Page 155

Page 155

166

which Epiphanies opposed by a crass realism. He therefore became the leader of a reaction against Origen which assailed all Greek culture within the Church. While on a visit

Opposition to Jerusalem (probably in 393), he to Origen. contended in the Church of the Resur rection against the teachings of Origen as the root of Arianism until Bishop Johan nea compelled him to desist. Johannes replied with a sermon against " anthropomorphism," but Epiphanies, though he too repudiated all anthropomorphiatic doctrines, besought the bishop to abandon the teachings of his opponent. Some time afterward he ordained a monk, the brother of Jerome, priest at Bethlehem, a violation of the episcopal rights of Johannes which he felt himself obliged to justify. He had another occasion to manifest his antipathy to Origen, when Theophilus of Alexandria came over to his side and sought to annihilate the followers of his former teacher in the Nitrian desert. The disciples of Origen took refuge with Chrysostom, and Theophilua urged Epiphauiue to convene a synod to condemn Origen and to send its rulings to him, to Chrysoatom, and other bishops. Epiphanies eagerly assented, held the synod, and hastened to Constantinople, at the invitation of Theophilus, in 402. There, however, he avoided meeting Chrysostom, but performed another ordination which contravened ecclesiastical law and informed the bishops whom he had as sembled of the condemnation of Origen. After a fruitless endeavor to secure the expl aeon and ex communication of the adherents of Origen and the condemnation of his writings, he left the city in rage, but died before he reached Cyprus.

The extraordinary reputation of Epiphanies among his contemporaries was due to his union of monastic asceticism with deep learning and zeal for orthodoxy, and he may be regarded as the representative of the tendency of his time to drive paganism at all costs from the positionwhich

Character it still held. His importance for and Sig- posterity, on the other hand, is found nificance. in the contents of his writings. His " Fast-anchored " affords insight into the theology of the period, and it contains a de tailed exposition of the doctrine of the Trinity and the Resurrection, and polemics against the Arians, Origen, and others. Far more important is the " Medicine Chest," which was based largely on Irenaeus and the lost " Heresies " of Hippolytus. The other sources of Epiphanies are more difficult to trace. Once he quotes Clement of Alexandria as his authority, but shows himself independent in his discussion of many of the older heresies, especially the Jewish and Samaritan sects, the Ebionites, the Valentiniana, and the Marcionites. With all his limitations, his work remains a valuable source for the heresies of the fourth century. The " Recapitulation," which was used by Augustine, may also have been a separate work of Epiphanies. His " Weights and Measures " is devoted chiefly to the books of the Bible, their translations, the geography of Palestine, and other Biblical subjects. His "Twelve Gems," on the twelve precious stones in the breastplate of the high priest, is extant only RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA lop, Ii.

in two excerpts, one edited by Konrad Leaner (Zurich, 1565), and the other preserved as the fortieth question of Anastasius. The Latin translation of the latter, which is incomplete at the beginning and the end, was first published by P. F. Foggini (Rome, 1750), but the exegesis of the Song of Solomon, also translated by the same scholar, is really an abridgment of a work of Philo of Carpasia. The letters of Epiphanies to Johannes of Jerusalem and Jerome have been preserved in Latin translation, but the Homilies, the Yitte prophetorum, the De 7iumerorum mysteries, and the so-called Physiologus are spurious.

(N. BoNwEmseH.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: The editio princepa of the Opera is by J. Hervagius, Basel, 1544; the editions by D. Petaviue, Paris, 1822, and W. Dindorf, Leipaic, 1859-82 (critical) contain the Vita ascribed to an alleged companion of Epiphanies, Polybius (worthless as a source). Sources for a life are: Socrates, Heat. eccl., vi. 10, 12; $osomen. Heat. eccl., vi. 32, vii. 27, viii. 14; Jerome, De vir. i71., exiv. For more modern discussions of his life consult: A. Gervaiee, Hiatoire de la vie de S. tpiphane, Paris, 1738: DCB, ii. 149-158 (by R. A. Lipaius, elaborate); Neander, Christian Church, vole . i., ii.; Schaff, Christian Church, iii. 928-933 et passim. For treatment of various phases of criticism consult: B. Eberhard, Die Befheitipuxg des Epiplsaniua am .$Ereite fiber Origenea, Trier, 1850; R. A. Lipaius. Zur Quellenkritik des Epiplaanioa, Vienna, 1885; idem, Quellen der 8.lteaten Kelzergeachiehte, pp. 91 eqq., Leipaic, 1874; A. Hilgenfeld, Ketzergeachichte des Urchriateutuma, pp. 80 aqq., ib. 1884; H. G. Voigt, Eine verachollene Urkurule des antimontanieliachen Kamp/ea, ib. 1891; E. Rolffs, in TU, xii. 4, 1895; Krumbacher, Ge achichte, pp. 874 aqq.; G. Rauachen, Jahrbvcher der chriatlichen Kirche, pp. 382-383, 404, 552 eqq., Freiburg, 1897; 1Criiger, History, passim; Harnack, Dogma, especially vol. ii.

EPIPHAftIUS SCHOLASTICUS: A friend and assistant of Cassiodorua (q.v.) at whose request he translated many Greek works into Latin, viz.: (1) the church histories of Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret, which he combined into one; under the name of Historic tripartita, it was the most popular compendium on its subject in the Middle Ages; (2) the collection of synodical epistles sent to the emperor Leo I. in defense of the Council of Chalcedon and in condemnation of Timotheus IElurue (generally known as the Codex Encyclius); (3) the commentary of Didymus the Blind on the Catholic Epistles; (4) the commentary of Epiphanies of Salamis on the Song of Solomon. G. KxttGElt.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Ceillier, Auteura aaah, viii. 524, mi. 102; DCB, ii. 159-180.

EPIPHANIiTS OF TICINUM: Bishop of Ticinum (Paves); b. at Ticinum 438 or 439; d. there Jan. 21, 496. He was elected bishop in 486 and was consecrated at Milan. He is described as of gracious personality and bearing and of great popularity. In the troublous times that preceded the downfall of the Western empire, Ep.phanius became the advocate and protector of his flock against the barbarian leaders in whose hands lay the fate of Italy. In 471 he went to Rome as delegate of the nobles and populace of Liguria to act as mediator between the emperor Anthemiua and his son-in-law the king-maker Ricimer and succeeded in preventing war, though he could not save Anthemiua from death by the orders of Ricimer in the following year. In 474 he was the