Ex. xxiii. 1, lxx. and marg.
LXXXIII. Of Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus, to Dioscorus, Archbishop of Alexandria.
To them that suffer under false accusation the greatest comfort is given by the words of Scripture. When such a sufferer is wounded by the lying words of an unbridled tongue, and feels the sharp stings of distress, he remembers the story of the admirable Joseph, and as he beholds that model of chastity, an exemplar of every kind of virtue, suffering, under a calumnious charge, imprisoned and fettered for invading another man’s bed, and spending a long time in a dungeon, his pain is lightened by the remedy that the story furnishes. So again when he finds the gentle David, hunted as a tyrant by Saul, and then catching his enemy and letting him go unharmed, an anodyne is given him in his distress. But when he sees the Lord Christ Himself, Maker of the ages, Creator of all things, very God, and Son of the very God, called a gluttonous man and a wine bibber by the wicked Jews, it is not only consolation but rather great joy that is given him in that he is deemed worthy of sharing the sufferings of the Lord.
Thus I was compelled to write when I read the letters of your holiness to the most pious and sacred archbishop Domnus, for there was contained in them the statement that certain men have come to the illustrious city administered by your holiness, and have accused me of dividing the one Lord Jesus Christ into two sons, and this when preaching at Antioch, where innumerable hearers swell the congregation. I wept for the men who had the hardihood to contrive the vain calumny against me. But I grieved, and, my Lord, forgive me, forced as I am by pain to speak, that your pious excellency did not reserve one ear unbiassed for me instead of believing the lies of my accusers. Yet they were but three or four or about a dozen while I have countless hearers to testify to the orthodoxy of my teaching. Six years I continued teaching in the time of Theodotus bishop of Antioch, of blessed and sacred memory, who was famous alike for his distinguished career and for his knowledge of the divine doctrines. Thirteen years I taught in the time of bishop John of sacred and blessed memory, who was so delighted at my discourses as to raise both his hands and again and again to start up: your holiness in your own letters has borne witness how, brought up as he was from boyhood with the divine oracles, the knowledge which he had of the divine doctrines was most exact. Besides these this is the seventh year of the most pious lord archbishop Domnus. 1765 Up to this present day, after the lapse of so long a time, not one of the pious bishops, not one of the devout clergy has ever at any time found any fault with my utterances. And with how much gratification Christian people hear our discourses your godly excellency can easily learn, alike from those who have travelled thence hither, and from those who reached your city from us.
All this I say not for the sake of boasting, but because I am forced to defend myself. It is not the fame of my sermons to which I am calling attention; it is their orthodoxy alone. Even the great teacher of the world who is wont to style himself last of saints and first of sinners, that he might stop the mouths of liars was compelled to set forth a list of his own labours; and in shewing that this account of his sufferings was of necessity, not of free will, he added “I am become a fool in glorying; ye have compelled me.” 1766 I own myself wretched—aye thrice wretched. I am guilty of many errors. Through faith alone I look for finding some mercy in the day of the Lord’s appearing. I wish and I pray that I may follow the footprints of the holy Fathers, and I earnestly desire to keep undefiled the evangelic teaching which was in sum delivered to us by the holy Fathers assembled in council at the Bithynian Nicæa. I believe that there is one God the Father and one Holy Ghost proceeding from the Father: 1767 so also that there is one Lord Jesus Christ, only begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all ages, brightness of His glory and express image of the Father’s person, 1768 on account of man’s salvation, incarnate and made man and born of Mary the Virgin in the flesh. For so are we taught by the wise Paul “Whose are the Fathers and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen,” 1769 and again “Concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh and declared to be the Son of God with power according to the spirit of holiness.” 1770 On this account we also call the holy Virgin “Theotokos,” 1771 and deem those who object to this appellation to be alienated from true religion.
In the same manner we call those men corrupt and exclude them from the assembly of the Christians, who divide our one Lord Jesus Christ into two persons or two sons or two Lords, for we have heard the very divine Paul saying “One Lord, one faith, one baptism” 1772 and again “One Lord Jesus Christ by Whom are all things” 1773 and again “Jesus Christ the same yesterday and to-day and for ever” 1774 and in another place—“He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens.” 1775 And countless other passages of this kind may be found in the Apostle’s writings, proclaiming the one Lord.
So too the divine Evangelist exclaims, “And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.” 1776
And his namesake exclaimed, “After me cometh one who is preferred before me for He was before me.” 1777 And when he had shewn one person, he expressed both the divine and the human, for the words “man” and “comes” are human, but the phrase “He was before me” expresses the divine. But nevertheless he did not recognise a distinction between Him who came after and Him who was before, but owned the same being to be eternal as God, but born man, after himself, of the Virgin.
Thus too, the thrice blessed Thomas, when he had put his hand on the flesh of the Lord, called Him Lord and God, saying “My Lord and my God.” 1778 For through the visible nature he discerned the invisible.
So do we know no difference between the same flesh and the Godhead but we own God the Word made man to be one Son.
These lessons we have learnt alike from the holy Scripture and from the holy Fathers who have expounded it, Alexander and Athanasius, loud voiced heralds of the truth, who have been ornaments of your apostolic see; from Basil and from Gregory and the rest of the lights of the world; and that, in our endeavour to shut the mouths of them that dare to oppose the blessed Theophilus and Cyril, we use their works, our own writings testify. For we are most anxious by the medicines supplied by very holy men to heal them that deny the distinction between the Lord’s flesh and the Godhead, and who maintain at one moment that the divine nature was changed into flesh, and at another that the flesh was transmuted into nature of Godhead.
For they clearly instruct us in the distinction between the two natures, and proclaim the immutability of the divine nature, calling the flesh of the Lord divine as being made flesh of God the Word; but the doctrine that it was transmuted into nature of Godhead they repudiate as impious.
I think that your excellency is well aware that Cyril of blessed memory often wrote to me, and when he sent his books against Julian to Antioch, and in like manner his book on the scapegoat, he asked the blessed John, bishop of Antioch, to shew them to the great teachers of the East; and in compliance with this request the blessed John sent us the books. I read them with admiration, and I wrote to Cyril of blessed memory; and he wrote back to me praising my exactitude and kindness. This letter I have preserved.
That I twice subscribed the writings of John of blessed memory concerning Nestorius my own hand bears witness, but this is the kind of thing whispered about me by men who try to conceal their own unsoundness by calumniating me.
Therefore I implore your holiness to turn your back on the liars; to give heed to the Church’s quiet and either to heal by salutary medicines them that are trying to destroy the doctrines of the truth, or, if they refuse to accept your treatment, to expel them from the fold, to the end that the sheep may be spared from contagion. I beg you to give me your customary salutation. That I have written you my true sentiments is proved by my works on the holy Scriptures and against the Arians and Eunomians.
I will in addition write yet a brief word. If any one refuses to confess the holy Virgin to be “Theotokos,” or calls our Lord Jesus Christ bare man, or divides into two sons Him who is one only begotten and first born of every creature, I pray that he may fall from hope in Christ, and let all the people say amen, amen.
Now that I have thus spoken, deign, my lord, to give me your sacred prayers, and to cheer me by a letter in reply telling me that your holiness has turned your back on my accusers.
I and my household salute all thy brotherhood in piety in Christ.
Footnotes
279:1765Domnus succeeded his Uncle John at Antioch in 441.
279:17662 Cor. xii. 11
279:1767The first formal insertion of the addition filioque is said to be in a Creed put forth at a council of Toledo about a.d. 400. At the third council of Toledo a.d. 589, the Nicæno-Constantinopolitan Creed was promulgated with the addition—“ex Patre et Filio procedentem.”
279:1768Heb. i. 3
279:1769Rom. ix. 5
279:1770Rom. 1:3, 4
279:1771cf. note on page 213.
279:1772Eph. iv. 5
279:17731 Cor. viii. 6
279:1774Heb. xiii. 8
279:1775Ephes. iv. 10
279:1776John i. 14
279:1777John i. 15
280:1778John xx. 28
LXXXIV. To the Bishops of Cilicia. 1779
Your piety has heard of the calumnies directed against me. The opponents of the truth allege that I divide our one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, into two sons, and it is said by some that a ground for their calumny is derived from a handful of men among you who hold these opinions, and who divide God the Word made man into two sons. They ought to listen to those words of the Apostle which openly declare “one Lord Jesus Christ by whom are all things,” 1780 and again “one Lord, one faith, one baptism.” 1781 They ought to have followed the Master’s teaching, for the Lord Himself says “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in Heaven.” 1782 And again “If ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up where He was before.” 1783 And the tradition of holy baptism teaches us that there is one Son, just as there is one Father and one Holy Ghost. I hope then that your piety will deign, if there really are any, though I cannot believe it, who disobey the apostolic doctrines to close their mouths, to rebuke them as the laws of the Church require, and teach them to follow the footsteps of the holy Fathers and preserve undefiled the faith laid down at Nicæa in Bithynia by the holy and blessed Fathers, as summing up the teaching of Evangelists and Apostles. For it becomes you who love God to give heed both to God’s glory and our common credit, and not to overlook the attacks which are made upon us all through the ignorance or contentiousness of these few men—if they really are guilty, and if they are not, like ourselves, suffering from the whetted tongues of false accusers.
Deign to remember us in your prayers to God, for so the law of love ordains.
Footnotes
280:1779This encyclical is probably of the same date as the preceding.
280:17801 Cor. viii. 6
280:1781Ephes. iv. 5
280:1782John iii. 13
280:1783John vi. 62
LXXXV. To the Bishop Basil. 1784
The chief good is said by the divine Paul to be love, 1785 and by love he ordered the nurslings of the faith to be fed. Of this love your piety possesses great wealth, and so has told me what was befitting and given me pleasant news. For to them that fear the Lord what can be pleasanter than the health and harmony of the doctrines of the truth? Be well assured, most godly sir, that we were much delighted to hear the intelligence of our common friend; and in proportion to our previous distress at hearing that he described the nature of flesh and of Godhead as one, and openly attributed the passion of salvation to the impassible Godhead, so were all rejoiced to read the letters of your holiness, and to learn that he maintains in their integrity the properties of the natures and denies both the change of God the Word into flesh, and the mutation of the flesh into the nature of Godhead, maintaining on the contrary that in the one Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, God the Word made man, the properties of either nature abide unconfounded. We praise the God of all for the harmony of divine faith. We have however written to either Cilicia, 1786 although our intelligence is imperfect, as to whether there are really any opponents of the truth, and have charged the godly bishops to search and examine if there are any who divide the one Lord Jesus Christ into two sons, and either to bring them to their senses by admonition, or cut them off from the roll of the brethren. For in fact we equally repudiate both those who dare to assert one nature of flesh and Godhead, and those who divide the one Lord Jesus Christ into two sons and strive to go beyond the definitions of the Apostles.
But let your holiness be well assured that we are disposed to peace. For if the prophet says, “With them that hate peace I was peaceful,” 1787 much more readily do we welcome the peace of God.
Some of those men who have been fed on lies have hurried to Alexandria and patched up calumnies against me, with the result that the godly bishop of that city, led away by their statements, although he had been fully informed by my letters, has sent a pious bishop to the imperial city. I beg you therefore to shew your accustomed kindness to him, and to confront falsehood with the truth.
Footnotes
281:1784There appears to be nothing in this letter or in Letter CII. also addressed to bishop Basil to identify the recipient. Basil bishop of Seleucia in Isauria was at the Latrocinium and at Chalcedon. Basil, bishop of Trajanopolis was also present at the same councils. Garnerius is in favour of the former, and notes the date as 448.
281:17851 Cor. xiii. 13
281:1786Vide note on p. 44.
281:1787Ps. 120:6, 7Ps. cxx. 6 and 7. lxx.
LXXXVI. 1788 To Flavianus, Bishop of Constantinople.
At the present time, most God-beloved lord, I have received many buffetings of billows, but I called upon the great Pilot, and have been able to stand firm against the storm; the attacks, however, now made upon me transcend every story in tragedy. In relation to the attacks which are being plotted against the apostolic faith, I thought that I should find an ally and fellow-worker in the most godly bishop of Alexandria, the lord Dioscorus, 1789 and so sent him one of our pious presbyters, a man of remarkable prudence, with a synodical letter informing his piety that we abide in the agreement made in the time of Cyril of blessed memory, and accept the letter written by him as well as that written by the very blessed and sainted Athanasius to the blessed Epictetus, and, before these, the exposition of the faith laid down at Nicæa in Bithynia by the holy and blessed Fathers. We exhorted him to induce those who are unwilling to abide by these documents at once to abide by them. But one of the opposite party, who keep up these disturbances, by tricking some of those who are on the spot and contriving countless calumnies against myself has stirred an iniquitous agitation against me.
But the very godly bishop Dioscorus has written us a letter such as never ought to have been written by one who has learnt from the God of all not to listen to vain words. He has believed the charges brought against me as though he had made personal enquiry into every one of them, and had arrived at the truth after questioning, and has thus condemned me. I however have bravely borne the calumnious charge, and have written him back a courteous letter, representing to his piety that the whole charge is false, and that not one of the godly bishops of the East holds opinions contrary to the apostolic decrees. Moreover the pious clergy whom he sent as messengers have been convinced by the actual evidence of the facts. These however he has dismissed unheeded, and, lending his ears to my calumniators, has acted in a manner quite incredible, were it not that the whole church bears witness to it. He put up with them that were crying Anathema against me; nay he stood up in his place and confirmed their words by adding his voice to theirs. Besides all this he sent certain godly bishops to the imperial city, as we learnt, in the hope of increasing the agitation against me. I in the first place have for champion Him who seeth all things, for it is on behalf of the divine decrees that I am wrestling—next after Him I invoke your holiness to fight in defence of the faith that is attacked, and do battle on behalf of the canons that are being trodden under foot. When the blessed Fathers were assembled in that imperial city 1790 in harmony with them that had sat in council at Nicæa, they distinguished the dioceses, and assigned to each diocese the management of its own affairs, expressly enjoining that none should intrude from one diocese into another. They ordered that the bishop of Alexandria should administer the government of Egypt alone, and every diocese its own affairs. 1791
Dioscorus, however, refuses to abide by these decisions; he is turning the see of the blessed Mark upside down; and these things he does though he perfectly well knows that the Antiochene metropolis possesses the throne of the great Peter, who was teacher of the blessed Mark, and first and coryphæus of the chorus of the apostles. 1792
But I know the majesty of the see, and I know and take measure of myself. I have learnt from the first the humility of the Apostles. I beseech your holiness not to overlook the trampling underfoot of the holy canons, and to stand forward zealously as champion of the divine faith, for in that faith we have hope of our salvation and on its account are confident that we shall meet with mercy.
But that your holiness may not be ignorant of this, know, my lord, that he shewed his ill-will towards me from the time of my assenting, in obedience to the canons of the holy Fathers, to the synodical letters issued in your see in the time of Proclus of blessed memory; on this point he has chidden me once and again on the ground of my violating the rights of the church of Antioch and, as he says, of that of Alexandria. Remembering this, and finding, as he thinks, an opportunity, he has exhibited his hostility. But nothing is stronger than the truth. Truth is wont to conquer even with few words. I beseech your holiness to remember me in your prayers to the Lord that I may have power to prevail against the waves that are beating me hither and thither.
Footnotes
281:1788This important letter may be placed between the sentence of deposition issued by Dioscorus in Feb. 448 and the imperial edict of March 449; probably before November 448, when Eutyches was arraigned before the Synod of Constantinople presided over by Flavian.
281:1789cf. Letter LX, written probably not long after the consecration of Dioscorus in 444.
282:1790i.e. in Constantinople in 381. The second Canon of the Council is referred to,—confining each bishop to his own “diocese,” i.e. a tract comprising more than one province. So the bishop of Alexandria was restricted to Egypt.
282:1791The immediate cause of this enactment by the Constantinopolitan Fathers was the interference of Peter of Alexandria in the appointment to the see of Constantinople, when the orthodox party nominated Gregory of Nazianzus. cf. p. 136.
282:1792The third Canon of Constantinople had enacted that henceforth the see of the new capital should rank next after Rome. In the text the precedence of Antioch before Alexandria is based on association with St. Peter. “The so-called Cathedra Petri, which is kept in a repository of the wall of the apse of the Vatican Basilica,” and was “exhibited in 1866” “is probably a throne made for or presented to Charles the Bold in 875.” Dict. Christ. Ant. ii. 1960. For the connexion of St. Peter with Antioch see Routh Rell. Sac. i. 179.
LXXXVII. To Domnus, Bishop of Apamea. 1793
The law of brotherly love demanded that I should receive many letters from your godliness at this time. For the divine Apostle charges us to weep with them that weep and rejoice with them that do rejoice. 1794 I have not received a single one, although just lately I was visited by some of the pious monks of your monastery with the pious presbyter Elias. Nevertheless I have written, and I salute your holiness; and I make you acquainted with the fact that the consolation of the Master has stood me in stead of all other, for in truth not even had I as many mouths as I have hairs on my head, could I worthily praise Him for my being deemed worthy of suffering on account of my confession of Him, and for the apparent disgrace which I hold more august than any honour. And if I be banished to the uttermost parts of the earth all the more will I praise Him as being counted worthy of greater blessings. Nevertheless I hope your holiness will put up prayers for the quiet of the holy churches. It is because of the storm that is assailing them that I wail and groan and lament. That quiet, as I know, was driven away by the Osrhoene clergy, 1795 who poured out countless words against me, although I had no share in their condemnation, nor in the sentence passed upon them; on the contrary, as your holiness knows, I besought that the communion might be given to them at Easter. But slanderers find no difficulty in saying what they like. My consolation lies in the blessing of the Master who said, “Blessed are ye when men shall revile you and persecute you and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely for my sake; rejoice and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.” 1796
Footnotes
282:1793Domnus of Apamea is to be distinguished from Domnus II, bishop of Antioch the recipient of Letters XXXI, CX, CXII and CLXXX. He was present at Chalcedon in 451. This letter may be placed in 448–9.
282:1794Romans xii. 15. Observe the inversion.
282:1795The action of the Osrhoene clergy here referred to is their accusation of Theodoret’s friend Ibas of Edessa. The “sentence” was that of excommunication delivered by Ibas. The leaders of the cabal against him were instigated by Uranius, bishop of Himeria, one of Ibas’s suffragans. cf. note on p. 291.
283:1796Matt. 5:11, 12
LXXXVIII. To Taurus the Patrician. 1797
Slanderers have forced me to go beyond the bounds of moderation, and compel me to write to you who have adorned the highest offices, and obtained the most distinguished honours. I therefore implore you to pardon me, for I do not write in self sufficiency, but because I am thrust forward by necessity. It is not because I expect to fall unjustly into trouble and distress, for this is the common fate of all who have sincerely served God, but because I desire to persuade your excellency that those who accuse my opinions are producing false charges against me. From my mother’s breast I have been nurtured on apostolic teaching, and the creed laid down at Nicæa by the holy and blessed Fathers I have both learnt and teach. All who hold any other opinion I charge with impiety, and if any one persists in asserting that I teach the contrary, let him not bring a charge which I cannot defend, but convict me to my face. For this is agreeable to the laws alike of God and of man, but to whom is it so becoming to champion the wronged as to you, O friend of Christ, to whom boldness of utterance is given by the splendour of your lineage, the greatness of your rank and your foremost place in the law?
Footnotes
283:1797Garnerius dates Letters LXXXVIII–CIX in 447. They belong rather to 448–449.
LXXXIX. To Florentius the Patrician. 1798
In sending a letter to your greatness I am daring what is beyond me, but the cause of my daring is not self-confidence, but the slanders of my calumniators. I have thought it well worth while to instruct your righteous ears how openly the impugners of my opinions are calumniating me. I have been guilty, I own, of many errors, but up to now I have ever kept the faith of the apostles undefiled, and on this account alone I have cherished the hope that I shall meet with mercy on the day of the Lord’s appearing. On behalf of this faith I continue to contend against every kind of heresy; this faith I am ever giving to the nurslings of piety; by means of this faith I have metamorphosed countless wolves into sheep, and have brought them to the Saviour who is the Arch-shepherd of us all. So have I learnt not only from the apostles and prophets but also from the interpreters of their writings, Ignatius, Eustathius, Athanasius, Basil, Gregory, John, and the rest of the lights of the world; and before these from the holy Fathers in council at Nicæa, whose confession of the faith I preserve in its integrity, like an ancestral inheritance, styling corrupt and enemies of the truth all who dare to transgress its decrees. I invoke your greatness, now that you have heard from me in these terms, to shut the mouths of my calumniators. It is in my opinion wholly unreasonable to accept as true what is charged against men in their absence; rather is it lawful and right that those who wish to appear as prosecutors should accuse the defendants in their presence, and endeavour to convict them face to face. Under these conditions the judges will without difficulty be able to arrive at the truth.
Footnotes
283:1798Florentius, Præfect of the Imperial Guard, and already six times Præfect of the East, was present as a lay commissioner at the trial of Eutyches in 449 and at Chalcedon in 451.
