innocent, who had warmly espoused
Chrysostom's interests, wrote to the clergy and laity of Constantinople strongly
condemning the intrusion of Arsacius, and exhorting them to persevere in their adhesion
to their true archbishop (Soz. H. E. vi. 22, 26). It is no cause for surprise
that Arsacius's episcopate was a brief one, and that a feeble character worn out
by old age should have soon given way before a storm of opposition so universal.
He died Nov. 11, 405 (Socr. H. E. vi. 19; Soz. H. E. viii. 23, 26;
Phot. C. 59; Pallad. Dial. c. xi.; Chrys. Ep. cxxv.).
[E.V.]