THEOPHILUS
625
THEOPHILUS
that animated the sect, the pohtical intrigues hiding
under the mask of rehgion. Pope Pius VII, 17 May,
1800, placed an interdict on the churches that had been
desecrated by tlie deistic rites, and Cardinal Consalvi,
in the course of the negotiations regarding the Con-
cordat of 1801, demanded that a speedy end be put to
the Theophilanthropists' profanation of the Catholic
temples.
Mathiej. La Thiophilanthropie (Paris, 1903) ; Idem, Contribu- tions A I'hiatoire rdigieuse de la rivotiUion (Paris, 1907)'; Bru- OERETTE. Les crialions religieusea de la revolution (Paris, 1904) ; Reid, The ri^c ami dissolution of the infidel societies in the metro- polis (London. ISOO); Ferbero, Disamina filosofica de'Dommi e della Morale relit/iosa de' Teofilantropi (Turin, 1798); for a com- plete bibliography see Tourneux, Bibliographie de I'histoire de Paris pe/idant la revotiUion (Paris, 1890-1900).
J. F. SOLLIER.
Theophilus, Bishop of Antioch. Eusebius in his "Chronicle "jjlacest he nameofTheophilus against that of Pope Soter (169-77), and that of Maximinus, Theo- philus's successor, against the name of Eleutherus (177-9.3). This does not mean that Maximinus suc- ceeded Theophilus in 177, but only that Theophilus and Maximinus flourished respectively in the times of Soter and Eleutherus. Lightfoot and Hort showed that Eusebius, having no such precise chrono- logical data for the bishops of Antioch as he hatl for those of Rome and .^lexandtia, placed the names of the Antiochene bishops against those of contemporary Roman bishops (Lightfoot, "St. Ignatius", etc., II, 468 sq., and "St. Clement", etc., I, 224 sqq.). When therefore we find in the third book of The- ophilus, "Ad .\utolycum", that the writer was alive after the death (180) of Marcus Aurelius, it does not follow, as even writers like Harnack and Barden- hewer supi)03e, that Eusebius made a chronological blunder.
The "Ad Autolycum", the only extant writing of Theophilus, is an apologj' for Christianity. It con- sists of three books, really separate works written at different times, and corresponds exactly to the de- scription given of it by Eusebius as "three elemen- tary works" (Hist, eccl., IV, xxiv). The author speaks of himself as a convert from heathenism. He treats of such subjects as the Christian idea of God, the Scripture accounts of the origin of man and the world as compared with pagan myths. On several occasions he refers (in connexion with the early chap- ters of Genesis) to an historical work composed by himself. Eusebius (op. cit.) speaks of refutations of Marcion and Hermogenes, and "catechetical books". To these St. .lerome (De vir. illust., xxv) adds com- mentaries on Proverbs and the Gospels. He speaks of the latter in the prologue to his own commentary on the Gospels, and also in his epistle " Ad Algasiam", where we learn that Theophilus commented upon a Diate.ssaron or Gospel Harmony composed by him- self ("Theophilus . . . quattuor Evangelistarum in unum opus compingens"). Along quotation in the same epistle is all that survives of this commentary, for Zahn's attempt, to identify it with a Latin com- mentary ascribed in some MSS. to Theophilus has found no supporters.
Batiffol. Atiriennea litteratures chritiennes: Lit. grecque, 101-2; Zahs, Forschung. zur Gesch. des N,T. Kanons, II; Harnack, AUchrist. Lit., 496 sq.; Idem, Chronologie. I, .319 sq.: Barden- hewer-Shahan. Patrologu (St. I-ouis. 1908), 65-7. For Theo- philus's teaching concerning the Eternal Word see Nr.wMAS, Causes of Rise and Success of Arianismia Tracts Theol. and Bccles.{lMnAnn, 1908). 255-.57. The Ad Autoljicum was first published by Fri- BIU8 (Zurich, 1.54fi) : the latest ed. bv Otto, Corp. apolonet., VIII (Jena, 1861). English tr. by FrnwER (Ixindon. 1860), and in Clarke, .Ante-Wicenc Library. The supposed Commentary on the Gospels was first printed by de La Biqne. Bibl. .S'.S. Patrum. V (Paris, 1,'>7.';), then by Otto (Ioc. cit.), then by Zahn doc. cit., 29-85). For references to literature in this commentarv see BaRDENHEWeh: MoRrv in Rerue Binfdictine. XXII. 12 sq."; and QuENTiN in Recite Benedictine, XXIV, 107 sq. Quentin gives reasons for regarding John of Jenisalem as possibly the author. For monographs on Theophilus's doctrine see Bardenhewer.