XC. To Lupicinus the Master. 1799
I have passed through the contests of my prime. I see before me the confines of old age, and have expected as an old man to have more honour given me. But I am a mark for the shafts of slander, and am driven to meet by defence accusations levelled against me. Under these circumstances, I beseech your excellency not to believe the lies of my accusers. Had I been living a life of silence, there might have been room for the suspicion of unorthodoxy. But I am continually discoursing in the churches, and therefore have, by God’s grace, innumerable witnesses to the soundness of what I teach. I follow the laws and rules of the apostles. I test my teaching by applying to it, like a rule and measure, the faith laid down by the holy and blessed Fathers at Nicæa. If any one maintain that I hold any contrary opinion, let him accuse me face to face; let him not slander me in my absence. It is fair that even the defendant should have an opportunity of speech, and meet with his defence the charges brought against him, and that then and not till then should the judges lawfully pronounce their sentence. This favour I beg through your excellency’s assistance. If any men wish to condemn me unheard, I accept with willingness even their unjust sentence. For I wait for the judgment of the Master, where we need neither witnesses nor accusers. Before Him, as says the divine Apostle, “all things are naked and opened.” 1800
Footnotes
283:1799i.e., magister officiorum, one of the great state officers under the Constantinian constitution. He had control over posts, police, arsenals, and the imperial correspondence and, from his authority in the palace, was a kind of “comptroller,” or “master of the household.” cf. Rufinus, p. 123.
284:1800Heb. iv. 13
XCI. To the Prefect Eutrechius. 1801
I well know, and need no words to tell me, how your excellency regards me. Actions speak more clearly than words, but I have been anxious for you to know the cause of the accusation that is brought against me. For I am suffering under a most extraordinary charge, being at one and the same time attacked as unmarried, and as having been married twice. 1802 If my present calumniators assert that I am falsifying the apostolic doctrine, why in the world, instead of accusing me in my absence, do they not attempt to convict me face to face? This fact alone is enough to give utter refutation to their lies, for it is because they know that I have innumerable witnesses to the apostolic character of my doctrines that they have urged an undefended indictment against me. Lawful judges must on the contrary keep one ear unbiassed for the accused. If they give both to the pleadings of the opponents, and deliver a sentence acceptable to them, I shall put up with the injustice as bringing me nearer to the kingdom of heaven, and shall await that impartial tribunal, where there is neither prosecutor, nor counsel, nor witness, nor distinction in rank, but judgment of deeds and words and righteous retribution. “For,” it is said, “we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ that every one may receive the things done in his body according to that he hath done whether it be good or bad.” 1803
Footnotes
284:1801vide p. 267.
284:1802This appears to be merely a figurative description of the inconsistency of the charges, for there was no question of Theodoret’s being a “digamos.”
284:18032 Cor. v. 10
XCII. To Anatolius the Patrician. 1804
The very holy lord archbishop Domnus has arranged for the most pious bishops to repair to the imperial city, with a view to the complete refutation of the false accusation made against us all. At this time we stand in especial need of the aid of your magnificence, since the Lord of all has endowed you with the gifts of pure faith, of warm zeal in its behalf, of intelligence and capacity, and power withal to carry out your prudent counsels. I beg you therefore to defend the cause of the wronged, to contend against lies, and champion the apostolic teaching now assailed. Without doubt the master and guide of the churches will bless your endeavour, will scatter the lowering cloud, and bless the nurslings of the faith with clear sky. Even should He permit the tempest to prevail, your greatness will reap your perfect reward, and we shall bow our heads before the storm, ready to live with cheerfulness wheresoever it may drive us, and waiting the judgment of God and his true and righteous sentence.
Footnotes
284:1804Seven Letters are addressed to Anatolius; viz., XLV, LXXIX, XCII, CXI, CXIX, CXXI, and CXXXVIII.
XCIII. To Senator 1805 the Patrician.
I cherish an indelible memory of your magnificence, and now by very religious and holy bishops I salute you. The very holy lord bishop Domnus has arranged for them to journey to the imperial city in order to put an end to the false charges raised against me. For certain men have contrived manifest calumnies against me, and have grievously disturbed the churches for whose sake the Lord Christ “endured the Cross despising the shame”; 1806 in whose behalf the band of the divine apostles and companies of victorious martyrs were delivered to many kinds of death. On behalf of their peace I call on your magnificence to contend. It had been easy for the God of all to have nodded His head and scattered the lowering clouds; but He bides His time, and thereby at once shews the endurance of them that are assailed, and gives us opportunities of doing good.
Footnotes
284:1805Senator was consul in 436, three years after the probable date of Theodoret’s earlier letter to him (cf. Letter XLIV. p. 264.) He was present at Chalcedon.
284:1806Heb. xii. 2
XCIV. To Protogenes 1807 The Præfect.
The loving-kindness of the Lord has already given you an opportunity of carrying out your good intentions. He has given you a greater opportunity now, that your excellency may the more easily champion the cause of the truth that is assailed, bring lies to nought, and give the churches the calm for which they so intensely long. Your excellency has already learned from many other sources how great is the surge by which the churches in the East are overwhelmed, but you will acquire more accurate information concerning it from the very religious bishops who, on account of it, have undertaken their long journey in the winter, relying, next after the Grace of God, on the providence of your authority. Disperse for us, then, O Christian man, the storm, change the moonless night into clear sunshine, and bridle the tongues set wagging against us. We by God’s grace are ever fighting for the apostolic decrees, and we preserve undefiled the faith laid down at Nicæa, and style impious all who dare to violate its dogmas. In evidence of the truth of what I say may be cited my catechumens, those who are from time to time baptized by me, and the hearers of my discourses in the churches. If they mean to accuse me in accordance with the law, they must convict me in my presence, not slander me in my absence. In this manner your excellency, when giving judgment in other cases, is wont to deliver your sentences, perceiving on which side lies the right from the pleadings both of the prosecution and of the defence.
Footnotes
284:1807Protogenes was Præfect of the East and Consul in 449 and was present at the Council of Chalcedon.
XCV. To the Præfect Antiochus. 1808
You have laid aside the cares of your very important government, but your fame flourishes among all; for they that have reaped the fruit of your benevolence, and they are many and everywhere, persistently extol it, proclaiming your good report in all directions, and stirring their hearers’ tongues to join in the chorus of acclamation. When I behold the worthy fruit which adorns with its beauty its far-famed stem, I am delighted. For this reason I call your excellency to greater and higher deeds, and beseech you to give heed to the tranquillity of the churches. They have been overwhelmed with a great storm by the contrivers of calumnies against me, and under these circumstances the very religious bishops, making light of a long journey, of infirmity, and of old age, have left their own flocks unshepherded, and undertaken to travel this great distance, in their eagerness to confute the lies told against us all. I beseech your greatness to give them your protection, to shew care for the calumniated East, and your forethought for the welfare of the apostolic faith. It is only fitting that you should add this further glory to the rest of your good deeds.
Footnotes
285:1808Antiochus was Consul in 431.
XCVI. To Nomus the Patrician. 1809
I have written to you two letters, indeed I think three, but without getting any answer. I had wished to say no more, but to know my own place and the greatness of dignities, and to beg you to inform me of the cause of your silence. Really I do not know what offence I can have given to your excellency. We err unwillingly as well as willingly, and sometimes are quite ignorant in what way we are transgressing. I therefore beg your greatness, remembering the divine laws which plainly charge us “If thy brother shall trespass against thee go and tell him his fault between him and thee alone” 1810 to deign to make plain to me the origin of the annoyance, that I may either prove myself innocent, or, made aware of where I was wrong, may beg your pardon. In my confidence in the evidence of my conscience I hope for the former. All men are adorned by magnanimity, and not least those who, following the example of your excellency, trained in outside education as well as instructed in divine principles, both hear the apostolic laws loudly exclaiming “Let not the sun go down upon your wrath” 1811 and remember the words of Homer 1812
“In fit bounds contain thy mighty mind;
Benignity is best.”
I have thus written not as though giving you information, but to remind one who is much occupied, and I do so in remembrance of the law of the Lord, who says “Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother and then come and offer thy gift.” 1813 In obedience to these words I have thought it right to salute your excellency by the most pious bishops, and to exhort you to give heed to the tranquillity of the churches. They are indeed overwhelmed by a great storm.
Footnotes
285:1809cf. Letters LVIII and LXXXI. Nomus the consul and Nomus the patrician are distinguished in Schulze’s Index to the Letters, but there seems no reason to doubt their identity. Nomus the powerful minister of Theodosius II. was consul in 445 and patrician in 449, to which year this third letter may be referred.
285:1810Matt. xviii. 15
285:1811Ephes. iv. 26
285:1812Il. ix. 256. cf. pp. 104 and 255.
285:1813Matt. 5:23, 24
XCVII. To the Count Sporacius. 1814
I am delighted with your excellency’s letter. My pleasure has been increased by the very religious presbyter and monk Iamblichus, who has told me of your warm zeal, your earnestness in religion, and your real goodwill to me. On hearing of this as well as of the efforts of the glorious and pious lord Patricius 1815 on my behalf I give you the apostolic blessing which the blessed Onesiphorus obtained from that holy tongue; “The Lord give mercy to your house, for he oft refreshed. me and was not ashamed of my chain;” “The Lord grant unto him that he may find mercy of the Lord in that day.” 1816 This I pray for you, even though the enemies of the truth inflict on me yet greater miseries as they suppose; for we have been taught to regard men’s purpose; but be sure of this, that with true religion death to me is very pleasant, and exile to the ends of the earth. Still we are distressed at the storm of the churches, which the Lord of all is mighty to disperse.
Footnotes
285:1814Sporacius or Asporacius was present at Chalcedon in 451, as comes domesticorum, or one of the two commanders of the body guard. It was at his request that Theodoret wrote his Hæreticarum fabularum compendium which he dedicates “To the most magnificent and glorious lord Sporacius my Christ-loving son.” To Sporacius was also addressed the short treatise “adversus Nestorium” of which some editors have doubted the genuineness. The present letter may be dated in 449.
286:1815Cf. Letter XXXIV.
286:18162 Tim. 1:16, 182 Tim. i. 16 and 18
XCVIII. To Pancharius.
We are distressed to see the tempest of the churches, but their Master and Ruler ever through mighty billows shows to men His own wisdom and power. He rebukes the winds and brings about a calm as He did when He was in the apostles boat. 1817 So though I am distressed, nevertheless because I know this power of our Saviour and am aware of what He arranges for us, even though adversity befall me, I give thanks and accept it as a gift of God. I have learned the lesson to care little for the present, and to wait for the expected blessings. But it behoves your excellency zealously to defend the apostolic faith, that you may receive from the God of all the recompense of such conduct.
Footnotes
286:1817Matt. viii. 26
XCIX. To Claudianus the Antigrapharius. 1818
Although you have not yet met me, I think that your excellency is aware of the open calumnies that have been published against me, for you have often heard me preaching in church, when I have proclaimed the Lord Jesus, and have pointed out the properties alike of the Godhead and of the manhood; for we do not divide one Son into two, but, worshipping the Only-begotten, point out the distinction between flesh and Godhead. This, indeed, is I think confessed even by the Arians, who do not call the flesh Godhead, nor address the Godhead as flesh. Holy Scripture clearly teaches us both natures. Nevertheless, though I have ever thus spoken, certain men are uttering lying words against me. But I rely on my conscience and have as witness to my teaching Him who looks into the hearts. So, as the prophet says, I regard the contrivances of calumny as “a spider’s web.” 1819 I await the great judgment which needs no words, but makes manifest what in the meanwhile is unknown.
I send this by the very religious bishops, thinking it worth while to salute your excellency by them and to remind you of your promise. For attacked as I am I do not cease to go a-hunting, for I know that even the sacred apostles in the midst of the assaults made upon them did not cease to ply the net of the spirit.
Footnotes
286:1818“Fuit vero ἀντιγραφεὺς apud Græcos quem Galli vocant Contrôleur général des finances.” Garnerius.
286:1819Isaiah lix. 5
C. To Alexandra. 1820
I have recently received your excellency’s letter. For the zeal you have shewn on my behalf I thank you, and pray the God of all to guard the goods you have, to increase them with further boons, and to grant you the enjoyment of future and everlasting blessings. I think that He hears the prayer even of them that are sentenced to relegation, and all the more when it is for the sake of His divine doctrine that they are undergoing apparent disgrace. I am writing by the very religious bishops, and I beg that they may meet with your kindly care. It is for the sake of the faith of the gospel and the peace of the churches that they have undertaken this long journey.
Footnotes
286:1820cf. Letter XIV.
CI. To the Deaconess Celarina.
The flames of the war against us have been lit up again. After yielding awhile, the enemy of men has once more armed against us men nurtured in lies, who utter open slander against me, and say that I divide our one Lord Jesus Christ into two sons. I however know the distinction between Godhead and manhood, and confess one Son, God the Word made man. I assert that He is God eternal, who was made man at the end of days, not by the change of the Godhead, but by the assumption of the manhood. It is however needless for me to inform your piety of my sentiments, for you have exact knowledge of what I preach, and how I instruct the ignorant. I beseech you therefore since the workers of lies have poured their insults upon all the godly bishops of the East at once, and overwhelmed the churches with a storm, that your piety will show all possible zeal on behalf of the doctrines of the gospel and the peace of the churches. On this account the very godly bishops have left the churches shepherded by them, have disregarded the inclemency of winter, and endured the labours of their long journey, that they may calm the tempest which has arisen. I am sure that your godly excellency will regard them as champions of piety and governors of the churches.
CII. To Bishop Basilius. 1821
There is nothing remarkable in the reproaches that are directed against me being heard in silence by men who do not know me; but that your holiness should not refute the lies of my revilers, or at least should do so only to a certain extent, and with no great heartiness, passes the belief of any one who knows your character and conduct. And I say this not because friendship ought to be preferred to truth, but because the witness of truth is on the side of friendship. Your reverence has very often heard me preaching in church, and, in other assemblies where I have spoken on doctrinal questions; you have listened to what I have said, and I do not know of any occasion on which you have found fault with me for expressing unorthodox opinions. But what is the case at the present moment? Why in the world, my dear friend, do you not utter a word against falsehood, while you allow a friend to be calumniated and the truth to be assailed? If this is because you disregard the helpless and insignificant, remember the plain proclamation of the commandment of the Lord “Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones which believe in me, for I say unto you that in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.” 1822 If however it is the influence of my calumniators which imposes silence upon you, you must listen to the other law which says “Thou shalt not honour the person of the mighty” 1823 and “Judge righteous judgment” 1824 and “Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil” 1825 and “He that shutteth his eyes from seeing evil and stoppeth his ears from hearing of blood.” 1826 You may find innumerable similar passages in holy Scripture, which I have thought it needless to collect when writing to a man brought up in the divine oracles, and watering Christian people with his teaching. But this I will say, that we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ, and shall give account of our words and deeds. I, who for every other reason dread this tribunal, now that I am encompassed with calumny, find my chief consolation in the thought of it.
Footnotes
287:1821Cf. Letter LXXXV. There seems nothing to indicate whether this Basil is Basil of Seleucia or Basil of Trajanopolis, both of whom were present at the Latrocinium and took part against Theodoret. Garnerius refers it to the former, a time-server of the court.
287:1822Matt. 18:10, 6Matt. xviii. 10 and 6
287:1823Leviticus xix. 15
287:1824John vii. 24
287:1825Ex. xxiii. 2
287:1826Isaiah xxxiii. 15. Observe the inversion.
CIII. To the Count Apollonius. 1827
The very godly bishops have been led to travel to the imperial city by the calumnies uttered against me, and I by their holinesses send your excellency my salutation, and pay the debt of friendship, not indeed to wipe out the cherished obligation, but to make it greater. For in truth the obligations of friendship are increased by their discharge. That I should now be reaping the fruits of calumny is not extraordinary, for, in that I am human, there is nothing that I must not expect. All troubles of this kind must be borne by them that have learned wisdom; one thing only is distressing—that harm should accrue to the soul.
Footnotes
287:1827Cf. Letter LXXIII. Apollonius was “comes sacrarum largitionum” in 436.
CIV. To Flavianus, 1828 Bishop of Constantinople.
I have already in another letter informed your holiness how openly the calumniators of our teaching are slandering us. 1829 Now in like manner by means of the very godly bishops I do the same, having not only these as witnesses of the orthodoxy of my teaching but also countless other men who are my hearers in the churches of the East. Above and beyond all these I have my conscience, and Him who sees my conscience. And I know too how the divine Apostle often appealed to the testimony of his conscience, for “our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience” 1830 and again “I say the truth in Christ I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost.” 1831 Know then, O holy and godly sir, that no one has ever at any time heard us preaching two sons; in fact this doctrine seems to me abominable and impious, for there is one Lord Jesus Christ through whom are all things. Him I acknowledge both as everlasting God and as man in the end of days, and I give Him one worship as only begotten. I have learned however the distinction between flesh and Godhead, for the union is unconfounded. Thus drawn up as it were in battle array to oppose the madness of Arius and Eunomius, we very easily refute the blasphemy hazarded by them against the only begotten, by applying what was spoken in humility about the Lord, and suitably to His assumed nature, to man, and, on the other hand, what becomes the divine and signifies the divine nature, to God; not dividing Him into two persons, but teaching that both the former and latter attributes belong to the only begotten, the latter to Him as God the Creator and Lord of all, and the former as made man on our account. For divine Scripture says that He was made man, not by mutation of the Godhead, but by assumption of human nature, of the seed of Abraham. This the divine Apostle openly says in the words “For verily He took not on Him the nature of angels, but He took on Him the seed of Abraham, wherefore in all things it behoved Him to be made like unto His brethren.” 1832 And again “Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made: he saith not and to seeds, as of many; but as of one, and to thy seed, which is Christ.” 1833
These and similar passages have been cut out of divine Scripture by Simon, Basilides, Valentinus, Bardesanes, Marcion, and the man who is named after his maniacal heresy. 1834 So they style the Master Christ God only, and describe Him as having nothing human about Him, but appearing in imagination and appearance as man to men. On the other hand the Arians and Eunomians say that God the Word assumed only a body, and that He Himself supplied the place of a soul in the body. And Apollinarius describes the Master’s body as endued with a soul; 1835 but, deriving, I know not whence, the idea of a distinction between soul and intelligence, 1836 deprives intelligence of its share in the achieved salvation. 1837 The teaching of the divine Apostles lays down on the contrary that a soul both reasonable and intelligent was assumed together with flesh, and the salvation of which the hope is held out to them that believe is complete.
There is yet another gang of heretics who hold differently. Photinus, 1838 Marcellus, 1839 and Paul of Samosata, 1840 assert that our Lord and God was only man. When arguing with these we are under the necessity of advancing proofs of the Godhead, and of shewing that the Master Christ is everlasting God. When, on the other hand, we are contending with the former faction, which calls our Lord Jesus Christ God only, we are obliged to marshal against them the forces of the divine Scripture, and collect from it evidence of the assumption of the manhood. For a physician must use remedies appropriate to the disease, and suit the medicine to the case.
Now, therefore, I beseech your holiness to scatter the slander raised against me, and bridle the tongues now vainly reviling me. For, after the incarnation, I worship one Son of God, one Lord Jesus Christ, and denounce as impious all who hold otherwise. Deign, sir, to give me too your holy prayers, that, by God’s grace, I may reach the other side of the ocean of danger, and drop my anchor in the windless haven of the Lord.
Footnotes
287:1828Cf. Letters XI. and LXXXVI. This letter may probably be placed between the sentence of internement and the assembling of the Latrocinium.
287:1829Compare Letter LXXXVI.
287:18302 Cor. i. 12
287:1831Rom. ix. 1
288:1832Heb. 2:16, 17
288:1833Gal. iii. 16
288:1834i.e. Manes.
288:1835᾽έμψυχον
288:1836ψυχή and νοῦς
288:1837cf. pp. 132 and 140.
288:1838Disciple of Marcellus. cf. Soc. ii. 30. Theodoret, in his interpretation of the Ep. to the Hebrews, links him with Sabellius. (Ed. Migne. iii. 547.)
288:1839cf. p. 139.
288:1840Patriarch of Antioch 260–270. Bp. Wordsworth calls him “the Socinus of the 3rd c.” Samosata (Samsat) was capital of the Commagene in Syria.
CV. To Eulogius the Œconomus. 1841
We have heard from many sources of your piety’s efforts on behalf of true religion. It is therefore right that you should readily succour one who is calumniated for the same cause, and should refute the reviler’s lies. You, O godly Sir, know what I hold, and what I teach, and that no one has ever heard of my preaching two sons. Exert, I implore you, in this case too your divine energy, and stop the mouths of the evil speakers. In conflicts of this kind one must help not only one’s friends but even those who have caused us pain.
Footnotes
288:1841In an ecclesiastical sense the title œconomus was used of
(i) the treasurer of a particular church: e.g. Cyriacus of Constantinople (Chron. Pasch. p. 378).
(ii) a diocesan official. The Council of Chalcedon ordered that every diocese should have its œconomus.
(iii) the custos monasterii, who had charge of the secular affairs of the monastery, as the diocesan œconomus of those of the diocese.
CVI. To Abraham the Œconomus.
By the godly bishops I salute you. I beseech you to give heed to the churches’ calm, and to disperse the waves of calumny. “Whatsoever a man soweth that shall he also reap,” 1842 as says the divine Apostle. Without doubt then he who fights for the apostolic doctrines shall reap the fruit of the apostolic blessing and enjoy the Apostles’ devotion.
Footnotes
288:1842Gal. vi. 7
CVII. To the Presbyter Theodotus.
The struggles which your piety has undergone on behalf of the apostolic doctrines are not unknown, but are frequently mentioned alike by those who have known them by experience, and by others who have heard of them from these. Continue, my dear sir, your efforts, and fight for the doctrines of the Fathers. For these I too am buffeted in all directions and, while I receive the shock of the great waves, I beseech our Governor either to nod his head and scatter the tempest, or enable the victims of the storm by His grace to play the man.
