Listed 6 sub titles with search on: Religious figures biography for destination: "SAMOSATA Ancient city TURKEY".
d.c. 380, feastday: June 21
d.c. 311, feastday: December 9
d. 312, feastday: January 7 (Catholic church), October 15 (Εastern church)
Martyrs Romanus, James, Philotheus, Hyperechius, Abibus, Julian and Paregorius
Andreas, bishop of Samosata, about 430 A. D., took part in the Nestorian controversy against Cyril, patriarch of Alexandria, in answer to whose anathemas he wrote two books, of the first of which a large part is quoted by Cyril, in his Apol. adv. Orientales, and of the second some fragments are contained in the Hodeyus of Anastasius Sinaita. Though prevented by illness from being present at the council of Ephesus (A. D. 431), he joined Theodoret in his opposition to the agreement between Cyril and John, and, like Theodoret, he changed his course through fear, but at a much earlier period. About 436 he yielded to the persuasions of John, and joined in the condemnation of Nestorius. Eight letters by him are extant in Latin in the " Epistolae Ephesinae" of Lupus.
Lucianus (Loukianos) of Antioch, one of the most eminent ecclesiastics and biblical
scholars in the early Church. He was born, like his illustrious namesake, the
satirist, at Samosata, on the Euphrates: he was of respectable parents, by whom
he was early trained up in religious principles and habits. They died, however,
when he was only twelve years old; and the orphan lad, having distributed his
property to the poor, removed to Edessa, where he was baptized, and devoted himself
to ascetic practices, becoming the intimate friend, and apparently the pupil of
Macarius, a Christian of that town, known principally as an expounder of the Scriptures.
Lucian, having determined to embrace an ecclesiastical life, became a presbyter
at Antioch, and established in that city a theological school, which was resorted
to by many students from all parts, and which exercised a considerable influence
on the religious opinions of the subsequent generation. What were the religious
opinions of Lucian himself it is difficult exactly to determine. They were such
as to expose him to the charge of heterodoxy, and to induce three successive bishops
of Antioch to excommunicate him, or else to induce him to withdraw with his followers
from communion with them. According to Valesius and Tillemont the three bishops
were Domnus, the successor of Paul of Samosata (A. D. 269--273), Timaeus (A. D.
273--280), and Cyrillus (A. D. 280--300); and Tillemont dates his separation from
A. D. 269, and thinks it continued ten or twelve years. The testimony of Alexander,
patriarch of Alexandria (apud Theodoret, H. E. i. 4), who was partly contemporary
with Lucian, makes the fact of this separation indisputable. He states that Lucian
remained out of communion with the church for many years; and that he was the
successor in heresy of Paul of Samosata, and the precursor of Arins. Arins himself,
in a letter to Eusebius of Nicomedeia (apud Theodoret, H. E. i. 5), addresses
his friend as sulloukianista "fellow-Lucianist," which may be considered as intimating
that Lucian held opinions similar to his own; though, as Arius would, in his circumstances,
be slow to take to himself a sectarian designation, we are disposed to interpret
the expression as a memorial that they had been fellow-students in the school
of Lucian. Epiphanius, who devotes a section of his principal work (Panarium;
Haeres. 43, s. ut alii, 23) to refute the heresies of the Lucianists, says that
Lucian was originally a follower of Marcion, but that he separated from him and
formed a sect of his own, agreeing, however, in its general principles, with that
of the Marcionites. Like Marcion, the Lucianists conceived of the Demiurgos or
Creator, as distinct from the perfect God, ho agathos "the good one ;" and described
the Creator, who was also represented as the judge, as ho dikaios "the just one."
Beside these two beings, between whom the commonly received attributes and offices
of God were divided, the Lucianists reckoned a third, ho poneeos, " the evil one."
Like the Marcionites, they condemned marriage: Epiphanius says that this was out
of hatred to the Demiurgos or Creator, whose dominion was extended by the propagation
of the human race. This description of the sect is to be received with very great
caution, for Epiphanius acknowledges that it had been long extinct, and that his
inquiries had led to no clear or certain information respecting it. The gnostic
character of the doctrines ascribed to it receives no countenance from the statements
of Alexander of Alexandria, and is probably altogether without foundation: the
views of Lucian appear to have had more affinity with those of the Arians; and
it is observable that Eusebius of Nicomedeia, Leontius of Antioch, and other prelates
of the Arian or Semi-Arian parties, and possibly (as already intimated) Arius
himself, had been his pupils. But whatever may have been the heterodoxy of Lucian,
he either abjured it or explained it so as to be restored to the communion of
the Church, in which he continued until his martyrdom, the glory of which was
regarded as sufficient to wipe off all the reproach of his former heresy; and
"Lucian the martyr" had the unusual distinction of being referred to by orthodox
and heterodox with equal reverence. It was probably on his reunion with the Church
that he gave in the confession of his faith, which is mentioned by Sozomen (H.