F. J. Bacchus. XIV.— 40
Theophilus, Patriarch of Alexandria (385-412).
Concerning the extraction and early life of Theophilus
we have but scanty information. He had a sister of
similar temperament and St. Cyril, his successor, was
his nephew. Hydatius ("Chron.", II; P. L., LI, 874)
calls him a "most learned man", and dedicates to him
an Easter table for 100 years. St. Jerome informs us
that he did not come forward as a public teacher be-
fore 385 ("Contra Rufin.", Ill, 18, in P. L., XXIII,
492). After his election to the Patriarchate of Alex-
andria (385) he showed himself a man of great intel-
lectual gifts and capacity, but also extremely violent
and unscrupulous in the choice of his means. His
name is connected with three important historical
events: the decay of paganism in Egy]it, llic Origen-
istic controversy, and the deposition and b;inishment
of St. John Chrysostom. About 390 'I'heophilus de-
prived the pagans of Alexandria of a temple, probably
with the consent of the Emperor Thcodosius I, and
apparently destroyed several other temples (.Socrates,
V, 16; Ammian., XXII, xi, 7). A riot ensued, and a
number of Christians were slain. With Tlicophilus
at their head, the Christians retaliated by destroying
the celebrated temple of Serapis, on the ruins of which
the patriarch erected a church. He also erected a
magnificent church at Canope. In 391 or 392 Theo-
philus was requested by the Synod of Capua to exert
his influence to end the schism at Antioch. How-
ever, lie f:ulcd to establish peace, and it was only in
.398 that St. .lohii Clirysostoiii, with the assistance of
Theophilus, siicceedrd in rc-estal)lisliing ecclesiastical
conimiiiiion between Flavian and Rome.
I'ntil :i9'.t Theophilus was regarded as a friend of Origen and the Origenists. Many of the so-called Origenist monks were among his best friends; some of them he ajipointed to ecclesiastical offices and digni- ties: for example, he named Isidore archpresbyter and patriarchal <iai!t(ii)iits, and raised others to the episco- pate. Ill till' (luarrel between ,Ioh;iiiiic.s-Kufiiius and Epiphaiiius-.leronie lie took the side of the first (So- crates, VI, 10), informeil Jerome through Isidore in 396 that he should show more respect for tlic authority of his bishop, .lohn of Jerusalem (Epp. Ixiii and Ixxxii; "Contra Rufin.", Ill, 17; "Contra Johannem Hieros.", 37), and accused St. Epiphanius of anthro- pomorphism. He also banished the Egyptian bishop Paulus, an opponent of the Origenists, and reproached St. Jerome for the hospitality he showed him (Je- rome, "Cont. Rufinum", III, 17 and 78). Between 399 and 400 Theophilus suddenly altered his attitude; the chief motive for the rlumge seems to have been a personal quarrel with the archpresbyter Isidore, well known as a friend of the Origenists. Isidore had taken charge of a sum of money and, in accorflance with the express request of the donor, did not inform Theophilus, who suffered from a "mania for building " and avarice (St. Isidore Pelus., Ep. i, 152). The patriarch heard of the matter, however, and did not shrink from the vilest slanders against Isidore and even acts of violence (Pall., VI; Sozomen, VIII, 12). Isidore found protection with his friends, the monks of Nitria, whereupon Theophilus turned against them also. At first he .set the .anthropomorphic-minded monks, the enemies of the Origeni.sts, against them, although he had condemned their views in his Easter letter of :ii)i| (.Sozomcn, VIII, 11; Ca,ssian, "Coll.", X, 2), then ilire(^tecl against them his Easter letter of 401 (P. !>., XXI, 773), and finally condemned Origen- i.sm at the Synod of Alex.andria in 401.
Then placing himself at the head of soldiers and armed serv:ui(s he m;ircheil :igainst the monks, burned their ihvi'lliiigs, ;ui(l ill-treated those whom he cap- tured I l':ill., vii; Socnites, \'l, 7; for Jerome's congrat- ulations to Theophilus see Jerome, E[). Ixxxvi). The monks, about 300 in number, proceeded first to Palestine, where the majority of them settled near Scythopolis; the four Tall Brethren meanwhile pro-