CVIII. To Acacius the Presbyter.
True indeed is the promise of David’s Psalm, for through him the Spirit of truth gave this promise to them that believe, “Commit thy way unto the Lord, trust also to him; and he shall bring it to pass; and he shall bring forth thy righteousness as the light and thy judgment as the noonday.” 1843 This we find too has come to pass in the case of your piety. For the great care you bestow upon them that are weeping for their orphanhood, and your struggles on behalf of the apostolic doctrines, are in every one’s mouth, and so, as the prophets say, “Hidden things are made manifest.” Since I too have heard of your piety’s admirable exertions I write to salute you, most godly sir, and beseech you to increase your glory by adding to your labours, and to fight on behalf of the doctrine of the Gospels, that we may both keep the inheritance of our fathers unimpaired, and bring our Master His talent with good usury. 1844
Footnotes
289:1843Ps. 37:5, 6
289:1844On the care of orphans in the early church vide Ig. Ep. Smyrn. VI. and Bp. Lightfoot’s note. At Constantinople the Orphanotrophus was a priest of high rank.
CIX. To Eusebius, Bishop of Ancyra. 1845
Many are the devices secretly plotted against me, and through me patched up against the faith of apostles. I am however comforted by the sufferings of the Saints, Prophets, Apostles, Martyrs, and men famous in the churches in the word of Grace; and besides these by the promises of our God and Saviour, for in this present life He has promised us nothing pleasant or delightful, but rather trouble, toil, and peril, and attacks of enemies. “In the world,” He says, “ye shall have tribulation,” 1846 and “if they have persecuted me they will also persecute you,” 1847 and “If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub how much more shall they call them of his household,” 1848 and “The time cometh when whosoever killeth you will think he doeth God service,” 1849 and “Straight is the gate and narrow the way which leadeth unto life,” 1850 and “When they persecute you in this city flee you into another,” 1851 and I might quote all similar passages. The divine Apostle too speaks in the same strain. “Yea and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution, but evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived.” 1852 These words give me the greatest comfort in this distress. As the calumnies uttered against me have probably reached your holiness’s ears, I beseech your holiness to give no credence to the lies of my slanderers. I am not aware of ever having taught anyone up to the present time to believe in two sons. I have been taught to believe in one only begotten, our Lord Jesus Christ, God the Word made man. But I know the distinction between flesh and Godhead, and regard as impious all who divide our one Lord Jesus Christ into two sons, as well as those who, travelling in an opposite direction, call the Godhead and manhood of the master Christ one nature. For these exaggerations stand opposed to one another, while between them lies the way of the doctrines of the Gospel, beautified by the footprints of prophets and apostles, and of all who after them have been conspicuous for the gift of teaching. I was anxious to adduce their opinions, and to point out how they bear witness in favour of my own, but I want more words than a letter allows room for, wherefore I have written summarily what I have been taught about the incarnation of the only begotten; I send my statement to your godly excellency. 1853 I have written not with the object of teaching others, but of making my defence against the accusations brought against me, and of explaining my sentiments to those who are ignorant of them. After your holiness has read what I have written, if you find it in conformity with the apostolic doctrines, I hope you will confirm my opinion by what you reply—if, on the contrary, anything that I have said jars with the divine teaching, I request to be told of it by your holiness. For, though I have spent much time in teaching, I still need one to teach me. “We know,” says the divine Apostle “in part,” 1854 and again he says, “If any man think that he knoweth anything he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.” 1855 So I hope that I may hear the truth from your holiness, and that you may also give heed to the calm of the Church, and fight for the divine doctrines. It is for their sakes that the very godly bishops, making light of the difficulties of the journey, and of the winter, have set out for the imperial city, in the endeavour to bring about some end to the storm. Send them I pray you, on their way with your prayers and with your prayers too strengthen me. 1856
Footnotes
289:1845Cf. Letter LXXXII.
289:1846John xv. 33
289:1847John xv. 20
289:1848Matt. 25
289:1849John xvi. 2
289:1850Matth. vii. 14
289:1851Matth. x. 23
289:18522 Tim. 3:12, 13
289:1853Garnerius supposes this to refer to Dial. II.
289:18541 Cor. xiii. 9
289:18551 Cor. viii. 2
290:1856The route of the bishops would be by land, in consequence of the dangers of the sea voyage in winter time. From Ancyra (Angora) they would follow the course of the Sangarius into Bithynia, and would cross thence via Chalcedon to Constantinople.
CX. To Domnus, Bishop of Antioch. 1857
When I read your letter I remembered the very blessed Susannah, who when she saw the famous villains, and believed that the God of all was present, uttered that remarkable cry, “I am straitened on every side;” 1858 but nevertheless preferred to fall into the snares of slander rather than to despise the just God. And I, sir, have two alternatives as I have often said, to offend God and wound my conscience, or to fall by man’s unjust sentence. The most pious emperor, I think, knows nothing of this. For what hindered him from writing, and ordering the ordination to take place, if in truth it so pleased him? Why in the world do they utter threats without and cause alarm, and yet do not send letters openly ordering it? One of two things must be true; either the very pious emperor is not induced to write, or they are trying to make us break the law and afterwards be indicted by them for illegality. I have before me the example of the blessed Principius, 1859 for in that case, when they had given orders by writing, they punished him for obedience. Moreover the letters which I read on the very day of the letter-bearer’s arrival are of a contrary tenour. For one of the holy monks has written to some one that he has received letters both from the very illustrious guardsman and the very glorious ex-magister stating that the case of the very godly lord bishop Irenæus will stand more favourably, and in return for this good will they ask prayers on their behalf. I think therefore that a reply ought to be written to the clergy who have written from the imperial city to the effect that 1860 “in obedience to the sentence of the very godly bishops of Phœnicia, and knowing both the zeal and the magnanimity and love for the poor and all the other virtues of the very godly bishop Irenæus, and in addition to this the orthodoxy of his opinions, I have ordained him. I am not aware that he has ever objected to apply to the holy Virgin the title ‘Theotokos,’ or has ever held any other opinions contrary to the doctrines of the Gospel. As to the question of digamy, I have followed my predecessors; for Alexander of blessed and sacred memory, the ornament of this apostolic see, as well as the very blessed Acacius, bishop of Berœa, ordained Diogenes of blessed memory who was a ‘digamus;’ 1861 and similarly the blessed Praylius ordained Domninus of Cæsarea who was a ‘digamus.’ 1862 We have therefore followed precedent, and the example of men well known and illustrious both for learning and character. Proclus, bishop of Constantinople, of blessed memory well aware of this and many other instances, both himself accepted the ordination, and wrote in praise and admiration of it. So too did the leading godly bishops of the Pontic Diocese, 1863 and all the Palestinians.
“No doubt has been raised about the matter, and we hold it wrong to condemn a man illustrious for many and various noble actions.” In my opinion it is becoming to write in these terms. If your holiness holds any other view, let what seems good to you be done. I, as they suppose, have undergone one punishment, and am ready by God’s help to undergo yet another. Even a third and fourth, if they like, by the stay of God’s grace I will endure, praising the Lord. If your holiness thinks right, let us see what answer comes from Palestine, and, after considering more exactly what course is to be taken, let us so write to Constantinople.
Footnotes
290:1857This letter is placed by Garnerius in the end of 447 on account of its allusion to Proclus, who died in October 447, and to the deposition of Irenæus of Tyre, for which the formal edict was issued in Feb. 448, but which was perhaps rumoured earlier. But by some the death of Proclus is placed a year earlier.
290:1858Susannah 22
290:1859Of the blessed Principius nothing is known. cf. Tillemont, XV. 267.
290:1860“The phraseology of this letter has given rise to much misapprehension. The use of the first person has led some to suppose that Theodoret, who belonged to another province, was the consecrator of Irenæus, or that he took part in his consecration, or even with the Abbé Martin (le Pseudo-Synode d’Éphèse, pp. 84, 85) that it is erroneously ascribed to Theodoret, and was really written by Domnus. It is clear from the tenor of the epistle that it was written by Theodoret, and that the first person is employed by him as writing in Domnus’ name. (Tillemont xv. pp. 871, 872.)” Dict. Christ. Biog. iii. 281 n.
It is in consonance with this theory that Alexander of Antioch is described as bishop of this apostolic see, a phrase natural for Domnus to use, but not for Theodoret.
290:1861It is uncertain who this Diogenes was; he cannot have been Diogenes of Cyzicus, for he was alive and present at Chalcedon in 451.
290:1862No more is known of Domninus or Praylius. cf. p. 157. “It is clear from the Philosophumena of Hippolytus (ix, 12.) that by the beginning of the third century the rule of monogamy for the clergy was well established, since he complains that in the days of Callistus ‘digamist and trigamist bishops, priests, and deacons began to be admitted.’” Dict. Christ. Ant. i. 552.
290:1863The Pontic Diocese is one of the twelve civil divisions of the Constantinian empire.
CXI. To Anatolius the Patrician. 1864
Your excellency will be recompensed for the kindness you have shewn me by the God of all, for all that is done for His sake has its reward. I laugh at all my slanderers. The bodies of them who are most severely scourged do not feel the pain, because the scourged flesh is deadened. Still I lament over them whose unrestrained mouths utter such lies. In what way have the accusers of the godly bishop Ibas 1865 been wronged by me that they should utter such calumnies against me? To begin with, I was not even one of the judges, for in obedience to the imperial decree I was living at Cyrus. Moreover, as I have heard from many, they all along treated my absence as a grievance, for I had arranged for their partaking of the Holy Communion at the Easter feast of salvation, 1866 and as they often expressed a wish to meet me, I received them with kindness and advised them as to the proper course to take. But that I may also speak in the defence of the very godly bishop the lord Domnus, what was the proper course for him to take? He was openly attacked; he saw men deposed by a synodical sentence sent into another diocese, and resuming their priestly functions in violation of the laws of the Church; he saw things holy and divine laughed at and turned into ridicule by the enemies of the Church; what was he to do? When he knew this he handed over the case to others, and not only to the very godly lord Ibas, but also to the holy lord bishop Symeon of Amida, that the metropolitans of the two provinces might hear the charges. What fairness is there in charging the same persons with cruelty and kindness? If we excommunicate, we run into danger; if we do not excommunicate, we do not escape it. We alone of all the world are objects of attack. Other dioceses are at peace. We alone are exposed to calumniators,—specially I myself, though I took no part in the trial, and am absolutely without responsibility in the matter.
Thus have I been forced to write on reading your lordship’s letter, and on learning from it how for these reasons a great commotion has been made against me, a man confined to my diocese; a man of peace; one not even deliberating with the godly bishops of the province. As a matter of fact, although there have been already two episcopal ordinations in our province, I took part in neither. Were I not restrained by the imperial decree I would have gone away, and spent the remainder of my days in some remote spot. I am faint for the plots hatched against me. I am sure those Edessenes never put together their slander against me of their own accord. They were prompted to these attacks on me by their truly truthful neighbours. I thank our Saviour that he has deemed me worthy of the beatitudes of the Gospel, all unworthy though I be. For this reason I have gladly accepted the sentence of relegation. I am ready for exile, and, for the sake of the “hope laid up for me,” 1867 welcome whatever fate they may inflict. I pray without ceasing for your excellency, and beseech all the saints to share in my petitions.
Footnotes
290:1864This letter is in reply to that written by Anatolius on the receipt of Letter XCII. Garnerius, who places the decree of relegation earlier than Tillemont, dates it at about the end of April 448.
291:1865The leaders of the attack on Ibas, (bishop of Edessa and metropolitan, in 436) were four presbyters, Samuel, Cyrus, Eulogius, and Maras. The cabal chose the moment for action when Domnus visited Hierapolis for the enthronization of Stephen, and in 445 Ibas was summoned by Domnus to Antioch, but did not come. In 448 the eighteen charges—some frivolous, some of gross heresy—were formally heard, and Domnus decided in favor of Ibas. cf. p. 283, note.
291:1866i.e. recommended Ibas not to excommunicate his accusers.
291:1867Col. i. 5
CXII. To Domnus, Bishop of Antioch. 1868
When news was brought to me that the pettiness of the victorious emperor had been put an end to, a reconciliation effected between him and the very godly bishop, 1869 the summons to the council cancelled, and the peace of the churches restored, I hoped that our troubles were a thing of the past. But I am deeply distressed at what I hear from your holiness. It is impossible to hope for any good from this notorious council, unless the merciful Master with His wonted providence shall undo the riotous demons’ devices. Even in the great synod, I mean that of Nicæa, the Arian party voted with the orthodox and set their hands to the apostolic exposition. But they did not cease to war against the truth till they had torn asunder the body of the Church. For thirty years the supporters of the apostolic doctrines and they who were infected with the Arian blasphemy continued in communion with one another. But at Antioch, 1870 when the latest council was finished, when they had seated the man of God, the great Meletius, on the apostolic throne, and then after a few days ejected him by the imperial authority, Euzoius who was affected with the undoubted plague of Arius was put forward, and straightway the champions of apostolic doctrines seceded and thereafter the division continued.
As I look back on what happened then, and look forward to similar events in the future, my wretched spirit sighs and wails, for I see no prospect of good. The men of the other dioceses do not know the poison which lies in the Twelve Chapters; 1871 having regard to the celebrity of the writer of them, they suspect no mischief, and his successor in the see 1872 is I think adopting every means to confirm them in a second synod. For supposing he who lately wrote them at command, and anathematized all who did not wish to abide by them, were presiding over an œcumenical council, what could he not effect? And be well assured, my lord, that no one who knows the heresy they contain will brook to accept them, though twice as many men of this sort decree them. Before now, though a larger number have rashly confirmed them, I resisted at Ephesus, and refused to communicate with the writer of them till he had agreed to the points laid down by me, and had harmonized his teaching with them, without making any mention of the Chapters. This your holiness can ascertain without any difficulty if you order the acts of the synod to be investigated; for they are preserved as is customary with the synodical signatures, and there are extant more than fifty synodic acts shewing the accusation of the Twelve Chapters. For before the journey to Ephesus the blessed John 1873 had written to the very godly bishops Eutherius of Tyana, Firmus of Cæsarea, and Theodotus of Ancyra, denouncing these Chapters as Apollinarian. 1874 And at Ephesus the exposition and confirmation of these Chapters was the cause of our deposition of the Alexandrian and of the Ephesian. 1875 Moreover at Ephesus many synodic letters were written both to the victorious emperor, and to the great officers, about these Chapters; and in like manner to the laity at Constantinople and to the reverend clergy. Moreover when we were summoned to Constantinople we had five discussions in the imperial presence, and afterwards sent the emperor three protestations. And to the very godly bishops of the West, of Milan I mean, of Aquileia, and of Ravenna, we wrote on the same subject, protesting that the Chapters were full of the Apollinarian novelty. Furthermore their writer received a letter from the blessed John by the hands of the blessed Paul, 1876 openly blaming them; and in like manner from Acacius of blessed memory. And to give your holiness concise information on the subject I have sent you both the letter of the blessed Acacius, as well as that of the blessed John to the blessed Cyril, in order that you may perceive that though they were writing to him on the subject of agreement they blamed these Chapters. And the blessed Cyril himself, in his letter to the blessed Acacius plainly indicated the drift of these Chapters in the words “I have written this against his innovations and when peace is made they will be made manifest.” The very defence proves the accusation. I have sent you the copy of what he wrote at the time of the agreement, that you may see, my lord, that he made no mention of them, and that those who attend the Council are under an obligation to bring forward what was written at the time of the agreement, and to state plainly what had caused the difference and on what terms the sundered parts were atoned. For they who are summoned to fight for the truth must flinch from no toil, and must invoke the divine aid, that we may preserve unimpaired the heritage bequeathed us by our forefathers.
Your holiness must look out for men of like mind among the godly bishops and make them companions of your journey; and likewise of the reverend clergy those who are zealous for the truth, lest betrayed even by them of our own side we are either driven to do something displeasing to the God of all, or, in our abandonment, fall an easy prey to our foes.
It is faith in which we have our hopes of salvation, and we must leave no means untried to prevent aught spurious being brought into it, and the apostolic teaching from being corrupted.
I write you these words from far away, with sighs and with groans, and I beseech our common Master to scatter this dark cloud and bestow on us once more the boon of the bright sunshine.
Footnotes
291:1868Garnerius points out that the indications of the date of this letter are clear. It mentions the imperial summons to the Latrocinium, and contains Theodoret’s advice to Domnus as to what companions he should take with him. It must therefore be placed between the arrival of the summons at Antioch and the departure of Domnus for Ephesus. The summons is dated the 30th of March, and appointed the 1st of August for the meeting. Antioch is a clear thirty days’ journey from Ephesus and Domnus had not yet chosen his companions. We may therefore date the letter in the May of 449.
291:1869Presumably Irenæus of Tyre.
291:1870i.e., in 361. For Theodoret’s account of the circumstances vide pp. 92, 93.
292:1871Cyril wrote his IIIrd letter to Nestorius probably on Nov. 3, 430. “To the end of the letter were appended twelve ‘articles’ or ‘chapters,’ couched in the form of anathematisms against the various points of the Nestorian theory.” “These propositions were not well calculated to reclaim Nestorius; nor were they indeed so worded throughout as to approve themselves to all who essentially agreed with Cyril as to the personal Deity of Christ. On the contrary the abruptness of their tone, and a certain one-sidedness…made some of them open, prima facie, to serious criticism from persons who, without being Nestorians, felt that in the attack on Nestorianism the truth of Christ’s real and permanent manhood might be in danger of losing its due prominence.” Canon Bright, Dict. Christ. Biog. i. 766.
292:1872Dioscorus succeeded Cyril at Midsummer, 444.
292:1873i.e. John of Antioch. He reached Ephesus June 27, 431.
292:1874Eutherius of Tyana (Kiliss Hissar in Karamania) was a strong Nestorian, and signed the appeal of Nestorius after his deposition in 431. On July 17th John and his adherents were deposed. Firmus of the Cappadocian Cæsarea (still “Kasaria”) himself a graceful letter writer, was an anti-Nestorian. Theodotus of Ancyra also sided with Cyril.
292:1875i.e. Cyril and Memnon. “No sooner had John reached Ephesus, than before he had washed and dressed after his journey, in the inn itself, late at night, in secret session, by the connivance of the Count Candidianus, a sentence was passed on Cyril and Memnon—on Cyril on the accusation of Theodoret.” Cf. Garnerius Hist. Theod., and Cyril. Ep. ad Cœlest. Labbe iii. 663.
292:1876John of Antioch sent Paul of Emesa to confer with Cyril on terms of peace in 432.
CXIII. To Leo, Bishop of Rome. 1877
If Paul, the herald of the truth, the trumpet of the Holy Ghost, hastened to the great Peter 1878 in order that he might carry from him the desired solution of difficulties to those at Antioch who were in doubt about living in conformity with the law, much more do we, men insignificant and small, hasten to your apostolic see 1879 in order to receive from you a cure for the wounds of the churches. For every reason it is fitting for you to hold the first place, inasmuch as your see is adorned with many privileges. Other cities are indeed adorned by their size, their beauty, and their population; and some which in these respects are lacking are made bright by certain spiritual boons. But on your city the great Provider has bestowed an abundance of good gifts. She is the largest, the most splendid, the most illustrious of the world, and overflows with the multitude of her inhabitants. Besides all this, she has achieved her present sovereignty, and has given her name to her subjects. She is moreover specially adorned by her faith, in due testimony whereof the divine Apostle exclaims “your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.” 1880 And if even after receiving the seeds of the message of salvation her boughs were straightway heavy with these admirable fruits, what words can fitly praise the piety now practised in her? In her keeping too are the tombs that give light to the souls of the faithful, those of our common fathers and teachers of the truth, Peter and Paul. 1881 This thrice blessed and divine pair arose in the region of sunrise, and spread their rays in all directions. Now from the region of sunset, where they willingly welcomed the setting of this life, they illuminate the world. They have rendered your see most glorious; this is the crown and completion 1882 of your good things; but in these days their God has adorned their throne 1883 by setting on it your holiness, emitting, as you do, the rays of orthodoxy. Of this I might give many proofs, but it is enough to mention the zeal which your holiness lately shewed against the ill-famed Manichees, proving thereby your piety’s earnest regard for divine things. Your recent writings, too, are enough to indicate your apostolic character. For we have met with what your holiness has written concerning the incarnation 1884 of our God and Saviour, and we have marvelled at the exactness of your expressions.
For both writings agreed in setting forth both the everlasting Godhead of the Only-begotten derived from the everlasting Father, and the manhood derived from the seed of Abraham and David; and that the nature assumed was in all things like unto us, being unlike to us in this respect alone, that it remained free from all sin; since it springs not of nature but of free will.
The letters moreover contain this, that the Only-begotten Son of God is one, and his Godhead impassible, immutable, and invariable, like the Father who begat Him and the Holy Spirit; and that on this account He took the passible nature, divine nature being incapable of suffering, that by the suffering of His own flesh He might bestow freedom from suffering on them that have believed in Him. These statements and others of like nature were contained in your letters. We, in admiration of your spiritual wisdom, have lauded the grace of the Holy Ghost uttered through you, and we invoke and beseech and beg and implore your highness to protect the churches of God that are now assailed by the storm.
