"The Ethiopian eunuch", continues the saint, "when he understood not what he read, believed St. Philip; whereas the eunuchs of Constantius do not believe Peter when he confesses Christ, nor the Father indeed, when He reveals His Son"--an allusion to the declarations of the popes that in condemning Arianism they spoke with the voice of Peter and repeated his confession, "Thou art [the] Christ, the Son of the living God", which the Father Himself had revealed to the Apostle. The Arian historian Philostorgius also speaks of the Romans having eagerly demanded the return of their pope, and so does Rufinus. If St. Athanasius believed in his fall, this was when he was in hiding, and immediately after the supposed event; he was apparently deceived for the moment by the rumors spread by the Arians. It is not surprising to find that Liberius returned to Rome before the end of 357, and that it was noised abroad that he must have signed the condemnation of Athanasius and perhaps some Arian Creed. A more moderate view is represented by Hefele, who denied the authenticity of the letters, but admitted the truth of Sozomen's story, looking upon the union of the pope with the Semi-Arians as a deplorable mistake, but not a lapse into heresy. Includes the Catholic Encyclopedia, Church Fathers, Summa, Bible and more — all for only $19.99... (Reigned 352-366.) The same story of the pope's fall is supported by three letters attributed to him in the so-called "Historical Fragments" ("Fragmenta ex Opere Historico" in P.L., X, 678 sqq.) But the curious "Gesta Liberii", apparently of the time of Pope Symmachus, do not make any clear allusion to a fall. See De Rossi in "Bull. Vol. Constantius was pressing the bishops of Gaul to condemn Athanasius, and assembled a number of them at Arles where he had wintered.

Constantius sent to Rome his prefect of the bed-chamber, the eunuch Eusebius, a very powerful personage, with a letter and gifts. The “Liber Pontificalis” makes him return from exile to persecute the followers of Felix, who becomes a martyr and a saint. Bishops, says St. Athanasius, and pious ladies were obliged to hide, monks were not safe, foreigners were expelled, the gates and the port were watched. That these were not mere words was proved, not only by Liberius’s noble attitude of protest during the preceding years, but by his subsequent conduct. That St. Hilary should have taken some trouble to prove that the "Studens paci" was spurious makes it evident that he did not believe Liberius had fallen subsequently in his exile; else his trouble was useless.

“The Ethiopian eunuch”, continues the saint, “when he understood not what he read, believed St. Philip; whereas the eunuchs of Constantius do not believe Peter when he confesses Christ, nor the Father indeed, when He reveals His Son”—an allusion to the declarations of the popes that in condemning Arianism they spoke with the voice of Peter and repeated his confession, “Thou art [the] Christ, the Son of the living God“, which the Father Himself had revealed to the Apostle. The pope asked St. Eusebius to assist the legates with his influence, and wrote again to thank him for having done so. The preface to the “Liber Precum” mentions two expulsions of Felix, but does not say that either of them was previous to the return of Liberius. Historians and critics have been much divided as to the guilt of Liberius. Liberius: "They will not be needed; the ecclesiastics are rich enough to send their bishops as far as the sea." The forged letters and, still more, the strong words of St. Jerome have perpetuated the belief in his guilt. The same story of the pope’s fall is supported by three letters attributed to him in the so-called “Historical Fragments” (“Fragmenta ex Opere Historico” in P.L., X, 678 sqq.) He knew that the pope was the only ecclesiastical superior of the Bishop of Alexandria, and he "strove with burning desire", says the pagan Ammianus, "that the sentence should be confirmed by the higher authority of the bishop of the eternal city". It should be carefully noted that the question of the fall of Liberius is one that has been and can be freely debated among Catholics. the condemnation of Athanasius himself (Hist. Sabinus seems simply to have had the Arian story before him, but regarded it, probably rightly, as an invention of the party of Eudoxius; he thinks the truth must have been that, if Liberius signed a Sirmian formula, it was the harmless one of 351; if he condemned the "Homoousion", it was only in the sense in which it had been condemned at Antioch; he makes him accept the Dedication Creed (which was that of the Semi-Arians and all the moderates of the East), and force upon the court bishops the Semi-Arian formula of 359 and after.
Be on the lookout for your Britannica newsletter to get trusted stories delivered right to your inbox. The preface to the “Liber Precum” also speaks of his yielding to heresy. In their view, such a fall would unpope him and invalidate all his subsequent acts. Crist." and later ones; Eng tr.

As this was not a Sunday, May 17 was probably the day.Of his previous life nothing is known save that he was a Roman deacon. vol. It is interesting that the fragments of the book against Valens and Ursacius should still contain in the forged letters of Liberius (and perhaps, also in one attributed to St. Eusebius) a part of the false evidence on which a Doctor of the Church was turned out of Milan and apparently excommunicated. The forged letters and, still more, the strong words of St. Jerome have perpetuated the belief in his guilt. ", The emperor gave the pope three days for consideration, and then banished him to Beroea in Thrace, sending him five hundred gold pieces for his expenses; but he refused them, saying Constantius needed them to pay his soldiers. It is hard to see how Hilary in banishment and Athanasius in hiding could disbelieve such a story, when they heard that Liberius had returned, though the other exiled bishops were still unrelieved.