12 On the Docetism of Valentinus vide Dr. Salmon in D. C. Biog. i. 869. "According to V. (Irenaes i. 7) our Lord's nature was fourfold: (1) He had a yuxh/ or animal soul; (2) He had a pneu=ma or spiritual principle derived from Achamoth; (3) He had a body, but not a material body, but a heavenly one. . . . (4) The pre-existent Saviour descended on Him in the form of a dove at His Baptism. When our Lord was brought before Pilate, this Saviour as being incapable of suffering withdrew His power;" (cf. the Gospel of Peter, "The Lord cried, saving, 'My Power, my Power, Thou hast left me.'") "and the spiritual part which was also impassible was likewise dismissed; the animal soul and the wonderfully contrived body alone remaining to suffer, and to exhibit on the cross on earth a representation of what had previously taken place on the heavenly Stauros. It thus appears that Valentinus was only partially docetic." But cf. Iren. v. 1, 2, and iii. 22.
2 cf. Letters cxxiii. and ccclxvi.
6 The sentence in all the mss. (except the Codex Coislin. II., which has o 9 trapei\j) begins ou' trapei/j. The Ben. Ed. propose simply to substitute ei/ for ou' and render "Si enium conversus est. proprium constituit corpus. quod videlicet densata in ipsa decitate, substitit." I have endeavoured to force a possible meaning on the Greek as it stands, though paxunqei/ohj more naturally refers to the unorthodox change than to the orthodox conjunction. The original is ou gap trapei\j oi'kei=on u 9pesth/sato sw=ma, o#per, paxunqei/shj au'tw= th=j qei!kh= fu/sewj, u 9pe/sth.
3 In 358, when the homoiousion was accepted, and twelve anathemas formulated against all who rejected it.
5 Ecc. xii. 12, LXX. cf. Ep. ccxliv. p. 286.
2 See Soz., H. E. vi. 34, who says that Barses, with Eulogius, was not consecrated to any definite see. cf. also Theodoret H. E. iv. 16, where it is stated that his bed was preserved at Aradus.
3 Domnius was a not uncommon name, and there are several mentioned about the same time, e.g. Nilus, lEpp. iii. 43 and 144.
6 This passage shews in what sense St. Basil understands do/guata in Eph. ii. 15 and Col. ii. 14. cf. note on p. 41.
9 Here the Ben. note is Mirum id videtur ac prima specie vix credibile, Marcellum ob impios errores ex ecclesia exiisee. Nam. S. Athanasius suspectum illum quidem, sed tamen purgatum habuit, teste Epiphanio, Haeres. lxxii. lxxii. p. 837. Hinc illius discipuli communicatorias beatissimi papae Athanasii litteras ostenderunt confessoribus Aegyptiis, ibid. p. 843. Testatur idem Epiphanius varia esse Catholicorum de Marcello judicia, aliis eum accusantibus, aliis defendentibus, p. 834. Paulinus ejus discipulos sine discrimine recipiebat, ut in superiore epistola vidimus. ipse Basilius in epist. 69 queritur quod eum Ecclesia Romana in communionem ab initio suscepisset. Quomodo ergo exiise dicitur ex Ecclesia qui tot habuit communicatores? Sed tamen S. Basilii testimonium cum sua sponte magni est momenti (non enim ut in dijudicandis Marcelli scriptis, ita in ejusmodi facto proclive fuit errare), tum etiam hoc argumento confirmatur quod Athanasius extremis vitae suae annis Marcellum a communione sua removerit. Neque enim, si semper cum eo communicasset Athanasius, opus habuissent illius discipuli confessione fidei ad impetrandam confessorum Aegyptiorum communionem: nec Petrus Athanasii successor canones violatos, concessa illis communione, quereretur, ut videmus in epistola sequenti, si Aegyptum inter ac Marcellum ejusque clerum et plebem non fuisset rupta communio. Videtur ergo Marcellus sub finem vitae aliquid peccasse, quod Athanasium ab ejus communione discedere cogeret: et cum jamdudum a tota fere oriente damnatus esset, amissa Athanassi communione, quae unicum fere illius refugium erat, desertus ab omnibus videri debuit, nec ei nova ignominia notato prodesse poterat concessa olim a Romana Ecclesia communio.
3 The Ben. note points out that the accusation against Eusebius (of Samosata) and Meletius was monstrous, and remarks on the delicacy with which Basil approaches it, without directly charging Petrus, from whom it must have come, with the slander involved.
4 Ome Ms. contains a note to the effect that this letter was never sent. Maran (Vit. Bas. xxxvii.) thinks the internal evidence is in favour of its having been delivered.
1 Placed in 377, or in the beginning of 378.
2 To be distinguished from Libanius the bishop, p. 177, and Libanius the professor, mentioned later.
3 Dhsero/rwn, or Deserto/rwn, the accepted reading, is a curious Latinism for the Greek a'u'to/uoloi. Eusebius was in exile in Thrace, and the now the Goths were closing round Valens.