We had expected that through the instrumentality of the representatives 1885 sent by your holiness to Ephesus, the tempest would have been done away, but we have fallen under severer attacks of the storm. For the very righteous bishop of Alexandria was not content with the illegal and very unrighteous deposition of the most holy and godly bishop of Constantinople, the lord Flavianus, nor was his soul satisfied with a similar slaughter of the rest of the bishops, but me too in my absence he stabbed with a pen, without summoning me to the bar, without trying me in my presence, without questioning me as to my opinions about the incarnation of our God and Saviour. Even murderers, tomb-breakers, and adulterers, are not condemned by their judges until they have themselves confirmed by confession the charges brought against them, or have been clearly convicted by the testimony of others. Yet I, nurtured as I have been in the divine laws, have been condemned by him at his pleasure, when all the while I was five and thirty days’ march away.
Nor is this all that he has done. Only last year when two fellows tainted with the unsoundness of Apollinarius had gone thither and patched up slanders against me, he stood up in church and anathematized me, and that after I had written to him and explained my opinions to him.
I lament the disturbance of the church, and long for peace. Six and twenty years have I ruled the church entrusted to me by the God of all, aided by your prayers. Never in the time of the blessed Theodotus, 1886 the chief bishop of the East; never in the time of his successors in the see of Antioch, did I incur the slightest blame. By the help of God’s grace working with me more than a thousand souls did I rescue from the plague of Marcion; many others from the Arian and Eunomian factions did I bring over to our Master Christ. I have done pastoral duty in eight hundred churches, for so many parishes does Cyrus contain; and in them, through your prayers, not even one tare is left, and our flock is delivered from all heresy and error. He who sees all things knows how many stones have been cast at me by evil heretics, how many conflicts in most of the cities of the East I have waged against pagans, against Jews, against every heresy. After all this trial and all this danger I have been condemned without a trial.
But I await the sentence of your apostolic see. I beseech and implore your holiness to succour me in my appeal to your fair and righteous tribunal. Bid me hasten to you, and prove to you that my teaching follows the footprints of the apostles. I have in my possession what I wrote twenty years ago; what I wrote eighteen, fifteen, twelve, years ago; against Arians and Eunomians, against Jews and pagans; against the magi in Persia; on divine Providence; on theology; and on the divine incarnation. By God’s grace I have interpreted the writings of the apostles and the oracles of the prophets. From these it is not difficult to ascertain whether I have adhered to the right rule of faith, or have swerved from its straight course. Do not, I implore you, spurn my prayer; regard, I implore you, the insults piled after all my labours on my poor grey head.
Above all, I implore you to tell me whether I ought to put up with this unrighteous deposition or not; for I await your decision. If you bid me abide by the sentence of condemnation, I abide; and henceforth I will trouble no man, and will wait for the righteous tribunal of our God and Saviour. God is my witness, my lord, that I care not for honour and glory. I care only for the scandal that has been caused, in that many of the simpler folk, and especially those whom I have rescued from various heresies, cleaving to the authority of my judges and quite unable to understand the exact truth of the doctrine, will perhaps suppose me guilty of heresy.
All the people of the East know that during all the time of my episcopate I have not acquired a house, not a piece of ground, not an obol, not a tomb, but of my own accord have embraced poverty, after distributing, at the death of my parents, the whole of the property which I inherited from them.
Above all I implore you, O holy sir, beloved of God, to grant me the help of your prayers. I have told you this by the reverend and godly presbyters Hypatius and Abramius chorepiscopi 1887 and by Alypius exarch 1888 of our monks. I would hasten to you myself were I not kept back by the chains of the imperial order, which imprison me as they do others. Treat my messengers, I beseech you, as a father might his sons; give them kindly and unbiassed audience; deign to grant your protection to my old age, 1889 slandered as it is and attacked in vain. Above all, regard, to the utmost of your power, the faith conspired against; preserve for the churches the inheritance of their fathers unimpaired. So will your holiness receive the recompense due for such deeds from the great Giver of all good gifts. 1890
Footnotes
293:1877This celebrated letter may be dated towards the end of 449, allowing time for news to reach Theodoret of his deposition at the Latrocinium on August 11. In 445 Leo had procured the well known decree from Valentinian III, addressed to the famous Aetius in connexion with the dispute with Hilary of Arles, constituting the bishop of Rome the chief authority in the Western Church, basing his demands not so much on the recognised precedence of the imperial see as on the supposed primacy of St. Peter. But in 451, only two years after the date of Theodoret’s letter the council of Chalcedon (Can. xxviii), after recording the canon (iii) of Constantinople that “the bishop of Constantinople shall have the primacy of honour after the bishop of Rome, because that Constantinople is new Rome,” added “we decree the same things concerning the privileges of Constantinople, which is new Rome. The Fathers formerly gave the primacy to the see of old Rome, because she was the imperial city, and gave like privileges to new Rome, rightly judging that the city which enjoyed like imperial privileges should also be honoured in matters ecclesiastical, being next in rank.” We are yet very far from later claims. Indeed even Gregory the Great when he protested against the title of œcumenical bishop, assumed by John the Faster, did not claim it for himself.
293:1878Paul and Barnabas went up to Jerusalem, not to Peter, but “unto the Apostles and elders.” Acts xv. 2. Peter took a leading part in the discussion, but the “sentence” was pronounced not by Peter, but by James, and the decree was that of “the Apostles and elders with the whole Church.” The slight “wresting” of the scriptures of which Theodoret is guilty is due rather to a desire to compliment an important personage than in anticipation of later controversies.
293:1879Rome was the only apostolic see in the West.
293:1880Rom. i. 8
293:1881The traditional places of sepulture are, of half of each of the holy bodies, the shrine of SS. Peter and Paul in the crypt of St. Peter’s; of the remaining moiety of St. Peter the Lateran; of St. Paul, St. Paolo fuori le Mura.
293:1882Κολοφών. cf. note on page 262.
293:1883St. Paul is treated as in a sense bishop of Rome. The idea may have some bearing on the hypothesis sometimes adopted, to avoid the difficulties in the early Roman succession, that there was a Gentile line derived from St. Paul, who ordained Linus, and after him Cletus; and that for the Jewish brethren St. Peter ordained Clement.
293:1884His dogmatic epistles and his sermons. He is not known to have written any large treatise.
293:1885Dioscorus presided, and next him sat Julius of Puteoli, who in company with the presbyter Renatus, and the deacon Hilarius (successor to Leo in the papacy) had carried to Flavian the famous “tome” of Leo in June 449. Leo (Epp. XXXII. and XXXIV.) describes his legates as sent “de latere meo.” According to one version of the story Renatus died at Delos on the way out. Labbe IV. 1079.
294:1886Patriarch at Antioch 420–429.
294:1887No word exactly renders the title of these ministers, discharging functions of an episcopal kind, though without high responsibility. They are first mentioned in the Councils of Ancyra and of Neo-Cæsarea and fifteen of them subscribed the decrees of Nicæa.
294:1888Exarch, in its most ordinary ecclesiastical sense nearly equivalent to patriarch, came also to be used of officers charged with the visitation of monasteries.
294:1889If born in 386 (Garnerius), Theodoret would now be 63. Tillemont says 393.
295:1890The tone of this letter, it need hardly be said, is quite inconsistent with the later idea of an “appeal to Rome.” It is “an appeal,” but the appeal of a wronged man for the support, succour, and advice, of a brother bishop of the highest position and character. It does not on the face of it suggest that Leo has any authority to review or alter the sentence of the council. Tillemont (Mém. Ecc. xv. 294) observes that though addressed to Leo in person the appeal is really made to the bishops of the West in council. Leo remonstrated, but Theodosius and his court maintained that the decrees of the Latrocinium must stand.
CXIII. (a). 1891 From Pope Leo to Theodoret.
To our much beloved brother Theodoretus, bishop, Leo, bishop.
Footnotes
295:1891In Migne’s edition here follows the reply of Leo to Theodoret, which appears as Letter CXX. in the works of Leo.
CXIV. 1892 To Andiberis.
The reverend presbyter Peter is distinguished not only by his priestly rank, but also by his wise practice in medicine. During his long residence with us he has won all hearts by his conciliatory manners. On learning of my departure he has now determined to leave Cyrus; I therefore commend him to your excellency, and hope that, fully capable as he is of doing good service to the city,—for when he lived at Alexandria he practised the same profession,—he will meet with kindness at your hands.
Footnotes
295:1892Written after the deposition at Ephesus, and when Theodoret is either on the point of departing, or has departed, from Cyrus to the Apamean monastery. The simultaneous exercise of the clerical and medical professions points perhaps to the continuance of the class of “Silverless martyrs,” i.e. physicians who took no fee but healed on condition that their patients should turn to Christ. The legendary Saints of the unfeed faculty are Cosmo and Damian, the brothers whose church occupies the site of the Temple of Remus, or of the Penates, in the Roman Forum.
CXV. To Apella.
When I undertook the direction of the see of Cyrus, I procured for it from all directions men who practised necessary arts, and besides this induced skilful physicians to live there. Of these one is the reverend presbyter Peter, who practises his profession with wisdom, and adorns it by his character. On my departure, several have left the city and Peter also has determined to leave. Under these circumstances I beseech your excellency to give him your kind care. He is well able to attend the sick and to wage war against their ailments.
CXVI. 1893 To the Presbyter Renatus.
We have heard of the warm and righteous zeal of your holiness, and the just and lawful boldness of speech which you employed in condemning the audacious proceedings at Ephesus. Nor is this known to us alone, but the fame of your orthodoxy has gone out into all lands, and all men are celebrating your righteousness, your zeal, your boldness, and your denunciation of my unfair treatment. And your holiness took this course after seeing one massacre. If you had seen the others which took place after your departure you would perhaps have emulated the fervour of the famous Phinehas. 1894 I am one of those who was subsequently condemned, being forbidden by the imperial order to attend the council, and sentenced in my absence. 1895
Six and twenty years have I been a bishop; innumerable labours have I undergone; I have struggled hard for the truth; I have freed tens of thousands of heretics from their errors and brought them to the Saviour; and now they have stripped me of my priesthood; they are exiling me from the city. For my old age, for my hairs grown gray in the truth, they have no respect. Wherefore, I beseech your sanctity, persuade the very sacred and holy archbishop 1896 to bid me hasten to your council. For that holy see has precedence over all churches in the world, for many reasons; and above all for this, that it is free from all taint of heresy, and that no bishop of heterodox opinion has ever sat upon its throne, but it has kept the grace of the apostles undefiled. 1897 Confident in your justice I shall accept your decisions, whatever they may be, and shall claim to be judged by my writings. More than thirty books have I written against Arius and Eunomius, against Marcion, against Macedonius, against the heathen and against Jews; I have interpreted the holy Scriptures, and any one who likes may easily learn that I have followed in the steps of the apostles, proclaiming the one Son, one Father, and one Holy Ghost; one Godhead of the Trinity, one sovereignty, one power, eternity, immutability, impassibility, one will; 1898 that the Godhead of the Lord Jesus Christ was perfect, perfect the manhood taken for our salvation and for our sakes delivered unto death. I do not know one Son of man and another Son of God, but one and the same, Son of God and God begotten of God, and Son of man, through the form of the servant, of the seed of Abraham and David. These and like doctrines I continue to teach; these also I have found in the writings of the most holy and sacred lord archbishop Leo, and I praise the Lord of all that I agree with his apostolic doctrines. Receive, I beseech you, my supplication, and do not overlook the wrongs under which I suffer. On this account I have sent to your holiness the godly presbyters Hypatius and Abramius, chorepiscopi, and Alypius exarch of our monks, adorned as they are by good lives, and able by word of mouth to give you exact information as to the affairs of my insignificant self.
Footnotes
295:1893This letter will be of the same date as CXIII. Theodoret was aware that Leo was to be represented at the Latrocinium by Renatus as well as by Julius of Puteoli and the archdeacon Hilarius, but had not heard that he had never reached Ephesus. We are told on the authority of Felix, the author of the “Breviarium Hæresis Eutychianæ” that Renatus died at Delos on the way out. This death is however discredited by Quesnel and some other authorities.
295:1894Numbers xxv. 7
295:1895Hilarius did leave Ephesus before the second session of the council (Cf. Leo Ep. XLVI) and before the deposition of Theodoret. The “massacre” may refer to the brutal treatment of Flavian by the adherents and bullies of Dioscorus.
295:1896i.e. Leo.
295:1897This is more or less true up to the time of Leo the great, but Leo the great was the first pope who was an eminent theologian. Liberius is a doubtful case. Cf. page 76.
295:1898The Monothelite Controversy dates from two centuries after Theodoret, when Heraclius was trying to bring about religious union in his empire. Pope Honorius asserted two energies, but one will. Monothelitism was definitely condemned at Constantinople in 681, and Honorius anathematized.
CXVII. To the Bishop Florentius. 1899
Truly the grace of our God and Saviour has not yet abandoned the human race, but has left us a seed in your holiness “lest we should become as Sodom, and be made like unto Gomorrah.” 1900 This seed suffers us not altogether to faint, but charges us to wait for the passing away of the dire storm; this renders us hopeful.
We have therefore sent to your holiness the very godly presbyters Hypatius and Abramius, chorepiscopi, and Alypius, exarch of our monks, that you may put an end to the disaster which has befallen the churches of the East; that in the first place you may confirm the faith handed down to us from the first by the holy Apostles, may proscribe the heresy that has started up, and openly convict the men who have the hardihood to debase the preaching of the Œconomy; 1901 and secondly may fight as champion of them who are being attacked for the truth’s sake. For it is in the cause of the apostolic Faith, most holy, that we have undergone that unrighteous massacre, because we refused to abandon the truth of the Gospel doctrines. Now it behoves your holiness not to overlook the unjust persecution of men of like mind with yourself, but by your just help to put a stop to injustice, and teach the assailants of the truth that men who strive to act unscrupulously at their own good pleasure cannot be allowed to work out their ends.
Footnotes
296:1899There were at this time two well known personages of the name of Florentius to whom this letter may possibly have been addressed. Florentius the patrician, recipient of Letter LXXXIX., and Florentius bishop of Sardis. Against the former hypothesis are the terms of the letter; against the latter the character and sympathies of the metropolitan of Lydia, if, as Garnerius thinks, he was an Eutychian. Canon Venables (Dict. Christ Biog. II. 540) supposes a Florentius bishop of a nameless western see. Garnerius and others think the letter was probably really addressed to the clergy or bishops assembled in synod at Rome.
296:1900Romans ix. 25
296:1901Vide page 72.
CXVIII. To the Archdeacon of Rome. 1902
A terrible storm has attacked our churches, but the adherents of the apostolic faith have in your holiness a safe and quiet haven. Not only do you champion the cause of the doctrines of the Gospel, but you utterly detest the wrong done to me. I was living far away at a distance of thirty-five days’ journey, when I was condemned at their good pleasure by those most righteous judges. Teaching which has obtained in the churches from the coming of God our Saviour till this day they have abandoned. They have introduced a novel and bastard doctrine, diametrically contrary to the tradition of the apostles, and are openly at war with them that hold to the ancient instruction. Deign, then, most godly sir, to kindle the zeal of the very sacred and holy archbishop, that the churches of the East too may enjoy your kindly care. Above all fight in behalf of the faith delivered from the beginning by the holy apostles; preserve the heritage of our fathers unimpaired, and scatter the mist that oppresses us. Give us instead of moonless night clear sunshine, and condemn the wickedness of the massacre unrighteously wrought against us. It is becoming to your holiness to add yet this act of zeal to your other good deeds.
Footnotes
296:1902Cf. note on page 293. Garnerius however is doubtful whether the archdeacon is Hilarius or another. The evidence seems in favour of the identity.
CXIX. To Anatolius the Patrician. 1903
Your excellency has been fully informed as to the acts of the most righteous judges at Ephesus, for their sound has gone out into all lands and their most just judgment to the ends of the world. 1904 What church has not felt the storm that has been raised by it? The one side wronged, the other were wronged, but they who neither suffered nor did the wrong share the distress of the wronged, and lament over them that so savagely and against all laws human and divine massacred their own members. Even house breakers caught in the very act are first tried and then punished by their judges; even murderers, violators of sepulchres, and adulterers, are first haled before the bench, and their accusers ordered to make their indictment, and the motive of the witnesses is tested to see that they are not giving evidence to curry favour with the prosecutors, or are prejudiced against the defendants; and after this they are bidden to make their defence to the charges brought against them. This is done twice, thrice; sometimes even four times; and then, and not till then, after the truth has been sought in the words of both accuser and accused, the sentence is given. As to how these men judged in the case of the rest I will say nothing, lest I may seem a meddler in what does not concern me. I am forced to speak on behalf of myself alone, for the unrighteous deed of violence compels me. The imperial order kept me at home, and prevented me from travelling beyond the bounds of the city placed under my pastoral care. The decision of the synod went against me, and a man was condemned who was five and thirty days’ journey away.
Now the God of all said to the patriarch Abraham about Sodom and Gomorrah: “Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is very great and because their sin is very grievous; I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it which is come unto me; and if not, I will know.” 1905 He knew quite well the wickedness of those men, and nevertheless He said, “I will go down and see,” so teaching us to wait for the proof of facts. But these men never summoned me to trial, they never heard the sound of my voice, they refused to hear from me a statement of my opinions, and handed me over, as a victim to be slaughtered, to the rage of the enemies of the truth.
I, however, welcome my rest, and especially so at the present time, when the apostolic decrees have been by many destroyed, and the new heresy strengthened. But lest any one who does not know me should believe that the slanders uttered against me are true, and should be scandalized at the idea of my holding opinions other than those of the gospel, I implore your excellency to ask as a favour from the victorious sovereign that I may go to the West, and there plead my cause before the very godly and holy bishops; and if I be found transgressing in the least degree the rule of the faith, that I may be plunged into the midst of the deep sea. If he will not grant you this request, let him at least command me to inhabit my monastery, 1906 which is a hundred and twenty miles away from Cyrus, seventy-five from Antioch, and lies three miles away from Apamea.
Of these petitions, if possible, I ask the former; if not at least I implore that, through your excellency’s interposition, the second may be granted me. I shall ever carry the memory of your kindness in my heart and on my lips, supplicating the Lord of hosts to requite your excellency as well with present as with future blessings. I am compelled to write to you in these terms because I have heard that certain persons are endeavouring to compass my removal from this place.
Footnotes
296:1903This letter is of the same date as the rest of the present series. Theodoret has heard of his deposition and is expecting the sentence of banishment.
296:1904Cf. Psalm xix. 4
297:1905Gen. 18:20, 21
297:1906i.e. Nicerte.
CXX. To Lupicius. 1907
Even the enemies of the truth must, I think, be indignant at the injustice and illegality of the violence done us. It is only reasonable that the nurslings of the truth, at whose head stands your excellency, should be still more distressed at this new and surprising tragedy. It is only right that those who are the more grieved should show the more earnestness and zeal to counteract the deeds impiously and illegally done; and restore to its previous concord the Church’s body now in peril of being torn asunder. Wherefore I beseech your excellency to reckon the present crisis an opportunity for spiritual reciprocity; to give on your side earnestness on behalf of the truth, and to receive from our generous Master alike His kindly care in this present life and in the life to come the kingdom of heaven.
Footnotes
297:1907Garnerius reads Lupicinus and identifies him with the recipient of Letter XC. Letter CXX is of the same date as the preceding.
CXXI. To Anatolius the Patrician. 1908
The Lord who overlooks and governs all things has shewn both the apostolic truth of my doctrines, and the falsehood of the slander laid at my door. For the writings sent from the right godly and holy lord Leo, archbishop of Great Rome, to Flavianus of holy memory and to the rest assembled at Ephesus, are entirely in harmony with what I myself have written and have always preached in church. So soon therefore as I had read them, I praised the loving-kindness of the Lord, in that He had not wholly forsaken the churches, but had protected the spark of orthodoxy; or—shall I not rather say?—not a spark, but a very great torch, such as might enkindle and enlighten the world; for he has truly, in his writings, observed the apostolic stamp, and in them we have found at once what has been delivered by the holy and blessed prophets and apostles, and their successors in the preaching of the Gospel, and moreover the holy Fathers assembled at Nicæa. By these I confess that I abide, and indict all who hold other doctrines as guilty of impiety. Side by side with these writings of mine I have set one of the letters sent by him to Ephesus, to the end that when your excellency reads them you may remember the words which I have often spoken in church, may recognise the harmony of the doctrines, and may hate the utterers of the lie as well as those who have set up their new heresy in opposition to the doctrines of the Apostle.
Footnotes
297:1908This letter may be dated shortly after Letter CXIX. Garnerius points out that it contains a short summary of the orthodox tradition, but makes no mention of the council of Ephesus in 431.
CXXII. 1909 To Uranius 1910 Bishop of Emesa.
I have been greatly delighted that we who correspond in character should have corresponded by letter. But I do not quite see what you mean by saying “Are not these my words?” If it were said only for the sake of salutation, I am not annoyed at it; but if it is intended to remind me of the advice which recommended silence, and of the so-called œconomy, 1911 I am very much obliged, but I do not accept the suggestion. For the divine Apostle charges us to take quite the opposite course. “Be instant in season and out of season.” 1912 And the Lord says to this very spokesman, “Be not afraid, but speak” 1913 and to Isaiah, “Cry aloud, spare not” 1914 and to Moses “Go down, charge the people” 1915 and to Ezekiel “I have made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel,” and it shall be “if thou warn not the wicked,” 1916 and the like: for I think it needless to write at length to one who knows. Not only therefore are we not distressed at having spoken freely, but we even rejoice and are glad, and laud Him who has thought us worthy of these sufferings; aye and call on my friends to encounter the same perils.
