to promote a formal hearing of the case, and even to cause Theophilus to be brought to Constantinople to be tried by its bishop. Arcadius ordered Theophilus to be summoned. Theophilus delayed to obey the imperial citation. When at last he set forth, as he passed through Lycia he is said to have boasted that he was "going to court to depose John" (ib. p. 72). It was not a mere brag; he knew his own diplomatic ability, and that Chrysostom's unworldly strictness had alienated Eudoxia and some people of rank, and even not a few ecclesiastics. The great name of the see of Athanasius would also go for much, and the watchword of "No Origenism" for yet more. He felt that he could exchange the position of a defendant for that of a judge. Theophilus landed at Constantinople at midday on a Thursday in the latter part of June 403 (ib. p. 64). Not one of the clergy went to meet him or pay him the usual honour (Socr.). Chrysostom invited him to the episcopal residence (Chrys. Ep. i. to Innocent; Pallad. p. 12), but he ignored all friendly messages, would not enter the cathedral; and betook himself to lodgings without the city. The emperor now urged Chrysostom to sit as judge in the case; he refused, for he "knew" (so he says) "the laws of the Fathers, and had a respect for the man." Theophilus had no such scruples. Proceedings against Chrysostom were taken at the council of "the Oak," a suburb of Chalcedon, and a sentence of deposition passed. [CHRYSOSTOM.] Theophilus was afterwards pleased to take up the almost forgotten question of the Nitrian exiles. They were persuaded to ask their pope's forgiveness, and Theophilus restored them to his communion. Returning to Constantinople he boldly entered the cathedral with an armed following to enforce the installation of a successor to "John," but finding that he had undertaken too much, and that the people were resolutely loyal to Chrysostom, he went on board a vessel at midnight and fled with his followers (Dial. p. 16). It was high time, for, says Palladius drily, "the city was seeking to throw him into the sea " (ib. p. 75). Theophilus did not attack Chrysostom in his Paschal Letter for 404, but returned to the subject of Origenism as an error which deceived "simple and shallow" minds. He informed pope Innocent that he had deposed Chrysostom; and Innocent, disposed to censure his "hasty arrogance" in not communicating the grounds of the condemnation (ib. p. 9) wrote, "Brother Theophilus, we are in communion with you and with our brother John. . . . Again we write, and shall do so whenever you write to us, that unless that mock trial is followed by a proper one, it will be impossible for us to withdraw from communion with John."
Theophilus seems to have written a work of great length against Origenism (Gennadius, de Vir. Ill. 33), from which Cyril quotes in his treatise, ad Arcadiam et Marinam (P. Pusey's Cyril, vii. 166), in support of the "Personal Union," and Theodoret in his second dialogue on the distinction between Christ's soul and the Word. Theophilus affirmed that Origen had been condemned (not only by Demetrius, but) by Heraclas. Either in this work (as Tillemont thinks, xi. 497) or in another, he strove to shew that he had only seemed to agree with the Anthropomorphists, for "he shewed," says Gennadius, that, according to the faith, God was incorporeal, "neque ullis omnino membrorum lineamentis compositum." In 410 he consecrated the eccentric philosopher and sportsman SYNESIUS to the metropolitan see of Ptolemais, who thanked him warmly for his Paschal Letter of 411, and wished him a long and happy old age (Synes. Ep. 9). In another letter Synesius, after professing his readiness to "treat as a law whatever the throne of Alexandria might ordain," asks the archbishop what should be done in regard to the people of Palaebisca and Hydrax, who were most reluctant to be placed, as Theophilus intended, under a bishop of their own, and asked leave to remain under Paul, bp. of Erythrum, to which diocese these "villages" had always belonged, save while Siderius was their bishop. Theophilus had also asked him to reconcile the bps. of Erythrum and Dardanis to each other (Ep. 67).
Theophilus died "of lethargy" on Oct. 15, 412 (Socr. vii. 7), after an episcopate of 27 years and nearly 3 months. The moral of his life is the deterioration which too great power can produce in one whose zeal in the cause of religion, although genuine and active, is not combined with singleness of heart.
All his extant remains are collected in Gallandius (Bibl. Patrum, vol. vii. pp. 603 ff.); his "canons" in Beveridge (Pand. Can. ii. 170). The sense of these canons is given in Johnson's Vade Mecum, ii. 255. See also Zahn, Forschungen, ii. 234 ff.
[W.B.]
Theophilus (13), a Christian who discussed Christianity with Simon, a Jew, in a treatise published by a Gallic writer named EVAGRIUS in 5th cent. The title as given by Gennadius (de Vir. Ill. c. 51 is Altercatio Simonis Judaei et Theophili Christiani. This work lay hid till Zacagni, the Vatican Librarian, noticed it in 1698 in his Collect. Mon, pp. 51, 53, 324. It was printed by Migne (Patr. Lat. t. xx. c. 1165) and by Gebhardt and Harnack (Texte u. Untersuch. zur Gesch. der Altchrist. Lit. Bd. i. Hft. 3; Leipz. 1883), with exhaustive notes and dissertations. It has an important bearing on the controversy during patristic times between the church and Judaism. The disputants discuss various arguments against the deity of Christ drawn from O.T., Theophilus making a very liberal use of the mystical method of exposition. The Jew begins by objecting that Christ cannot be God because in Deuteronomy it is said "There is no other God beside Me," and Isaiah says, "I am the first and the last, and beside Me there is no God." Theophilus then defends his position from the conduct of Abraham towards the angel whom he worshipped at the oak of Mamre and from the Psalms. He quotes Is. vii. 14, "Behold, a virgin shall conceive." Simon replies that the virgin was the daughter of Jerusalem, whom Isaiah represents as despising Shalmanezer, while the angel who smote the Assyrians is the fulfilment of the prophecy contained in the name Emmanuel, since he was for them indeed "Nobiscum Deus." Theophilus retorts that the virgin daughter of Jerusalem had brought forth no son. The