E. iii. 5), and given at length by Socrates (H. E. ii. 10). It was promulgated
by the Eusebian or Semi-Arian Synod of Antioch (A. D. 341), the members of which
announced that they had found it in the hand-writing of Lucian himself. Sozomen
expresses his doubt of the genuineness of the document; and the caution with which
it is worded, for the most part in scriptural terms, so suited to the purpose
of the synod, which desired to substitute for the Nicene confession a creed which
moderate men of both parties might embrace, renders the suspicion of Sozomen not
unreasonable. The genuineness of the creed is, however, maintained by Bishop Bull
(Defensio Fid. Nicaen. ii. 13. 4-8), by powerful arguments, and is indeed generally
admitted; but the controversy as to its orthodoxy has not been decided even in
modern times; for although trinitarian writers for the most part affirm that it
is orthodox, Petavius and Huetius, with the Arian Sandius, impute to it an Arian
character. It was strenuously upheld by the Arians of the fourth century, especially
as it did not contain the obnoxious term "homoousios." Supposing it to be genuine,
its ambiguity probably arose from the desire of Lucian not to compromise his own
real sentiments, yet to express them in terms of so orthodox an appearance as
to satisfy the rulers of the Church, into which he sought to be readmitted.
After his reunion with the Church, Lucian appears to have recovered
or increased his reputation both for learning and sanctity. He was especially
eminent for his charity to the poor. His eminence marked him out as a victim in
the persecution under Diocletian and his successors. He fled from Antioch and
concealed himself in the country; but, near the close of the year 311, he was
apprehended at Antioch, by order, according to Eusebius and Jerome, of the emperor
Maximin (Daza , but according to the author of his Acta, under Maximian (Galerius).
The slight difference of the names Maximin and Maximian easily accounts for the
difference of these statements: if he was martyred under Maximian we must place
his apprehension at least a year earlier than the date just given. He was conveyed
by land across Asia Minor to Nicomedeia in Bithynia, where, after suffering the
greatest tortures, which could only extort from him the answer, "I am a Christian"
(Chrysost. Homilia in S. Lucianum, Opera, vol. i. ed. Morel., vol. v. ed. Savil.,
vol. ii. ed. Benedict), he was remanded to prison. He died the day after the feast
of the Epiphany, A. D. 312, most probably from the effects of the tortures already
inflicted, and especially by starvation, having been fourteen days without food,
for he would not taste of that which was placed before him, as it had been offered
to idols. His body was cast into the sea, and having been washed ashore near the
decayed town, or the ruins of Drepanum, was buried there. Constantine the Great
afterwards rebuilt the town in honour of the holy martyr, and gave to it, from
his mother, by whom he was probably influenced, the name of Helenopolis. The statement
of the Alexandrian or Paschal Chronicle, that he was burnt to death, is utterly
inconsistent with other more trustworthy statements.
The works of Lucian comprehended, according to Jerome (De Viris Illustr.
c. 77), two small works, "libelli," on the Christian faith, and some short letters
to various individuals. The two works "on the faith" (De Fide) were, perhaps,
the creed already noticed as discovered and published by the synod of Antioch,
and the speech (Oratio) made by him before the emperor, which is preserved by
Rufinus (H. E. ix. 6). If this defence was spoken, it must have been at another
examination than that described by Chrysostom. Of the letters of Lucian we have
no remains, except a fragment in the Alexandrian Chronicle (p. 277, ed. Paris;
p. 221, ed. Venice; vol. i. p. 516, ed. Bonn). But the most important of Lucian's
literary labours was his revision of the text of the Septuagint. Some (Ceillier,
Auteurs Sacres, vol.iv. p. 47, and Neander, Church Hist. by Rose, vol. ii. note
ad fin.) have thought that he revised the text of the N. T.: but although some
expressions used by Jerome (Praef. ad Evangelia) give countenance to their opinion,
we believe the revision was limited to the Septuagint. The author of the Acta
S. Luciani says he was moved to undertake his revision by observing the corruption
of the sacred books; but his subsequent statement that the revision was guided
by a comparison of the Hebrew text, limits the expression "sacred books" to the
O. T. The copies of the edition of Lucian, though unfavourably characterised by
Jerome (l.c.), are described by him elsewhere (Apolog. contra Rufin. ii. 27) as
commonly used in the churches from Constantinople to Antioch. They were known
as "exemplaria Lucianea." (Hieron. De Viris Illustr. c. 77.) In the Synopsis S.
Scripturae, printed with the works of Athanasius (c. 77), is a curious account
of the discovery of Lucian's autograph copy of his revision at Nicomedeia. (Euseb.
H. E. viii. 13, ix. 6 ; Socrates, Sozomen, Theodoret, Rufinus, ll. cc.; Philostorg.
H. E. ii. 12-15; Synopsis S. Scriptfurae, Athanas. adscripta, l. c.; Dial. III.
de Sancta Trinitate, Athanas. adscripta, c. 1; Epiphanius, l. c.; Chrysostom,
l. c.; Hieronym. ll. cc.; Chron. Paschale, pp. 277, 279, 283, ed. Paris, 221,
223, 226, ed. Venice, vol. i. pp. 516,519, 520, 527, ed. Bonn; Acta S. Luciani
Presbyt. Martyris, Gr. apud Sym. Metaphr.; Latinè apud Lipomannum, Surium, et
Bolland. Acta Sanctor. vii. Jamnar. vol. i. p. 357, &c.; Suidas (who transcribes
Metaphrastes), s. vv. Loukianos and Notheuei; Tillemont, Memoires, vol. v. p.
474, &c.; Ceillier, l. c.; Cave, Hist. Litt. ad ann. 294; Fabric. Bibl. Graec.
vol. iii. p. 715; Hody, De Textib. Original. lib. iii. p. i. c. 5. 4, 5, lib.
iv. c. 3. 1.)
This text is from: A dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology, 1873 (ed. William Smith). Cited Oct 2006 from The Perseus Project URL below, which contains interesting hyperlinks
Receive our daily Newsletter with all the latest updates on the Greek Travel industry.
Subscribe now!