If they know that we do not keep the apostolic rule of the faith, but swerve to the right hand or the left, let them hate us; let them join the opposite side; let them be ranked with them that are at war with us. But if they bear witness to our holding the right teaching of the gospel message, we hail them with the cry, “Do you too ‘stand having your loins girt about with truth,…and your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace,’” 1917 and so on, for it is said that virtue comprises not only temperance, righteousness, and prudence, but also courage, and that by means of courage the rest of its component parts are preserved. For righteousness needs the alliance of courage in its war against wrong; temperance vanquishes intemperance by the aid of courage. And for this reason the God of all said to the prophet “The just shall live by his faith, and if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him.” 1918 Shrinking he calls cowardice. Hold fast then, my dear friend, to the apostolic doctrines, for “He that shall come will come, and will not tarry,” 1919 and “He shall render to every man according to his deeds,” 1920 for “the fashion of this world passeth away,” 1921 and the truth shall be made manifest.
Footnotes
298:1909The two following letters are written from the monastery at Nicerte where Theodoret found a retreat after his banishment from Cyrus. Garnerius would place the former late in 449, and the latter early in 450.
298:1910Uranius, bishop of Emesa in Phœnicia, was present at the two trials of Ibas, at Tyre in February and at Berytus in September 448. At the Latrocinium he was accused of immorality and of episcopal usurpation. It was during his episcopate that the head of the Baptist was supposed to be found at Emesa. Cf. notes on pp. 96 and 242.
298:1911Cf. note on p. 72. Here οἰκονομία is used for discreet silence like the German “Zurückhaltung,” and the French “ménagement.” Cf. the Socratic ἐρωνεία and the Latin dissimulatio.
298:19122 Tim. iv. 2
298:1913Acts xviii. 9
298:1914Isaiah lviii. 1
298:1915Exodus xix. 21
298:1916Ezek. 3:17, 19. inexact quotation.
298:1917Ephes. vi. 14
298:1918Heb. 10:38, Hab. 2:4Heb. x. 38. Cf. Hab. ii. 4. Sept. Note inverted quotation of Habakkuk.
298:1919Heb. x. 37
298:1920Rom. ii. 6
298:19211 Cor. vii. 31
CXXIII. To the Same.
Your letter was a long one, and a pleasant one, and it shews how warm and genuine is your affection. So delighted am I with it that I am not at all sorry for having erroneously conjectured the meaning of the beginning of your former one. For my misapprehension of the intention of your letter has disclosed your brotherly love, made plain the sincerity of your faith, and shewn your zeal for the true religion. We have indeed shared between us the words and the trials of the prophet; your holiness has used the words; I am buffeted by the hurricane and billows, and against the rowers of the ship I exclaim in his words “They that observe lying vanities forsake their own mercy.” 1922 Perhaps He who is Jonah’s Lord and mine will grant that I too may rise and be released from the monster. But if the surge continue to boil I trust that even thus I shall enjoy the divine protection, and learn by my own experience how His strength is “made perfect in weakness,” 1923 for He has measured the peril by my infirmity. The divine prophet whom I have mentioned was flung into the sea by his shipmates one and all, but I am granted the consolation of your holiness, and of other godly men. For them and for your godliness I pray that the blessing bestowed upon the excellent Onesiphorus may be yours, for you have not blushed at my gibes; nay rather you have shared in my afflictions for the faith’s sake.
And one thing which I wish you to know is that, though other godly bishops have sent me their bounty, I have declined to receive it;—not from any want of respect to the senders, God forbid;—but because hitherto food convenient for me has been provided by Him Who gives it even to the ravens without stint. In the case of your reverence I have acted differently, for really the warmth of your affection has overcome what has hitherto been my fixed principle. For be well assured, my godly friend, that ever since friendship grew up between us the fire of our love has been kindled to greater heat.
Footnotes
298:1922Jonah ii. 8
298:19232 Cor. xii. 9
CXXIV. To the Learned Maranas. 1924
I too am distressed at the calamities of the Church, and wail over the storm that is raging; for myself I am glad to be quit of agitation, and to be enjoying a calm which is delightful to me. As to the men whom your learning states to be still carrying on their iniquities, the day is not far distant when they will pay the penalty of their present rash lawlessness. All things are governed by the Lord of all with weight and rule, and whenever any fall away into unbounded iniquity His long suffering comes to an end, and He then acts as Judge and appoints punishment. Foreseeing this I pray that they may cease from their license that I may not be compelled to weep once more for them as I behold them undergoing chastisement.
Your excellency I can never forget, and I beg our common Master to fill your house with blessing.
Footnotes
299:1924Cf. Letter LXVII. This letter may be dated during Theodoret’s banishment to Nicerte in 449, and is evidently in reply to a letter of condolence from the advocate.
CXXV. To Aphthonius, Theodoritus, Nonnus, Scylacius, Apthonius, Joannes, Magistrates of the Zeugmatensis.
I know the strength and stability of your faith, and have been filled with the greatest possible delight, for, since we worshippers of the eternal Trinity constitute one body, it is only natural that together with the members that are sound the rest of the members should rejoice. So says the divine Apostle; “Whether one member be honoured all the members rejoice with it.” 1925 I therefore rejoice with you in your struggles on behalf of the apostolic doctrines and your following of the famous Naboth in more excellent things. Naboth for his vineyard’s sake suffered most unrighteous slaughter, because he would not give up the heritage of his fathers. You are fighting not for vineyards, but for divine doctrines, and reject this new-fangled and spurious heresy as blackening the brightness of the teaching of the gospel; you do not suffer the number of the blessed Trinity to be diminished or increased. For it is diminished by those who ascribe the passion of the only begotten to the Godhead; it is increased by those who have the audacity to introduce a second son. You believe in one only begotten, as you do in one Father and in one Holy Ghost. In the only begotten made flesh you behold the assumed nature which He took from us and offered on our behalf. The denial of this nature puts our salvation far from us; for if the Godhead of the only begotten is impassible, as the nature of the Trinity is impassible, and we refuse to acknowledge that which is by nature adapted to suffer, then the preaching of a passion which never happened is idle and vain. For if that which suffers has no existence how could there be a passion? We declare that the divine nature is impassible;—a doctrine confessed by our opponents as well as by ourselves. How then could there be a passion when there is no subject capable of suffering? The great mystery of the œconomy will appear an appearance, a mere seeming instead of the reality. This is the fable started by Valentinus, Bardesanes, Marcion and Manes. But the teaching handed down to the churches from the beginning recognises, even after the incarnation, one Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, and confesses the same to be everlasting God, and man made at the end of days; made man not by the mutation of the Godhead but by the assumption of the manhood. For suppose the divine nature to have undergone mutation into the human nature, then it did not remain what it was; and if it is not what it was, they who have these objects of worship are false in calling Him God. We, on the contrary, recognise the only begotten Son of God to be immutable as God, and Son of the very God. For we have learnt from the divine Scripture that being in the form of God He took the form of the servant; 1926 and took on Him the seed of Abraham, not was changed into Abraham’s seed; and shared just as we do both in flesh and blood and in a soul immortal and immaculate. Preserving these for our sinful bodies He offered His sinless body and for our souls His soul free from all stain. It is for this reason that we have the hope of the common resurrection for the race will assuredly share with its first fruits, and as we have shared with Adam in his death, so too with Christ our Saviour shall we be sharers in His life. This the divine Apostle has plainly taught us, for “now” he says “is Christ risen from the dead and become the first fruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead, for as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” 1927
I write thus not to inform you but to remind you. I have tried to be brief, but I fear I have transgressed the limits of a letter. I was however urged to write by the very reverend and godly presbyter and archimandrite Mecimas, who, in obedience to the law of love, has undertaken so long a journey, told us of your excellency’s zeal, and begged us to inflame it by a letter. I have therefore granted his supplication, and written my letter, and I implore the Lord of all to keep you safe in the faith and make stronger than him who sifts us. 1928
Footnotes
299:19251 Cor. xii. 26
299:1926Phil. ii. 6 and 7
300:19271 Cor. 15:20, 21, 22
300:1928cf. Luke xxii. 31
CXXVI. To the Bishop Sabinianus. 1929
I praised your holiness on your quitting the envied see. Once it was venerable; now it is ridiculous, for we have made it a thing to be bought and sold. I was astounded to hear of your having appealed to the men who ejected you. You ought to have done just the contrary, and, on being invited to grasp the tiller, to have declined to do so, on the ground that your shipmates had become your foes. Are you not aware, most godly sir, what our Saviour, through His sacred apostles, taught us to preach? Do you not know what the heirs of the apostolic doctrines have just now laid down as objects of worship? For who of the old teachers from the time when the message was first preached down to the period of the darkness that now obtains, ever listened to any one preaching one nature of flesh and Godhead or dared at any time to call the nature of the only begotten passible? These doctrines in our day are by some men openly and boldly uttered, while among others their utterance is overlooked, and by silence men become participators in the blasphemy. What then, may well be asked, is the proper course to be taken by those who abominate such doctrines? They have, I should reply, two alternatives before them; they may either come to close quarters, and prove the spuriousness of the doctrines, or they may decline communion with their opponents as openly impious.
I, indeed, have received the wrong done me as a divine blessing. I do not mean that I have thanked them that have wronged me; how could I thank fratricides, and men who have become followers of Cain?
But I praise my Master for thinking me worthy of the lot of them that suffer wrong, for separating me from wrong-doers and blasphemers, and for giving me my most delightful rest.
Footnotes
300:1929Sabinianus succeeded Athanasius bishop of Perrha on the deposition of the latter at Antioch in 445. He was deposed at the Latrocinium and Athanasius restored. Both bishops signed at Chalcedon as bishops of Perrha (Labbe iv, 602, 590. Dict. Christ. Biog. iv, 574. The letter may be dated 450. Theodoret chides Sabinianus for appealing to the dominant wrong doers against his expulsion.
CXXVII. To Jobius, Presbyter and Archimandrite. 1930
The patriarch Abraham won a victory in his old age. 1931 The great Moses was now an old man when, so long as he stretched out his hands in prayer, he vanquished Amalek. 1932 The divine Samuel 1933 was an old man when he put the aliens to flight. These are emulated by your venerable old age. In our wars for true religion’s sake you are playing the man, and championing the cause of the gospel doctrines, and putting young men in the shade by the vigour of your spirit.
I rejoice to hear it, and am glad, and long to embrace your right venerable gray hairs. This I cannot do, for your reverence is kept at home by your years, and I am kept in durance here by the imperial decree. But I cheat my love by this letter, and give your piety this most loving embrace. I call upon you in your prayers to help the churches now whelmed in the storm, and to win for me the divine support, assailed as I am for the sake of the doctrines of the gospel, and standing sorely in need of help from above.
Footnotes
300:1930Jobius was an orthodox archimandrite of Constantinople, and subscribed the deposition of Eutyches by the hand of his deacon Andreas at Constantinople in 448. (Labbe iv, 232) In 450 Leo addresses him with other archimandrites (Ep. LXXI page 1012). This letter seems to have been written about the time of the Latrocinium.
300:1931Gen. xiii. 15
300:1932Ex. xvii. 13
300:19331 Sam. vii. 12
CXXVIII. To Candidus, Presbyter and Archimandrite. 1934
I am afraid that the vigour of your godly soul has been overcome by old age, and that you do not keep your hands stretched out as usual. So Amalek is trying to win. May there be some to succour your weakness, as once of old Ur and Aaron supported the hands of the law-giver, that you may overthrow Amalek and save Israel. These are days when we specially need more earnest prayers, when Gentiles and Jews and every heresy are at peace, and the Church alone is beaten by the storm and surrounded by the boisterous billows.
We indeed specially need the aid of your prayers, for those whom we reckoned to be fighting on our side are fighting on that of our foes.
Footnotes
300:1934Garnerius would date this letter at the time of the council of Chalcedon.
CXXIX. To Magnus Antoninus the Presbyter. 1935
Sailors at night are cheered by the sight of the harbour lights, and so are they who are in peril for the sake of the apostolic faith by the zeal of them that share the faith. We have great comfort in what we hear of your godliness’s efforts on behalf of the divine doctrines, for this mind has been given you by the Giver of all good gifts and for the safe keeping of these doctrines you undergo every toil. Now I, comforted by your zeal, make an insignificant return, calling on you to persevere in your divine labours, to despise your adversaries as an easy prey, (for what is weaker than they who are destitute of the truth?) and to trust in Him who said “I will not fail thee nor forsake thee,” 1936 and “Lo I am with you alway even unto the end of the world.” 1937 Help me too with your prayers that I may confidently say “The Lord is on my side; I will not fear: what can man do unto me?” 1938
Footnotes
301:1935Garnerius supposes that this Antoninus is the same as the Antoninus mentioned as living in Theodoret’s Religious History and thinks that the Solitary may have become an Archimandrite after 445 when the Religious History was written, but the mss. vary as to the superscription of the letter, which may be addressed to Magnus, Antonius and others.
301:1936Joshua i. 5
301:1937Matthew xxviii. 20
301:1938Psalm cxviii. 6
CXXX. To Bishop Timotheus. 1939
Not without purpose does the supreme Ruler allow the spirits that are against us to agitate the waves of impiety. He does so that He may try the courage of the sailors, and, while He exhibits some men’s manliness, convicts others of cowardice, stripping the mask from the faces of some who put on an appearance of piety, and proclaiming others as foremost fighters in the ranks of the truth. We have seen an instance of this in the present time. The storm rose high; some shewed their secret impiety; some abandoned the truth which they were holding, went over to the phalanx of our foes, and now, with them, are smiting the very men whom they used to call their chiefs. The witnesses of these things detest the enemy and pity the deserters, but are afraid to give aid to the victims of the attack upon the apostolic doctrines. Nay, suppose the traitors to urge them with greater insistency, they will perhaps themselves pass over to the side of the assailants, will give no quarter to their fellow-believers, but will drive against them their barbs side by side with the very men whom they accuse. They will act thus though they have been taught by the divine Scripture that a wrong done to one’s neighbour incurs punishment, while the suffering of injustice entails great and lasting rewards.
Your own piety, your zeal for the faith, and your good will to myself, have been proved by this agitation. Twice you have written me a letter in contempt of all that might deter you, and have thus shewn your brotherly affection. You have also indicated the conflict you are sustaining on behalf of the apostolic doctrines. You ask me to tell you by letter what we ought to think and preach concerning the passion of salvation. I have received your request with delight, and, not indeed to give you information but only to remind one who is beloved of God, will proceed to tell you what I have learnt from the divine Scripture and from the Fathers who have interpreted it.
Know then, most godly sir, that before all things it is necessary to observe the distinction of terms, and, in addition to this, the cause of the divine incarnation. Once let these be made clear, and there will be no ambiguity left about the passion. We will therefore first, to those who endeavour to contradict us, put this enquiry. Which of the names given to the only begotten Son of God are anterior to the incarnation, and which posterior, or rather, connected with the operation of the œconomy? They will reply that the terms anterior are, “God the Word,” “only begotten Son,” “Almighty,” and “Lord of all creation”; and that the names “Jesus Christ” belong to the incarnation. For, after the incarnation, God the Word, the only begotten Son of God is called Jesus Christ; for “Behold” He says “unto you is born this day Christ the Lord” 1940 and because others had been called christs, priests, kings, and prophets, lest any one should suppose Him to be like unto them, the angels conjoined the title Lord with that of Christ, in order to prove the supreme dignity of Him that was born. And, again, Gabriel says to the blessed Virgin, “Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son and shalt call His name Jesus” 1941 “for He shall save His people from their sins.” 1942 Before the incarnation, however, He was never called either Christ or Jesus. For truly the divine Prophets, in their predictions of things to come, used the words, just as they prophesied about the birth, the cross, and the passion, when the events had not yet come to pass. Nevertheless, even after the incarnation He is called God the Word, Lord, Almighty, only begotten Son, Maker, and Creator. For He was not made man by mutation, but, remaining just what He was, assumed what we are, for “Being in the form of God,” to use the words of the divine Apostle “He took the form of a servant.” 1943 On this account, therefore, even after the incarnation, He is called also by the titles which are anterior to the incarnation, since His nature is invariable and immutable. But when relating the passion the divine Scripture nowhere uses the term God, since that is the name of the absolute nature. No one on hearing the words “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” 1944 and similar expressions, would suppose that the flesh existed before the ages, or is of one substance with the God of the universe, or was Creator of the world. Every one knows that these terms are proper to the Godhead. Nor would any one on reading the genealogy of St. Matthew suppose that David and Abraham according to nature were forefathers of God, for it is the assumed nature which is derived from them.
Since then these points are plain and indubitable even among extreme heretics, and we acknowledge both the nature which is before the ages, and that which is of recent time, so are we bound to recognise at once the passibility of the flesh, and the impassibility of the Godhead, not dividing the union nor separating the only begotten into two persons, but contemplating the properties of the natures in the one Son. In the case of soul and body, which are of natures contemporary and naturally united, we are accustomed to make this distinction, describing the soul as simple, reasonable, and immortal, but the body as complex, passible, and mortal. We do not divide the union, nor cut one man in two. Far rather, then, in the case of the Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages, and of the manhood assumed of David’s seed, is it becoming to adopt a similar course, and distinctly to recognise the everlasting, eternal, simple, uncircumscribed, immortal, and invariable character of the one nature, and the recent, complex, circumscribed, and fluctuating nature of the other. We acknowledge the flesh to be now immortal and incorruptible, although before the resurrection it was susceptible of death and of passion; for how otherwise was it nailed to the tree, and committed to the tomb? And though we recognise the distinction of the natures, we are bound to worship one Son, and to acknowledge the same as Son of God and Son of man, form of God, and form of a servant, Son of David, and Lord of David, seed of Abraham, and creator of Abraham. The union causes the names to be common, but the community of names does not confound the natures. With them that are right-minded some names are plainly appropriate as to God, and others as to man; and in this way both the passible and the impassible are properly used of the Lord Christ, for in His humanity He suffered, while as God He remained impassible. If, according to the argument of the impious, it was in the Godhead that He suffered, then, I apprehend, the assumption of the flesh, was supererogatory; for suppose the divine nature to have been capable of undergoing passion, then He did not need the passible manhood. But grant that, as even their own argument contends, the Godhead was impassible, and the passion was real, let them beware of denying that which suffered, lest they deny with it the reality of the passion; for if that which suffers does not exist, then the passion is unreal. Now for any one who likes to open the quaternion 1945 of the sacred evangelists, it is easy to perceive that the divine Scripture distinctly proclaims the passion of the body, and to learn from them how Joseph of Arimathæa came to Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus; how Pilate ordered the body of Jesus to be delivered, how Joseph took down the body of Jesus from the tree and wrapped the body of Jesus in the linen cloth, and laid it in the new tomb. All this is described by the four evangelists with frequent mention of the body. But if our opponents adduce the words of the angel to Mary and her companions, “Come where the Lord lay,” 1946 let them be referred to the passage in the Acts which states that devout men “carried Stephen to his burial” 1947 and observe that it was not the soul, but the body, of the victorious Stephen, to which the customary rites were paid. And to this very day, when we approach the shrines of the victorious martyrs, we commonly enquire what is the name of him who is buried in the grave, and those who are acquainted with the facts reply peradventure “Julian the martyr,” or “Romanus,” or, “Timotheus.” 1948
Very often it is not entire bodies that are buried, but only very small remains, yet nevertheless we speak of the body by the name that belongs to the whole man. It was in this sense that the angel called the body of the Lord, “Lord,” because it was the body of the Lord of the universe. Moreover the Lord Himself promised to give on behalf of the life of the world, not His invisible nature, but His body. “For,” He says, “the bread that I will give is my flesh which I will give for the life of the world,” 1949 and when He took the symbol of divine mysteries, He said, “This is my body which is given for you.” 1950 Or according to the version of the Apostle, “broken.” 1951 In no place where He spoke of the passion did He mention the impassible Godhead.
It is therefore before all things necessary that the question should be put to those who are endeavouring to contradict us whether they confess that the perfect manhood was assumed by God the Word, and assert the union to have been made without confusion. Once let these points be admitted, and the rest will follow in due course, and the passion will be attributed to the passible nature. I have now summed up these heads and have exceeded the limits of my letter. I have sent also what I lately wrote at the suggestion of a very godly and holy man of God, the lord— 1952 in the form of a concise instruction designed to teach the truth of the apostolic doctrines. Should I find a good copyist, I will also send your holiness what I have written in the form of a dialogue, 1953 extending the argument, and strengthening my positions, by the teaching of the Fathers. I have moreover now sent a few statements of the ancient teachers, sufficient to shew the drift of their instruction. Give me in return, most godly sir, the succour of your prayers, that I may pass through the terrible tempest and reach the quiet haven of the Saviour.
Footnotes
301:1939Timotheus was Bishop of Doliche, a town of the Euphratensis. He was present at Antioch when Athanasius of Perrha was deposed, and also at Chalcedon. The letter may be dated from Nicerte in 450.
301:1940Luke ii. 11
302:1941Luke i. 31
302:1942Matt. i. 21. Observe the confusion of quotation.
