by a leametl uinl copious introduction. A German translation of tlic whole work was publisheil by Bert [Gebhardt and Harnack, Texte und Untersuchungen (Leipzig, 18<SS). 111]. An English translation of eight "Demonstrations", including an historical in- troduction, was published by Dr. John Gwynn [Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (New York, 1898), XIII].
Sasse, Prolegomena in Aphraatis sapientis PerSiF sermon^s homileticos (Leipzig. 1879); Forget. De vM el seriptis Aphraa- lU (Louvain. 1882); Wright, .4 Short Hislortj of St/riac Lit- erature (London, 1894). 31-.33; Di-val, La lilteralure syritique (Paris. 1900), 224-229; Labovrt, Le chrislianxsme dans I empire Perse (Paris, 1904), 32-42 et passim: Burkitt, Earlu Chrislinnily outside the Roman Empire (Cambridge, 1899), Lectures ii, iii; Parisot in ViG., Diet, de In Bible (Paris. 1892); Idem in Diet, de thiol, calk. (Paris, 1903); Nestle in Herzog, Realencyklopadie (3d ed.).
F. X. E. Albert.
Aphthartodocetae. See Monophysitism.
Aphthonius. See Manes.
Apiarius of Sicca, a priest of the diocese of Sicca, in proconsular Africa. Interest attaches to him only because of his appeal to Rome from his bishop's sentence of e.xcommunication, and the consequent protracted parleying between Rome and Carthage about the privileges of the African Church in regulat- ing its own discipline. In the resentment which the peculiar circumstances of the case provoked in many African bishops opponents of the Papacy read the denial by the Church of St. Augustine of the doctrine of Papal supremacy; and thus the case of Apiarius has come to be the classical example in anti-Roman controversial works, illustrating the fifth-century repudiation of Papal claims to disciplinary control.
Apiarius, deposed by Urbanus, Bishop of Sicca, for grave misconduct, appealed to Pope Zosimus, who, in view of irregularities in the bishop's proced- ure, ordered that the priest should be reinstated, and his bishop disciplined. Chagrined, perhaps, at the unworthy priest's success, a general synod of Carthage, in May, 418, forbade appeal "beyond the seas" of clerics inferior to bishops. Recognizing in what was virtually a restatement of previous African legislation an expression of displeasure on the part of the African bishops, Pope Zosimus sent a delega- tion to defend his right to receive certain appeals, citing decrees believed by him to have been enacted at the Council of Nica?a, but which in fact were canons of the Council of Sardica. The African bishops who met the legates, while not recognizing these decrees as Nicene, accepted them pending verification. In May, 419, was held the sixteenth Council of Carthage, and there again the representa- tions of Zosimus were accepted, awaiting the result of a comparison of the Nicene canons as they existed in Africa, in which the decrees cited by the Pope had not been found, with those of the churches of An- tioch, Alexandria, and Constantinople. By the end of the year 419 Pope Boniface, who had succeeded Zosimus in December, 418, was informed that the Eastern codices did not contain the alleged decrees; b\it, as the now repentant Apiarius had meantime been assigned to a new field of labour, interest in the affair subsided. The letter to Pope Boniface, while evidencing irritation at the arrogance of the legato Faustinus, contains nothing incompatible with belief m the Pope's supremacy.
Some four years later Apiarius relapsed into scandalous courses, was once more excommunicated, and again anpealed to Rome. Pope Celestine, who had succeeded Boniface in September, 423, re- iastated him and deputed the unwelcome Faustinus to sustain this decision before the African bishops. The legate's exasperating efforts in behalf of the unworthy priest were miserably thwarted by Apia- rius's admi.ssion of his guilt. Inccn.sed, in these provoking circumstances, by the heightened arro-
gance of Faustinus and the misinformed Pope's haste in sustaining Apiarius, a number of African bishops addressed to Celestine the famous letter, "Optaremus", in which they bitterly resent the insults of the tactless legate, and re(|uest that in future the popes will exercise due discretion in hearing appeals from Africa and exact from the African Church in such matters no more than was provided for by the Council of Nicaa. This letter, with all its boldness, cannot be construed into a denial of the Pope's jurisdiction by the Church of Africa. It simply voices the desire of the African bishops to continue the enjoyment of those privileges of partial home-rule which went by default to their Church during the stormy period when the theory of universal papal dominion could not be always reduced to practice, because of the trials which the growing church had to endure. But before the time of Apiarius, as the Sardican canons referred to attest, Western Europe had come to accept Rome as a court of last appeal in disciplinary causes. Africa, too, was now ready, and its readiness is shown by the case of Apiarius as well as by the records of like appeals to Rome to which St. Augustine him- self bears witness.
Hefele. Conciliengesch., II, 127, and English tr., Bk. VIII, §§ 120, 122, 125 (where numeroiLS references are fonnd to the documents contained in the collections of Mansi and Hardouin): Baronius, Annates, Eccl. ad an. 419, § 59 sq.; TiLLEMONT, Memoires, XIII, 292. 295, 323, notes 83 and 84 (Venice, 1732); Bellarmine, De Rom. Pont., II, xxiv; Pdller, The Primitive Saints and the See of Rome, 204 sqq. (3d ed.. New York, 1900); Dublin Review, July, 1890, 96 sqq. and July, 1901; Bbacn in Kirchenlex,. I, 1009-14.
John B. Peterson.
Apocalypse, from the verb 'aTroKaXiijrroi, to reveal, is the name given to the last book in the Bible. Protestants call it the Book of Revelation, the title which it bears in the King James Version. Although a Christian work, the Apocalypse belongs to a class of literature dealing with eschatological subjects and much in vogue among the Jews of the first century before, and after, Christ.
Adthenticity. — The author of the Apocalypse calls himself John. "John to the seven churches which are in Asia" (Ap., i, 4). And again, "I, John, your brother and your partner in tribulation, . . . was in the island, which is called Patmos, for the word of God" (i, 9). The Seer does not further specify his personality. But from tradition we know that the Seer in the Apocalypse was John the Apostle, the son of Zebedee, the Beloved Disciple of Jesus. At the end of the second century the Apocalypse was acknowledged by the historical representatives of the principal churches as the genuine work of John the Apostle. In Asia, Melito, Bishop of Sardis, one of the Seven Churches of the Apocalypse, acknowl- edged the "Revelation of John" and wrote a com- mentary on it (Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., IV, 26). In Gaul, Irenseus firmly believes in its Divine and Apos- tolic authority (Adversus Haer., V, 30). In Africa, TertuUian frequently quotes Revelation without ap-
Farent misgivings as to its authenticity (C. Marcion, II, 14, 25). In Italy, Bishop Hippolytus assigns it to the Apostle St. John, and the Muratorian Frag- ment (a document about the beginning of the third centurj') enumerates it along with the other canoni- cal writings, adding, it is true, the apocryphal Apoca- lypse of St. Peter, but with the clause, qiitim quidom ex nostris in eccU.fid legi nohmt. The IV^im Ilala, moreover, the standard Latin version in Italy and Africa during the third century, contained the .\jx)ca- lypse. In Egypt, Clement and Origen believed with- out hesitation in its Joannine authorship. They were both scholars and men of critical judgment. Their opinion is all the more valuable ius they had no sym- pathy with the millennial teaching of the book. They contented themselves with an allegorical in-