302:1943Phil. ii. 6
302:1944John i. 1
302:1945The word τετρακτύς commonly expresses the sum of the first four numbers in the Pythagorean system, i.e. 10, the root of creation; (1+2+3+4=10.) Cf. the Pythagorean oath “Ναὶ μὰ τὸν ἁμετέρᾳ ψύχᾳ παραδόντα τετρακτύν.” Its use for τετραδεῖον or τετράδιον (cf. Acts xii. 4) may indicate acceptance of the theory of the mystic and necessary number of the gospels of which early and remarkable expression is found in Irenæus (cont. Hær. iii. 11.)
303:1946Matt. xxviii. 6
303:1947Acts viii. 2
303:1948There were many martyrs of the name of Julianus. Theodoret might have visited a shrine of Julianus martyred at Emesa in the reign of Numerian. A Romanus was one of the seven martyrs at Samosata in the persecution of Diocletian. Among martyred Timothei was one who suffered at Gaza in 304.
303:1949John vi. 51
303:1950Luke xxii. 19
303:19511 Cor. xi. 24
303:1952The name is omitted.
303:1953Garnerius identifies the “short instruction” with the composition mentioned in letter CIX. and sent to Eusebius of Ancyra; and the bishop whose name is omitted with the same Eusebius. But in his note on CIX, he thinks this composition is a part of Dial. II. It would seem from this letter that the composition in question was distinct from the Dialogues.
CXXXI. To Longinus, Archimandrite of Doliche. 1954
You have shewn alike your zeal for the true religion, and your love for your neighbour, both of which are at the present time clearly connected, for it is for the sake of the apostolic decrees that I am being attacked, because I refuse to give up the heritage of my fathers, and prefer to undergo any suffering to looking lightly on the robbery of one tittle from the faith of the Gospel. You have accepted fellowship in my sufferings, not only by comforting me by means of your letter, but further by sending to me the very honourable and pious Matthew and Isaac. You shall hear, I am well assured, from the lips of the righteous Lord, “I was in prison, and ye visited me.” 1955 We are small and of no account, and burdened by a great load of sins, but the Lord is bountiful and generous. He remembers the small rather than the great, and says, “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these” 1956 “which believe in me” 1957 “ye have done it unto me.” 1958 I pray you in that you are conspicuous for right doctrine, and shine by worthiness of life, and therefore have great boldness before God, help me in your prayers, that I may be able “to stand,” to use the words of the Apostle, 1959 “against the wiles of error,” escape the sins of the destroyer, and stand, though with little boldness, in the day of the appearing before the righteous Judge.
Footnotes
303:1954Sent presumably at the same time as the preceding. Nothing is recorded of Longinus. It will be remembered that the name, recorded also in the Acts of Linus as that of an officer commanding the executioners of St. Paul, is assigned by tradition to the soldier who wounded the Saviour’s side.
303:1955Matt. xxv. 36
303:1956Matt. xxv. 40
303:1957Matt. xviii. 6
303:1958Matt. xxv. 40
303:1959Eph. 4:14, Eph. 6:11Eph. iv. 14, and vi. 11. As in the case of the former citation Theodoret seems to be quoting from memory, and coupling the two passages in which the word μεθοδεία occurs. “Wiles” fits in better with the evident allusion to Eph. vi. 11, than the periphrasis by which A.V. renders Eph. 4.14, and for which the revisers substitute “the wiles of error.” “μεθοδεία” may be exactly described as “ἡ ἀποστολικὴ φωνή,” for it occurs nowhere but in these two passages.
CXXXII. To Ibas, Bishop of Edessa. 1960
The Lord has taught them that suffer wrong not to be cast down, but to rejoice, and to derive consolation from the examples of old. For from the period of the first men down to our own days we find instances of men who have been zealous in the worship of the God of all, and yet have been wronged by those with whom their lot was cast, and have fallen into many and grievous troubles. Of these I would have gone through the entire list, had I not been writing to one of accurate knowledge of the divine Scriptures. But since you, O beloved of God, have been nurtured from your boyhood in the divine oracles, I have thought it needless so to do. I only ask you to cast your eyes on them, and to look on all the kind-hearted clergy that have done wrong, with sorrow; on all that look lightly on wrong doing, with pity; and to be sorrowful for the disquiet of the Church. I ask you to rejoice and be glad that I am a sharer in suffering for the sake of true religion, and to praise without ceasing Him who has imposed this lot on me. As for honour and comfort and the dignity of sees and wretched reputation, let us yield them to the murderers. 1961
Let us cleave only to the doctrines of the gospel, and with them, if need be, endure any extremity of pain, and choose honourable penury rather than wealth with its many cares.
I am not writing in these terms in order to give you exhortation, for I know the courage of your holiness in trouble. My object is to make my own mind known to your piety, and to inform you that you have on your side comrades who are gladly incurring peril for the truth’s sake. I have been anxious for some time to write thus to you, but I have been unable to find anyone to convey my letter. Now I have met with the very honourable and pious presbyter Ozeas, a man who is at once engaged in the battle for truth and attached to your piety. So I write and salute your holiness, and beg you to give me both the prop of your prayers and the comfort of a letter from you.
Footnotes
303:1960To console him under the unjust sentence of the Latrocinium.
304:1961It will be remembered that Flavianus had actually died from the brutal treatment he had received at the hands—and the feet—of Dioscorus with his partisans and bullies, and “migravit ad Dominum dolore plagarum,” Aug. 11, 449, three days after he was carried from St. Mary’s at Ephesus to his dungeon. (Liberatus Brev. xix. Dict. Christ. Biog. i. 858.)
CXXXIII. To John, Bishop of Germanicia. 1962
I have always known, sir, that you are not unmindful of our friendship. And it has ever been my wish and prayer that your piety should give heed to exact truth, and shun the communion of traitors to true religion, ascribing to the Supreme Ruler His care on our behalf. For indeed, while I have been silent and inactive, He has put an end to our very keen and terrible sufferings, and has replaced the dire tempest by this bright calm. And now that the loving-kindness of the Lord has granted us this blessing, I find the quiet of my retreat indeed delightful, for I feel the necessity of persuading those who have been led away by the slanders launched against me, and of both convincing them of the truth of the teaching of the gospels, and refuting the attack of falsehood. When once this refutation is finished, and the victory of the truth is secured, it is my purpose to quit public life, and withdraw to the rest that I so greatly long for. As to the foes of the truth I cry with the prophet, “Their memorial is perished with a noise, but the Lord shall endure for ever.” 1963 As to ourselves, I sing with the Psalmist, “He sent from above, He took me, He drew me out of many waters, He delivered me from my strong enemy.” 1964
This letter is in reply to two received from your holiness, one conveyed by Anastasius, the presbyter of Berœa, and one by the standard-bearer Theodotus. In your last letter you mention another, but this has not been delivered. As to my journey thither I can say nothing till I know what orders are given concerning me by the most pious emperor. His letter has not yet arrived.
Footnotes
304:1962John of Germanicia (vide p. 86 n.) was on the Nestorian side at Ephesus in 431, and so naturally associated with Theodoret. At Chalcedon he was compelled to pronounce a special anathema against Nestorius. (Mansi vii. 193, Dict. Christ. Biog. iii. 374.) The letter is written after the deposition and before the banishment to Nicerte. Cf. Ep. 147.
304:1963Ps. 9:6, 7, lxx.
304:1964Ps. 18:16, 17
CXXXIV. To Theoctistus, Bishop of Berœa. 1965
Our Saviour, Lawgiver, and Lord, was once asked, “What is the first commandment?” His reply was “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.” And He added “This is the first commandment: and the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” Then He said further “On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” 1966
He then who keeps these, according to the definition of the Lord, plainly fulfils the Law; and he who transgresses them is guilty of transgressing the whole Law. Let us then examine, before the exact and righteous tribunal of our conscience, whether we have fulfilled the divine commandments. Now the first is kept by him who guards the faith given by God in its integrity, who abominates its assailants as enemies of the truth and hates heartily all those who hate the beloved; and the second by him who most highly esteems the care of his neighbour and who, not only in prosperity but also in apparent misfortunes, observes the laws of friendship. They, on the other hand, who look after their own safety, as they suppose, who on its account make little of the laws of friendship and take no heed of their friends when assaulted and attacked, are reckoned to belong to the number of the wicked and of them that are without. The Lord of all requires better things at the hands of His disciples. “Love” He says “your enemies, for if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? for the sinners and the publicans do this.” 1967 I, however, have not received even such kindness as publicans receive. Publicans, do I say? I have not even received the consolation given to murderers and wizards in their dungeons. If every one had imitated this cruelty, nothing else would have been left then for me in my life time but to be wasted by want, and, at my death, instead of being committed to a tomb, to be made meat 1968 for dogs and wild beasts. But I have found support in those who care nought for this present life, but await the enjoyment of everlasting blessings, and these furnish me with manifold consolation. But the loving Lord “caused judgment to be heard from heaven; the earth feared and was still, when God arose to judgment.” 1969 But the wicked shall perish. 1970 The falsehood of the new heresy has been proscribed, and the truth of the divine Gospels is publicly proclaimed. I for my part exclaim with the blessed David, “Blessed be the Lord God who only doeth wondrous things, and blessed be His glorious name: and let the whole earth be filled with His glory; amen and amen.” 1971
Footnotes
304:1965This letter marks the change in the condition of affairs which followed on the death of Theodosius on July 29, 450, and the accession of Pulcheria and Marcian. Eutyches was exiled, the eunuch Chrysaphius banished and executed, and Theodoret recalled. It may be placed in the autumn of 450 or early in 451. The earlier letter (xxxii) to Theoctistus claims on behalf of Celestinianus a kindness which Theodoret in his then hour of need had failed to receive.
304:1966Matt. xxii. 36-40
305:1967cf. Matt. 5:44, 46 instead of τίνα μισθὸν ἔχετε; the text has τί πλέον ποιεῖτε
305:1968The use of the somewhat rare and poetical word Βορά suggests a possible allusion to several well known passages in the dramatists; e.g. Æsch. Pr. 583, Soph. Ant. 30 and Eur. Phœn. 1603.
305:1969Ps. 75:8, 9Psalm lxxv. 8 and 9
305:1970Psa. 37.20Psalm xxxvii. 20
305:1971Ps. 72:18, 19Ps. 72:18, 19
CXXXV. To Bishop Romulus. 1972
You have reminded me of the ancient story, and remarked how the King of the Syrians, bethinking him of the loving kindness of the kings of Israel, assumed the form of a suppliant and failed not to obtain his petition. Remember therefore, sir, the divine wrath. God delivered Ahab to utter destruction for using mercy, and delivered his sentence through the mouth of the prophet, saying “Thy life shall go for his life and thy people for his people.” 1973 We are thus commanded to temper mercy with justice, since not every kind of mercy is pleasing to the God of all. The present state of affairs specially requires prudent council; for we are contending on behalf of the divine doctrines, wherein we have the hope of our salvation. But herein, too, may be seen the great difference between man and man. Some men are verily infected with the common impiety; while others, without distinction, advance at one time one doctrine, and at another its opposite. Some who know the truth conceal it in the secret chambers of their soul, while they preach impiety with the rest; others again who are filled with envy have made their private ill-will an occasion of waging war against the truth, and wreak all kinds of mischief against the prophets of the truth. Again, there are who embrace the truth of the apostolic doctrines, and yet because they are afraid of the power of the dominant party are too cowed to proclaim it, and though they lament at the abundance of our misfortunes, nevertheless side with them that set the mighty surge a-rolling. It is in this last category that we place your reverence. We have believed you to be sound in the divine doctrines, and think that you keep your affection for me, and are borne along with the time for no other reason than your cowardice. Under these circumstances though I am not writing to any of the rest, I write to your holiness, and receive your reply. I see your drift and to some extent I pardon your pusillanimity. But the loving Lord has now removed all occasions of cowardice, by exhibiting the new-fangled impiety, and shewing the plain truth of the gospels. I, even though my mouths were as many as my hairs, cannot praise as I ought the loving-kindness of the Lord for compelling my strongest opponents openly to preach what has been preached by me. For I have heard that he who shares your holiness’s roof, when he heard that anathemas had been published in the great cities, ceased to imitate the crooked gait of crabs, and, after disputing in a certain assembly about doctrines, walked in the straight road. Never must we suit our words to the season, but ever preserve the unbending rule of truth.
Footnotes
305:1972Romulus, bishop of Chalcis in Cœle Syria, sided with the dominant Hæretical party through pusillanimity. He was at Chalcedon in 451. Who may have been his crab-gaited friend can only be conjectured.
It would appear that edicts anathematizing Eutyches were published soon after the accession of Marcian.
305:19731 Kings xx. 42
CXXXVI. To Cyrus Magistrianus. 1974
I was very much distressed to hear of the trouble which had befallen you. How indeed could I fail to suffer, making as I do your interest mine, and remembering the apostolic law which bids us not only “rejoice with them that do rejoice, but also weep with them that weep”? 1975 Suffering itself is able to draw even those that are at enmity with one another into sympathy.
What is so grievous as to lose a wife; one who bore blamelessly the yoke of wedlock, one who made her husband’s life pleasant, one who shared the care of the family; one who managed the household and shared in the direction of everything; one who was ready to suggest whatever might be likely to be of service, and to comply with the wishes of her husband? But what sorrow could surpass the committal to the tomb of the mother at the same moment as the son whom she bore; a son who had been carefully trained and had received a learned education; one who, you hoped, would be the stay of your old age; buried in the very spring of his manhood, when the down was just beginning to grow upon his cheeks? Did we only look at the character of the calamity, it admits of no consolation. But when we bethink us how our race is doomed to die; that against that race the divine fiat has gone forth; that suffering is common, for life is full of such woes; we shall bravely bear what has happened, shall repel the assaults of despair, and shall raise that wonderful song of praise “The Lord gave and the Lord hath taken away; the Lord hath done what seemed to him good; blessed be the name of the Lord.” 1976 But we have many more reasons for consolation. We have been distinctly taught the hopes of the resurrection, and we look for the time when the dead shall live again. We know how the Lord many times called death sleep. If we trust, as in truth we do, the Saviour’s words, we are bound not to mourn those that have fallen asleep, even though their sleep lasts somewhat longer than it is wont. We must await the resurrection. We must remember that the Ruler of the world in His wisdom, and clearly knowing as He does not the present only but the future also, guides events for our good. A wise man who knew all this full well reasons about deaths of this kind and says, “Yea; speedily was he taken away, lest that wickedness should alter his understanding.” 1977
Let us submit I beg you to the wise Ruler of all; let us submit to His decrees. Whether they be pleasant or whether they be grievous, they are good and profitable, they make men wise; for them that endure they ordain crowns.
Footnotes
306:1974There is here neither note of time, nor certainty whether this Cyrus is the Cyrus who is thanked in Ep. XIII. for the Lesbian wine. The superscriptions of both letters are unfavourable to theories identifying him with any possible bishop of the name.
306:1975Romans xii. 15
306:1976Job i. 21, lxx.
306:1977Wisdom iv. 2
CXXXVII. To the Archimandrite John. 1978
The blessed David fell into several errors, which God, who wisely orders all things, has caused to be recorded for the good of them that were to come after. But it was not on their account that Absalom, parricide, murderer, impious, and altogether vile, started his wild war against his father. The reason of his beginning that most unrighteous struggle was because he coveted the sovereignty. The divine David, however, when these events were coming to pass, began to remember the wrong that he had done. I too am conscious within myself of the guilt of many errors, but I have kept undefiled the dogmatic teaching of the Apostles. And they who have trampled upon all laws human and divine, and condemned me in my absence, have not sentenced me for what I have done wrong, for my secret deeds are not made manifest to them; but they have contrived false witness and calumny against me, or rather in their open attack upon the doctrines of the Apostles have proscribed me for my obedience to them. “So the Lord awaked as one out of sleep; He smote His enemies in the hinderparts and put them to a perpetual shame.” 1979 Counterfeit and spurious doctrines He has scattered to the winds, and has provided for the free preaching of those which He has handed down to us in the holy Gospels. To me this suffices for complete delight. I do not even long for a city in which I have passed all my time in hard work; all I long for is to see the establishment of the truth of the Gospels. And now the Lord has satisfied this longing. I am therefore very glad and happy, and I sing praises to our generous Lord, and I invite your reverence to rejoice with me, and, with our praises, to put up the earnest prayer that the men who say now one thing and now another and change about to suit the hour, like the chameleons who assume the colour of the leaves, may be strengthened by the loving-kindness of the Lord, established upon the rocks and, of His mercy, made to pay the highest honour to the truth.
Footnotes
306:1978A Johannes was an Archimandrite of Constantinople and was present at Chalcedon in 451, (Labbe iv. 512 d) but there is no evidence to identify the recipient of the present letter, which may be dated from Nicerte not long after the death of Theodosius.
306:1979Ps. 78:65, 66Psalm lxxviii. 65 and 66
CXXXVIII. To Anatolius the Patrician. 1980
I have cordially welcomed the rest which has fallen to my lot, and am harvesting its beneficial and pleasant results. Our Christ-loving Emperor, 1981 after reaping the empire as fruit of his true piety, has offered as first-fruits of his sovereignty to Him that bestowed it, the calm of the storm-tossed churches, the triumph of the invaded faith, the victory of the doctrines of the Gospel. To these he has added the righting of the wrong done to me. Of a wrong so great and of such a kind who ever heard? What murderer was ever doomed in his absence? What violator of wedlock was ever condemned without a hearing? What burglar, grave-breaker, wizard, church-robber, or doer of any other unlawful deed, was ever prevented, when eager to appeal to the law, and slain when far away by the sentence of his judge? In their cases nothing of the kind was ever known. For, by our law, plaintiff and defendant are bidden to stand face to face before the judge, while the judge has to wait for the production of plain truth, and then and not till then, either dismiss the accused as innocent, or punish him as being reached by the indictment. In my case the course pursued has been just the opposite. The emperor’s letter forbade me to approach the far-famed synod, and the most righteous judges condemned me in my absence, not after fair trial, but after extravagant laudation of the documents which were produced to incriminate me. Neither the law of God nor shame of man staved the deed of blood. Orders were given by the president, 1982 flinging the truth to the winds, and courting the power of the hour. He was obeyed by men who think as I do, whose doctrines are my doctrines, and who had expressed admiration of me and mine. None the less did that day convict some men of treachery; some of cowardice; while to me a ground of confidence was given by my sufferings for the truth’s sake. And to me our master Christ hath granted the boon “not only of believing on Him but also of suffering for His sake.” 1983 For the greatest of all gifts of grace are sufferings for the Master’s sake, and the divine Apostle puts them even before great marvels.
In these boons I too glory, humble and insignificant as I am, and having no other ground of boasting. And I beseech your excellency to offer on behalf of my poor self expressions of thanksgiving to the emperor, lover of Christ, and to the most pious Augusta, 1984 dear to God, instructress of the good, for that she has requited our generous Lord with such gifts, and has made her zeal for true religion the foundation and groundwork of her sway. Besides this, beg their godly majesties to complete the work that has been so well marked out, and to summon a council, not, like the last, composed of a turbulent rabble, but—kept quite clear of all of these—of men who decide on and highly value divine things, and esteem all human affairs as of less account than the truth. If their majesties wish to bring about the ancient peace for the churches, and I am sure that they do, beg their pious graces to take part in the proceedings, that their presence may overawe those of a contrary mind and the truth may have none to gainsay her, but may herself by her own unaided powers examine into the position of affairs, and the character of the apostolic doctrines.
I make this request to your excellency, not because I long to see Cyrus again, for your lordship knows what a solitary town it is, and how I have somehow or other managed to conceal its ugliness by my great expenditure on all kinds of buildings, but to the end that what I preach may be shewn to be in agreement with apostolic doctrines while the inventions of my opponents are counterfeit and base. Once let this come to pass, by God’s help be it spoken, and I shall pass the remainder of my days in cheerful contentment, wherever the Master may bid me dwell. To you who have been brought up in the true religion, and are dowered with the wealth of goodness it is becoming to make this effort, and by your urgent counsel to render yet more zealous our most pious emperor and the Christ-loving Augusta, zealous already as they are to strengthen their glorious empire by laudable and rightful energy.
Footnotes
307:1980This is the last of the series of Theodoret’s letters to his illustrious friend. It expresses his gratitude for his restitution by Marcian and begs Anatolius to use his best endeavours to get a council called to settle the difficulties of the Church. The letter thus dates itself in the year 451 and indicates that the calling of the council of Chalcedon was to some extent due to Theodoret’s initiative. At the earlier sessions at Chalcedon Marcian was represented by Anatolius, and it was partly the authority of Anatolius which overbore the protests of Dioscorus and his party against the admission of Theodoret.
307:1981Marcian was crowned Emperor on August the 24th 450. Theodosius II. had died on the preceding 28th of July.
307:1982“Dioscorus presided, and next to him Julian, or Julius, the representative of the ‘most holy bishop of the Roman Church’ then Juvenal of Jerusalem, Domnus of Antioch, and, his lowered position indicating what was to come, Flavian of Constantinople.” Canon Bright in Dict. Christ. Biog. i. 856; Mansi. vi. 607.
307:1983Phil. i. 29
307:1984cf. p. 155 n. “A sudden and total revolution at once took place. The change was wrought,—not by the commanding voice of ecclesiastical authority,—not by the argumentative eloquence of any great writer, who by his surpassing abilities awed the world into peace,—not by the reaction of pure Christian charity, drawing the conflicting parties together by evangelic love. It was a new dynasty on the throne of Constantinople. The feeble Theodosius dies; the masculine Pulcheria, the champion and the pride of orthodoxy, the friend of Flavianus and Leo ascends the throne, and gives her hand, with a share of the empire, to a brave soldier Marcianus.” Milman, Lat. Christ. 1. 264.
CXXXIX. To Aspar, Consular and Patrician. 1985
To the other good deeds of your excellency must be added your having acquainted our pious and most christian emperor, whom God’s grace has appointed for the blessing of his subjects, of the enormous wrong done against me, and your having by a righteous edict annulled an edict which was nothing of the kind. Supported by divine Providence I have made what they reckoned a punishment a means of good, and I have welcomed my rest with delight; but none the less I have been wrongly and illegally treated, though in no single point guilty of the errors which the enemies of the truth slanderously laid at my door, but yet made to suffer the penalty of the greatest criminals. Nay, my fate has been yet harder than theirs. I was judged without a trial; I was doomed in my absence; when forbidden by the emperor’s orders to go to Ephesus I received the most righteous sentence of my holy judges. All this has now been undone by his most serene majesty, through the active interposition of your excellency. I, for my part, feeling that I should be wrong to keep silent and not offer you my thanks, have availed myself of this letter, whereby I beseech your excellency to speak in warm terms in my behalf both to the victorious and Christian emperor and to the very godly and pious Augusta. On their behalf I implore our good Lord as earnestly as lies in my power to guard their empire in security, and to grant that it may be at once a source of loving protection for their subjects, and of terror to their foes, and establish honourable peace for all. May your excellency be induced to petition them completely to put an end to the agitation of the Church, and order the assembling of the council; not, like the last, of men who from their habits of unruliness throw the synod into confusion, but, in peace and quiet, of members instructed in divine things, and in the habit of confirming the apostolic decrees and rejecting what is spurious and at variance with the truth. And I express this hope to the end that your excellency may reap the good which such a course of conduct is likely to produce.
Footnotes
308:1985Garnerius has substituted for Aspar the name Abienus who was Consul in 450. Schulze would retain the ordinary reading of Aspar. The recipient of the letter, whoever he be, is thanked for his part in the rescinding of the acts of the late Latrocinium.
CXL. To the Master Vincomalus. 1986
I have been much astonished to learn that your magnificence, though quite unacquainted with me and mine, and knowing only the wrong that had been done me, stood up as my advocate, and left no means untried to undo the results of the conspiracy against me. But your excellency will assuredly receive recompense from our bountiful Lord, for He who promised to give a reward for a little water will doubtless give greater recompense to the givers of greater gifts.
I have indeed endured such sufferings as none, or at least very few, of the ancients have undergone, and this not only from my open foes, but, as I apprehend, from my real friends. The former attacked me, the latter betrayed me.
Who in the world ever heard of such a trial? Who ever commanded a criminal to be tried in his absence after chaining him up at a distance of more than five and thirty stages? What judge has ever been so savage and inhuman as not only to try men, aye but to condemn men the sound of whose voice he has never heard, and this in most savage and inhuman fashion? The Lord has ordered the erring brother, who spurns advice, after a first, second and third admonition, to be treated as “an heathen man and a publican.” 1987 Now these most equitable and righteous judges have not even given to them of the same faith with themselves the treatment which they give to heathen men and publicans. These indeed they do see and occasionally converse with, and that with all honour and deference where they appear to be of rank and dignity. But they have ordered me to be cut off from home, from water, from everything. This is the way in which they have wished to become imitators of our Father in heaven “Who maketh His sun to rise on the evil and on the good and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.” 1988 But of these men I will say no more. The tribunal of the Lord is at hand where is required not stage pretence but the reality of life. Now I beseech your excellency to express my thanks to the emperor, the lover of Christ and victorious, and to the very pious and godly Augusta, for having made true religion the firm root of their pious empire, and to implore their majesties to make the peace of the churches firm by commanding the assembling of a council, not of men of violence who throw the discussion into confusion, but of the lovers of the truth who confirm the apostolic teaching, and repudiate this new fangled and spurious heresy. And I pray that of these honourable endeavours you may reap the fruit at the hands of our loving Lord.
Footnotes
308:1986The internal evidence of the letter makes it synchronize with the preceding. The advocacy of the cause of Theodoretus by Vincomalus is the more striking in that it does not appear to have been suggested by personal friendship. Vincomalus was Consul Designate in 452. (Dict. Christ. Biog. iv. 1159. Labbe iv. 843.) Magister = “Magister Officiorum,” cf. note on p. 283.
308:1987Matt. xviii. 17
309:1988Matt. v. 45
CXLI. To Marcellus, Archimandrite of the Acoemetæ. 1989
Bright is made your holiness by your goodly life, exhibiting on earth the image of the conversation of the angels, but it is made still brighter by your zeal for the apostolic faith. As keel to boat, as corner-stone to house, so to them that choose to live in piety is the truth of the doctrines of the Gospel. For this truth when assailed you have bravely fought, not striving to protect it as though it were weak, but shewing your godly disposition; for the teaching of our Master Christ is gifted with stability and strength, in accordance with the promise of the same Saviour, “that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” 1990 It is the loving and bountiful Lord who has thought right that I too should be dishonoured and slain on behalf of this doctrine. For truly we have reckoned dishonour honour, and death life. We have heard the words of the apostle “For unto us it is given by God not only to believe on Him, but also to suffer for His sake.” 1991 But the Lord arose like the sleeper, and stopped the mouths of them that uttered blasphemy against God and injustice against me. But He has made the tongues of the pious pour forth their fountains in their wonted message. I, however, am gathering the delightful fruits of rest; as I look at the agitation of the churches I am grieved, but I rejoice and am glad at being freed from cares. I have ever been gratified at your admirable piety, but heretofore I have not written, not from any lack of regard for the dictates of charity, but because I have waited for some suitable occasion. Just now, having fallen in with the most pious and prudent monks who have been sent by your holiness on other business, I have lost no time in carrying out my wish. I salute your godliness. I beg you in the first place to support me with your prayers, and further to cheer me by a letter, for by God’s grace I have been attacked for the Gospel’s sake.
Footnotes
309:1989The Acoemetæ, “sleepless,” or “unresting,” were an order of monks established in the 5th century by Alexander, an officer of the imperial household. Marcellus, the third Abbot, was a second founder, and was warmly supported by the patriarch Gennadius of Constantinople. (458–71.) Before Chalcedon he joined with other orthodox abbots to petition Marcian against Eutyches. (Labbe iv. 531 Dict. Christ. Biog. iii. 813). Alexander’s foundation was of 300 monks of various nations, divided into six choirs, and so arranged that the work of praise and prayer should “never rest.” This has been copied elsewhere and since,
“where tapers day and night
On the dim altar burned continually,
In token that the house was evermore
Watching to God.
Wordsworth, Exc. viii.
309:1990Matt. xvi. 18
309:1991Phil. i. 29
CXLII. To the Same.
I have already addressed your reverence in another letter, and have delivered it to your much respected brethren. Now again I address your holiness. I am induced to do so both by your admirable life, and by the praiseworthy zeal which you have shewn on behalf of the apostolic faith, fearless alike of imperial power and of episcopal combination. For granted that the majority of the council consented under coercion, still they did confirm the new fangled heresy by their signatures. Your holiness, however, was shaken by none of these things, but abided by the ancient doctrines which the Lord, by means of both the prophets and the apostles, has taught the churches to hold. These decrees I pray that I may preserve, and keep to the end my faith and confession in one Father, one Son and one Holy Ghost. For the incarnation of the only begotten made no addition to the number of the Trinity. Even after the incarnation the Trinity is still a Trinity. This is the teaching I have received from the beginning; this has been my faith; in this was I baptized; this have I preached; in this have I baptized, this I continue to hold. Of them that utter a lie about the Father the Lord has said “When he speaketh a lie he speaketh of his own,” 1992 for what is said of the teacher is appropriate to the disciples. So these men who employ lies against me speak of their own, and do not describe what is mine. I am comforted by my Master’s words “Blessed are ye when men shall revile you and persecute you and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely for my sake. Rejoice and be exceeding glad for great is your reward in heaven.” 1993
I entreat your piety to pray that I may not have my part among the wrong doers, but among them that suffer wrong on account of the truth of the Gospels.
Footnotes
309:1992John viii. 44
310:1993Matt. 5:11, 12
CXLIII. To Andrew, Monk of Constantinople. 1994
I have never seen your piety nor have we ever communicated by letter, but I have become warmly attached to you. What has wrought the charm and continues to inflame it is the report unanimously brought by the tasters of your honey. All express admiration of the orthodoxy of your faith, the brightness of your life, the constancy of your soul, the harmoniousness of your character, the attractiveness and sweetness of your society and all the other characteristics of the true foster child of philosophy. For all these reasons I am attached to your godliness, and my longing has made me even begin a correspondence; but, my dear sir, grant me as soon as possible what I desire and let me have written communication from you. For when friends are at a distance considerable comfort is given them by epistolary communication. You will write to no man of heterodox opinions, but to one nurtured in the teaching of the apostles and preacher not of a quaternity but of a Trinity, for in reality I see little difference in the impiety of those who have the hardihood to endeavour to contract into one the two natures of the Only-begotten and those who endeavour to divide our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God, God the Word made man, into two sons; if such indeed there be; I cannot think so; but Arians, Eunomians, and Apollinarians too have ever shamelessly fabricated this slander against the Church, and indeed laborious students may easily perceive that our far famed Fathers, 1995 lights of the churches, laboured at the hands of the foes of the truth under this accusation which is now levelled against me by the most excellent champions of the new fangled heresy. Our wise Lord has laid bare their impiety, for He could not endure to confirm the unholy heresy by His long suffering.
Be sure then, sir, that you will be writing to one of like sentiments with your own; and of this you can easily assure yourself from my copious writings.
Write then to me in return, and again your letter, by God’s leave, shall serve to kindle affection. And before you write, give me the help of your prayers, and beseech our good Lord to guide my feet into the right road, that I may travel the rest of my journey in accordance with His laws. You who have won right of access from your unstained life will easily persuade Him Who is eager to give us His good gifts.
Footnotes
310:1994Garnerius identifies this Andrew with an archimandrite who was in favour of the deposition of Eutyches at Flavian’s Constantinopolitan Council in 448.
310:1995“No one,” says Garnerius “will have any doubt as to the reference being to Diodorus of Tarsus and Theodorus of Mopsuestia who compares the words used with Letter XVI, with the end of Dialogue I, and with expressions in both the ecclesiastical and religious history.” Cf. pp. 256, 175, 133, and 136.
CXLIV. To the Soldiers. 1996
Human nature is everywhere the same, but pursuits in life are many and various. Some men prefer a sailor’s career, some a soldier’s; some men become athletes, some husbandmen; some ply one craft and some another. To pass by all other differences, some men are zealous and diligent about divine things, and get themselves instructed in the exact teaching of the apostolic doctrines; while others, on the contrary, become slaves of the belly, and suppose that the enjoyment of base pleasures is happiness. Others again are there, lying in a mean between these two extremes, who do not exhibit this praiseworthy enthusiasm, nor embrace a life of incontinence, but still honour the simplicity of the faith. Men who attack the statement that some things are altogether impossible with God must not, I apprehend, be classed with the zealous and the well instructed in divine things, but rather either with those who have no exact knowledge of the apostolic doctrines, or those who have been enslaved by pleasures and shift hither and thither at the caprice of a moment, setting forth now one thing and now another.
You have asked me to write on these points. I should prefer at the present time to keep silence. But in obedience to the commandment of the Lord, “Give to every man that asketh of thee,” 1997 I am constrained briefly to reply.
I say then that the God of the universe can do all things, but that in the word “all” is comprehended only what is right and good, for He who is naturally both wise and good admits of nothing that is of a contrary nature, but only what becomes his nature. If any objectors gainsay this statement, ask them if the God of the universe, the lawgiver of truth, can lie. If they say that lying is possible to God, expel them from your company as impious and blasphemous. Should they agree that lying is not possible to the God of the universe, ask them in the second place, if He who is the fount of justice can become unjust. Should they allow that this too is impossible to the God of all, you must yet again enquire if the unfathomable depth of wisdom can become unwise, God cease to be God, the Lord cease to be the Lord, the Creator be no Creator, the Good not good but evil and the true Light not light but its opposite. If they admit that all these things and the like are impossible to God, you must say to them therefore many things are impossible with God; and that their being impossible so far from being a proof of want of power, indicates on the contrary the greatest power.
Even in the case of our own soul, when we say that it cannot die, we do not predicate weakness of it, but we proclaim its capacity of immortality. And similarly when we confess the immutability, impassibility, and immortality of God, we cannot attribute to the divine nature change, passion, or death. Suppose them to urge that God can do whatever He will, you must reply to them that He wishes to do nothing which it is not His nature to do; He is by nature good, therefore He does not wish anything evil; He is by nature just, therefore He does not wish anything unjust; He is by nature true, therefore He abominates falsehood; He is by nature immutable, therefore He does not admit of change; and if He does not admit of change He is always in the same state and condition. This He Himself asserts through the prophet. “I am the Lord I change not.” 1998 And the blessed David says “Thou art the same and Thy years shall have no end.” 1999 If He is the same He undergoes no change. If He is naturally superior to change and mutation He has not become from immortal, mortal nor from impassible, passible, for had this been possible He would not have taken on Him our nature. But since He has an immortal nature, He took a body capable of suffering, and with the body a human soul. Both of these He kept unstained from the defilements of sin, and gave His soul for the sake of the souls that had sinned, and His body for the sake of the bodies that had died. And since the body that was assumed is described as body of the very only begotten Son of God, He refers the passion of the body to Himself. But the four evangelists testify that it was not the divine nature but the body which was nailed to the cross, all teaching with one voice that Joseph of Arimathea came to Pilate and begged the body of Jesus; that he took down the body of Jesus from the tree and wrapped in fine linen, and laid in his own new tomb the body of Jesus; that Mary the Magdalene came to the tomb seeking the body of Jesus and ran to His disciples, and reported these things when she could not find the body of Jesus.
This is the unanimous teaching of the evangelists. But if your opponents urge that the angels said “Come see the place where the Lord lay” 2000 let the foolish folk learn that the divine Scripture says also about the victorious Stephen “And devout men carried Stephen to his burial.” 2001 And yet it was the body only which was deemed proper for burial, while the soul was not buried together with the body; nevertheless the body alone was spoken of by the common name. Similarly the blessed Jacob said to his sons “Bury me with my fathers.” 2002 He did not say “Bury my body.” Then he went on “There they buried Abraham and Sarah his wife; there they buried Isaac and Rebekah his wife; and there I buried Leah.” 2003 He did not say “their bodies.” The names are common to bodies or souls, but nevertheless it is only the bodies which he called by the common names. In this manner too we constantly describe the shrines of the holy apostles, prophets and martyrs, one it may be of Dionysius, another of Julianus another of Cosmas. 2004 And yet we know that only fragmentary remains of bodies lie there, while the souls in diviner regions are at rest. Precisely the same custom is to be found in common use, for such an one, we say, died; and such an one lies in this place; although we know that the soul is immortal and does not share the tomb with the body. In this sense the angel said “Come see the place where the Lord lay” 2005 not because he shut the Godhead in the tomb, but because he spoke of the Lord’s body by the Lord’s name.
In proof of this being the view of the holy Fathers let them mark the words of Athanasius, illustrious archbishop of Alexandria, who adorned his episcopate with confession. He exclaims “Life cannot die, but rather quickens the dead.”
Let them hear too the words of the far-famed Damasus bishop of Rome, “If anyone allege that on the cross pain was undergone by the Godhead and not by the body with the soul, the form of the servant which He had taken in its completeness, let him be anathema.” 2006
Let them hear too the very sacred and holy bishop of the Church of the Romans, the lord Leo, who has now written “The Son of God suffered as He was capable of suffering, not according to the nature which assumed but that which was assumed. For the impassible nature assumed the passible body, and gave it for us, to the end that He might work out our salvation and at the same time preserve His own nature impassible.”
And again “For He did not come to destroy His own nature but to save ours.” 2007
If therefore they accuse us for saying that God can do what He wishes, but that He wishes what is becoming to His own nature, and what is unbecoming He neither wishes nor is capable of; let them accuse too these saints and all the rest who maintain this position. Let them accuse even the Apostle who says “That by two immutable things in which it was impossible for God to lie.” 2008 And again “If we believe not, yet He abideth faithful: He cannot deny Himself.” 2009
Repeat these passages to your opponents, and if they are convinced, praise the good Lord for that, by means of your zeal, He has benefited them. If they remain unconvinced, enter into no discussion with them about doctrines, for it is forbidden by the divine apostle to “strive about words to no profit but to the subverting of the hearers.” 2010 But do you keep inviolate the teaching of the Gospels, that in the day of His appearing you may bring to the righteous Judge what has been entrusted to you with its due interest, and may hear the longed for words “Well done good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things I will make thee ruler over many things. Enter thou into the joy of thy Lord.” 2011
Footnotes
310:1996From the mention at the end of the letter of the epistle of Leo to Flavianus, Garnerius argues that it must be dated at the end of 449 or somewhat later. The epistle of Leo is dated on the 13th of June and could not have reached Theodoret in his detention at Cyrus till the autumn.
310:1997Luke vi. 30
311:1998Malachi iii. 6
311:1999Ps. cii. 27
311:2000Matt. xxviii. 6
311:2001Acts viii. 2
311:2002Gen. xlix. 29
311:2003Gen. xlix. 31
311:2004Cf. note on p. 303. Among martyred Dionysii were (i) one of the Seven Sleepers of Ephesus, (ii) one at Tripoli (iii) another at Corinth, (iv and v) and two at Cæsarea, in the persecution of Diocletian. Cosmas and Damianus are the famous semi-mythical physicians, the Silverless Martyrs. Vide p. 295.
311:2005Matthew xxviii. 6
312:2006Damas. Epist. ad Paulinum.
312:2007Leo Epist. ad Flavianum.
312:2008Hebrews vi. 18
312:20092 Tim. ii. 13
312:20102 Tim. ii. 14
312:2011Matt. xxv. 23
CXLV. To the Monks of Constantinople. 2012
There is nothing new or surprising in the fact that the men who have made their tongues weapons against our God and Saviour should also aim their shafts of falsehood against His right minded servants. It must needs be that the servants who grieve sorely at the outrage inflicted on their Master should share it. That so it should be they have been forwarned by their Lord Himself, Who consoles His holy disciples with the words “If they have persecuted me they will also persecute you.” 2013 “If they have called the Master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them of His household.” 2014 Then He cheered them by pointing out that calumny is easily detected, for He went on “There is nothing covered that shall not be revealed and hid that shall not be known.” 2015 I have often seen the truth of the divine prediction, but I see it with special clearness now. The authors of the calumny against me, who have bought my destruction for large sums of money, have been distinctly seen to be involved in the unsoundness of Valentinus and Bardesanes. They had hoped to cloke their own iniquity if only they could whet their tongues on the hone of falsehood in order to wound me. For ever since I saw that the heresy long ago extinguished had been renewed by these men I never ceased to cry aloud, bearing my testimony in private and in public, as well in social gatherings as in the temples of God, and strive to confute their conspiracy against the faith. They have consequently poured out their insults on my head, and allege that I preach two sons. But they ought to have convicted me to my face, not slandered me behind my back. They have done just the contrary. They tied me hand and foot at Cyrus by the imperial decree; they compelled the very righteous judges to condemn me without a trial, and delivered their most equitable sentence against a man who was five and thirty stages away. Such treatment was never suffered by any criminal charged with witchcraft or robbery of the dead, by murderer or by adulterer. But for the present I will leave the judges alone, for the Lord is at hand “Who judges the world with righteousness and the people with his truth;” 2016 Who exacts an account not only of words and deeds, but even of evil thoughts. But think it right to refute the false charge which has been made. What proof have they of my asserting two sons? Had I been one of the silent kind there might have been some ground for the suspicion, but my task has been to contend on behalf of the apostolic decrees, to bring the pasture of instruction to the Lord’s flocks, and to this end I have written five and thirty books interpreting the divine Scripture, and proving the falsehood of the heresies. The falsehoods these men have concocted are therefore easy of refutation. Tens on tens of thousands of hearers testify that I have taught the truth of the doctrines of the Gospel, and for any one who likes to bring them to the test my writings lie before the world. Not on behalf of a duality of sons, but of the only begotten Son of God, against the heathen, against Jews, against the recipients of the plague of Arius and Eunomius, against the supporters of the madness of Apollinarius, against the victims of the corruption of Marcion, I have never ceased to struggle; trying to convince the heathen that the Eternal Son of the ever living God is Himself Creator of the Universe; the Jews that about Him the prophets uttered their predictions, the Arians and Eunomians that He is of one substance, of one dignity and of equal power with the Father; Marcion’s mad adherents that He is not only good but just; and Saviour not, as they fable, of another’s works, but of His own. Once for all, fighting against each heresy, I charge men to fall down and worship the one Son.
And what need is there of many words, when it is possible to refute falsehood in few? We provide that those who year by year come up for holy baptism should carefully learn the faith set forth at Nicæa by the holy and blessed Fathers; and initiating them as we have been bidden, 2017 we baptize them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, pronouncing each name singly. Furthermore when performing divine service in the churches, both at the beginning and the decline of day and when dividing the day itself into three parts, we glorify the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost. 2018 If, as our slanderers allege, we preach two sons, which do we glorify and which do we leave unworshipped? It were the wildest folly to believe that there are two sons, and to give the doxology to one alone. And who is so distraught as, while hearing the words of the divine Paul “one Lord, one faith, one baptism,” 2019 and again “there is one Lord Jesus Christ by Whom are all things,” 2020 to lay down the law at variance with the teaching of the Spirit, and cut the one in two. But I am prating unnecessarily, for these men, nurtured in falsehood as they are, do not even dare to assert that they have ever heard me say anything of the kind; but they affirm that I preach two sons because I confess the two natures of our Master Christ. And they refuse to perceive that every human being has both an immortal soul and a mortal body; yet no one has hitherto been found to call Paul two Pauls because he has both soul and body, any more than Peter two Peters or Abraham or Adam. Everyone recognises the distinction of the natures, and does not call one man two Pauls. Precisely in the same way, when styling our Lord Jesus Christ the only begotten Son of God, God the Word incarnate, both Son of God and Son of Man, as we have been taught by the divine Scripture, we do not assert two sons, but we do confess the peculiar properties of the Godhead and of the manhood. The party however who deny the nature assumed of us men cannot hear these arguments without irritation.
It is only right that I should point out from what sources they have derived this impiety. Simon, Menander, Cerdo, and Marcion absolutely deny the incarnation, and call the birth from a Virgin fable. Valentinus, however, Basilides, Bardesanes, and Harmonius and their following, accept the conception of the Virgin and the birth; but they deny that God the Word took anything from the Virgin, but made as it were a transit through her as through a conduit, and appeared to mankind in semblance only, and seeming to be a man, in like manner as He was seen by Abraham and certain others of the ancients. Arius and Eunomius on the contrary held that He assumed a body, but that the Godhead played the part of the soul, in order that they may attribute to it what was lowly in His words and deeds. Apollinarius did indeed assert that He assumed a soul with the body, not the reasonable soul, but the soul which is called animal or phytic. 2021 Their contention is that the Godhead took the part of the mind. He had learnt the distinction of soul and of mind from the philosophers that are without while divine Scripture says that man consists of soul and body. For we read “And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living soul.” 2022 And the Lord in the sacred Gospels said to His apostles “Fear not them which kill the body but are not able to kill the soul.” 2023
So great is the divergence between the doctrines. These men have now done their best to outdo Apollinarius, Arius and Eunomius, in their impiety and have now endeavoured to plant anew the heresy sown of old by Valentinus and Bardesanes, and afterwards uprooted by most excellent husbandmen. Like Valentinus and Bardesanes they have denied that the body of our Lord was assumed of our nature. But the Church, following the footprints of the Apostles, contemplates in the Lord Christ both perfect Godhead and perfect manhood. For just as He took a body, not that He needed a body, but by its means to give immortality to all bodies; so too He took a soul, the guide of the body, that every soul by its means might share His immutability. For even if souls are immortal, they are not however immutable; for they undergo many and frequent changes, as they experience pleasure, now from one object, and now from another. Whence it cometh about that we err when we are changed and are inclined to what is worse. But after the resurrection our bodies enjoy immortality and incorruptibility, and our souls impassibility and immutability. For this reason the only begotten Son of God took both a body and a soul, preserved them free from all blame, and offered the sacrifice for the race. And this is why He is called our high priest; and He is named high priest not as God but as man. He makes the offering as man, and accepts the sacrifice with the Father and the Holy Spirit as God. If only Adam’s body had sinned, it alone should have benefited by the cure. But since the soul not only shared in the sin but was first in the sin, for first the thought forms an image of the sin and then carries it out by means of the body, it was just, I ween, that the soul too should be healed. But it is perhaps superfluous to demonstrate these points by reasoning, when the divine Scripture clearly proclaims them. This doctrine is distinctly taught by the holy David and the very divine Peter, the one foretelling from distant ages, and the other interpreting his prediction. The words of the first of the apostles are “David therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, He would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; he seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ that His soul was not left in hell neither His flesh did see corruption.” 2024
Now he has given us much instruction on the same point in these few words. First he states that the assumed nature derives its descent from the loins of David; secondly that He took not a body only, but also an immortal soul, and thirdly that He delivered body and soul to death, and, after taking them again, raised them as He would. His own words are “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up.” 2025 But we have learnt that the divine nature is immortal. What suffered was the passible, and the impassible remained impassible. For God the Word was made man not to render the impassible nature passible, but on the passible nature, by means of the Passion, to bestow the boon of impassibility. And the Lord Himself in the holy Gospels at one time says “I have power to lay down my life and I have power to take it again, no man taketh it from me but I lay it down of myself;” “That I may take it again.” 2026 And again “Therefore doth my Father love me because I lay down my life for the sheep,” 2027 and again “Now is my soul troubled” 2028 “my soul is exceeding sorrowful even unto death” 2029 and of His body He says “The bread that I will give is my flesh which I will give for the life of the world,” 2030 and when He delivered the divine mysteries and broke the symbol and distributed it, He added “This is my body which is being broken for you for the remission of sins,” 2031 and again “This is my blood which is shed for many for the remission of sins,” 2032 and again “Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood ye have no life in you” 2033 and “Whosoever eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life” “in himself” he adds. 2034 Innumerable passages of the same character may be quoted, both in the old Testament and the new, pointing out the assumption both of the body and of the soul, and that they are descended from Abraham and David. Joseph of Arimathea when he came to Pilate begged the body of Jesus, and the fourfold authority 2035 of the holy Gospels tells us how he received the body, wrapped it in the linen cloth, and committed it to the tomb. I do, indeed, sorrow and lament that I am compelled by the attacks of error to adduce against men supposed to be of one and the same faith with myself the arguments which I have already urged against the victims of the plague of Marcion,—of whom, by God’s grace, I have converted more than ten thousand, and brought them to Holy Baptism. What child of the church ever had any doubts on these points? Who has not cited this teaching of the holy Fathers? The works of the great Basil are full of it; as well, as those of his fellow soldiers Gregory and Amphilochius, and of those who in the West have been illustrious teachers of grace, Damasus, bishop of great Rome, and Ambrose of Milan; and Cyprian of Carthage who for the sake of these doctrines won the martyr’s crown. Five times was the famous Athanasius driven from his flock and compelled to dwell in exile; and in the cause of these doctrines strove too his master Alexander. Eustathius, Meletius, and Flavianus, luminaries of the East, and Ephraim, harp of the Spirit, who daily waters the people of Syria with the streams of grace; John and Atticus, loud heralds of the truth; and men of an earlier age than they, Ignatius, Polycarp, Irenæus, Justin, and Hippolytus, of whom the more part not only shine at the head of the company of bishops, but also adorn the martyr’s band.
He, too, who now rules great Rome and diffuses in all directions from the West the rays of right teaching, the most holy Leo, has expressed to me this distinctive mark of the faith in his own letters. All these have clearly taught that the only begotten Son of God and everlasting God, ineffably begotten of the Father, is one Son; and that after the incarnation He was called both Son of man and man, not because He was changed into manhood, for His nature is immutable, but because He took what was ours. They teach too that He was both impassible and immortal as God, and mortal and passible as man; but after the resurrection even in relation to His humanity He received impassibility and immortality, for, though the body remained a body, still it is impassible and immortal, verily a divine body and glorified with divine glory. This is distinctly told us by the blessed Paul in the words “For our conversation is in heaven from whence also we look for the Saviour, our Lord Jesus Christ, who shall change our vile body that it may be fashioned like unto the body of His glory.” 2036 He does not say to “His glory” but to “the body of His glory,” and the Lord Himself, when He had said to His apostles “There be some standing here which shall not taste of death till they see the Son of man coming in His Father’s glory,” 2037 took them after six days into an exceeding high mountain, and was transfigured before them, and His face became as the sun, and His raiment was bright like the light. 2038 By these means He shewed the manner of the second advent. He taught that the assumed nature is not uncircumscribed (for this is characteristic of the Godhead alone) but that it shall send forth flashes of the divine glory, and emit rays of light transcending the powers of the sense of sight. With this glory He was taken up; with this the angels said that He should come; for their words were “He who was taken from you into heaven shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.” 2039 When moreover He was seen by the divine apostles after the resurrection, He shewed them both hands and feet; and to Thomas He shewed also His side and the wounds of the nails and of the spear. For on account of those men who positively deny the assumption of the flesh, and further of those others who assert that after the resurrection the nature of the body was changed into the nature of Godhead, He preserved unaltered the prints of the nails and of the spear. And while raising all other bodies free from every disfigurement, 2040 in His own body He left the marks of His sufferings, to the end that deniers of the assumption of the body may be convicted of their error by means of His sufferings; and holders of the notion that His body was changed into another nature may be taught by the print of the nails that it abides in its own proper qualities. Suppose any one to imagine that he has a proof that the body of the Lord did not remain a body after the resurrection in the fact that He came in to the disciples when the doors were shut, let such an one remember how He walked upon the sea while His body was still mortal, how He was born after keeping the seals of virginity intact, and how again when encircled by them that were plotting against Him He frequently escaped from their hands. But why need I mention the Lord, who was not only man, but God before the ages, and to whom it was easy to do whatsoever He would? Let them tell how Habakkuk was translated from Judæa into Babylon in a moment of time and passed through the covering of the den, and brought the food to Daniel, and returned again. without destroying the seals of the den. 2041 It is sheer foolishness to enquire into the manner of the miracles of the Lord, but in addition to what has been said it ought also to be known that after the resurrection our bodies also will be incorruptible and immortal, and being released from what is earthly will become light and æthereal. This moreover is distinctly taught us by the divine Paul in the words “It is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption, it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown in dishonour it is raised in glory; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body” 2042 and in another place “We shall be caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.” 2043 If then the bodies of the saints become light and æthereal and easily travel through the air, we cannot wonder that the Lord’s body united to the Godhead of the only begotten, when, after the resurrection, it had become immortal, entered in when the doors were shut.
Countless other proofs might be quoted without difficulty from apostles and prophets. But what has been already said is enough to show the drift of my teaching. I believe in one Father, one Son and one Holy Ghost; and I confess one Godhead, one Lordship, one substance and three hypostases. For the incarnation of the only begotten did not add to the number of the Trinity, and make the Trinity a quaternity, but, even after the incarnation the Trinity was still a Trinity. And while confessing that the only begotten Son of God was made man I do not deny the nature which He took, but confess, as I have said, both the nature which took and the nature which was taken. The union did not confound the properties of the natures. For if the air by receiving the light through all its parts does not cease to be air, nor yet at the same time destroy the nature of the light, for with our eyes we behold the light and by our feeling we recognise the air, as it meets us cold or hot, or moist or dry, so it were sheer folly to call the union of the Godhead and the manhood confusion. If created natures which share at once subordinate and temporal existence, when united and in some sense mingled, yet remain unimpaired, and, when the light withdraws, the nature of the air is left alone, much more proper is it, I apprehend, for the nature which fashioned all things, when conjoined with and united to the nature which it assumed from us, to be acknowledged to continue itself in its purity, and in like manner to preserve unimpaired that which it had assumed. Gold, too, when brought in contact with the fire, participates both in the colour and power of fire, but it does not lose its own nature, but at the same time remains gold and has the active qualities of fire. In this manner also the Lord’s body is a body, but impassible, incorruptible, immortal, of the Lord, divine and glorified with the divine glory. It is not separated from the Godhead, nor yet is of any one else, save of the only begotten Son of God Himself. For it does not show to us another person, but the only-begotten Himself clad in our nature.
This is the doctrine which I am continually preaching. They on the other hand who deny the incarnation wrought on our behalf have called me a heretic, adopting a course something like that of unchaste females, who, while they sell their own charms, assail honest women with the insults of their profession, and apply language proper to their own wantonness to women who hold such wantonness in abhorrence. This is how Egypt has acted. She has herself fallen willingly into the thraldom of base desire. She has lavished her servile adulation on a man of chaste character. Then, failing to entice him by her wiles, or to trap him in the snares of her voluptuous passion, she describes one who is faithful to purity as an adulterer.
But these men will be called to account by God, as well for their devices against the faith as for the snares they have laid against me. I only charge those who have been influenced by the false accusations uttered against me to keep one ear for the accused, and not to give both to the accusers. In this manner they will fulfil the divine law which lays down “Thou shalt not raise a false report,” 2044 and “Judge righteously between every man and his brother.” 2045 In these words the divine law charges us not to believe the calumnies uttered against the absent but to judge the accused face to face.
Footnotes
312:2012This, remarks Garnerius, is less a letter than a prolix exposition of Theodoret’s view of the Incarnation. Theodoret mentions his condemnation at the Latrocinium and the exile of Eutyches, but says nothing of the favourable action towards himself of Marcianus. Theodosius died on the 29th of July, and Marcian began his reign on the 25th of August, 450. Theodoret could not possibly hear of the exile of Eutyches before the end of September. The document may therefore be dated in the late autumn of 450 before Theodoret had received the imperial permission to return to Cyrus.
312:2013John xv. 20
312:2014Matt. x. 25
312:2015Matt. x. 26
312:2016Ps. xcvi. 13
313:2017μυσταγωγοῦντες μυσταγωγέω came ultimately to equal “baptize.” The word and its correlatives had long passed out of special mystic use. In Cicero a μυσταγωγός is a “Cicerone” (Verr. iv. 59) and Strabo uses μυσταγωγεῖν for to be a guide. (812.)
313:2018Reference appears to be made here to offices at the 3d, 6th, and 9th hours, and to morning and evening services, without specification of their number.
313:2019Ephes. iv. 5
313:20201 Cor. viii. 6
313:2021i.e. the life common to man with animals and plants. cf. p. 194 n.
313:2022Gen. ii. 7
313:2023Matt. x. 28
314:2024Acts 2:30, 31, Ps. 16:10Acts ii. 30 and 31. Ps. xvi. 10
314:2025John ii. 19
314:2026John 10:18, 17. Observe the inversion and inexactitude.
314:2027John 10:17, 15John x. 17 and 15
314:2028John xii. 27
314:2029Matt. xxvi. 38
314:2030John vi. 51
314:20311 Cor. 11:24, Matt. 26:281 Cor. xi. 24. Matt. xxvi. 28. But it is to be noticed that for St. Paul’s word κλώμενον, i.e. “being broken,” Theodoret substitutes θρυπτόμενον, i.e. “being crushed,” or “broken small,” a verb not used by the evangelists. And the clause “for the remission of sins” is misplaced.
314:2032Matt. xxvi. 28
314:2033John vi. 53
314:2034John vi. 54
314:2035Cf. note on page 302.
315:2036Phil. 3:20, 21Phil. iii. 20 and 21
315:2037Matt. xvi. 28. Observe variation. The mss. agree.
315:2038Cf. Matt. 37:1, 2
315:2039Acts i. 11
315:2040Cf. p. 199. n.
315:2041Bel 36
316:20421 Cor. 15:42, 43
316:20431 Thess. iv. 17.
316:2044Ex. xxiii. 1
316:2045Deut. i. 16
CXLVI. To John the Œconomus. 2046
Rest and a life free from care are very grateful to me. I have therefore blocked the door of the monastery, and decline intercourse with my friends.
But I have received information that fresh attacks are being made against the Faith of the Gospels, and therefore conclude that there may be danger in my silence. When wrong has been done some mortal prince, not only the guilty authors of the outrage but they also who have been standing by and made no effort to drive off the assailants, are in peril of punishment: What penalty then ought not to be undergone by men who can venture to look lightly on the utterance of blasphemy against our God and Saviour? This is the fear which has impelled me now to write and expose the innovations of which I have been informed.
It is said that a common report in the city represents that after certain presbyters had offered prayer, and concluded it in the wonted manner, while some said “For to Thee belongs glory and to thy Christ and to the Holy Ghost;” and others “Through grace and loving kindness of thy Christ, with whom belongs glory to Thee with thy holy Spirit,” the very wise archdeacon prohibited the use of the expression, “the Christ” and said that the “only begotten” ought to be glorified. If this is true it were impossible to exceed the impiety. For he either divides the one Lord Jesus Christ into two sons and regards the only begotten Son as lawful and natural, but the Christ as adopted and spurious, and consequently unmeet for being honoured in doxology; or else he is endeavouring to support the heresy which has now burst in on us with the riot of wild revelry. Had a grievous tempest been now oppressing us, any one might have supposed that the blasphemer suited his blasphemy to the necessity of the moment, through fear of the power of the originators of the heresy. But now that He who is blasphemed has rebuked the winds and the sea, and blessed the storm-tossed churches with a calm, while everywhere by land and sea the proclamation of the apostles is preached, what room is there for the blasphemy? While not even they who have lately basely inserted among the doctrines of the Church that flesh and godhead are of one and the same nature have ever forbidden the offering of praise to the Lord Christ. This fact may be easily ascertained from those who have returned thence. A man holding the foremost place in the ecclesiastical rank ought to have known the divine Scripture, and to have learnt from it that just as the heralds of the truth rank the only begotten Son with the Father, so accordingly using the title of “the Christ” instead of that of “Son” they number Him sometimes with the Father and sometimes with the Holy Ghost; for the Christ is none other than the only begotten Son of God. So we may quote the divine Paul writing to the Corinthians, but teaching the world, that “There is one God the Father of whom are all things…and one Lord Jesus Christ by whom are all things.” 2047 Thus he calls the same person, Christ, Jesus, Lord, and Creator of all things. And writing to the Thessalonians he says “Now God Himself and our Father and our Lord Jesus Christ direct our way unto you.” 2048 And in his second epistle to the same he puts the Christ before the Father, not to invert the order, but to teach that the order of the names does not indicate a distinction of dignity and nature. His words are “Now our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope through grace, comfort your hearts, and stablish you in every good word and work.” 2049 And at the end of his Epistle to the Romans after certain exhortations he adds “I beseech you brethren for the Lord Jesus Christ’s sake and for the love of the spirit.” 2050 Now if he had known the Christ as being any other than the Son he would not have put Him before the Holy Ghost. Writing to the Corinthians, at the very beginning of his letter, he mentions the name of Christ as alone sufficient to influence the faithful. “Now I beseech you brethren by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that ye all speak the same thing” 2051 and when writing to them a second time he thus concludes “The peace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God the Father and the communion of the Holy Ghost be with you all.” 2052 Here he puts the name of Christ not only before the Spirit, but also before the Father and this in all the churches is the beginning of the Liturgy of the Mystery.
According, then, to this extraordinary regulation the august name of our God and Saviour, Jesus Christ, ought to be omitted from the mystic writings. But it is unnecessary to say more on this point. The opening of every one of his letters is distinguished by the divine Apostle with this address. At one time it is “Paul a servant of Jesus Christ called to be an apostle.” 2053 At another “Paul called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ.” 2054 At another “Paul a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ.” 2055 And suiting his benediction to his exordium he deduces it from the same source and links the title of the Son with God the Father, saying “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” 2056 And he graces the conclusion of his letters with the blessing “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all, amen.” 2057
Copious additional evidence may be found whereby it may be learnt without difficulty that our Lord Jesus Christ is no other person than the Son which completes the Trinity. For the same before the ages was only begotten Son and God the Word, and after the resurrection He was called Jesus and Christ, receiving the names from the facts. Jesus means Saviour; “Thou shalt call His name Jesus for He shall save His people from their sins.” 2058
He is named Christ from being as man anointed with the Holy Ghost, and called our High Priest, Apostle, Prophet and King. Long ago the divine Moses exclaimed “The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a prophet, from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me.” 2059 And the divine David cries “The Lord hath sworn and will not repent, Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchisedek.” 2060 This prophecy is confirmed by the divine Apostle. 2061 And again “seeing then that we have a great High Priest that has passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.” 2062
That as God, He is king before the ages that prophetic minstrelsy teaches us in the words “Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever; the sceptre of Thy kingdom is a right sceptre.” 2063
His majesty as man is also shown us. For having the sovereignty of all things as God and Creator, He assumes this majesty as man, wherefore it is added “Thou lovest righteousness and hatest wickedness, therefore God thy God hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.” 2064 And in the second psalm the anointed one himself says “Yet was I set as king by Him upon the holy hill of Sion, I will declare the decree of the Lord. The Lord hath said unto me ‘Thou art my Son this day have I begotten Thee; ask of me and I shall give Thee the heathen for thine inheritance and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.’” 2065 This He said as man, for as man He receives what as God He possesses. And at the very beginning of the psalm the gift of prophecy ranks Him with God the Father in the words “Why do the heathen rage and the people imagine a vain thing. The kings of the earth set themselves and the rulers take counsel together against the Lord and against His anointed.” 2066
Let no one then foolishly suppose that the Christ is any other than the only begotten Son. Let us not imagine ourselves wiser than the gift of the Spirit. Let us hear the words of the great Peter, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 2067 Let us hear the Lord Christ confirming this confession, for “On this rock,” He says, “I will build my church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.” 2068 Wherefore too the wise Paul, most excellent master builder of the churches, fixed no other foundation than this. “I,” he says, “as a wise master builder have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereon. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.” 2069 How then can they think of any other foundation, when they are bidden not to fix a foundation, but to build on that which is laid? The divine writer recognises Christ as the foundation, and glories in this title, as when he says, “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I but Christ liveth in me.” 2070 And again “To me to live is Christ and to die is gain,” 2071 and again “For I determined not to know anything among you save Jesus Christ and Him crucified.” 2072 And a little before he says, “But we preach Christ crucified to the Jews a stumbling-block and to the Greeks foolishness, but unto them which are called both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.” 2073 And in his Epistle to the Galatians he writes, “But when it pleased God who separated me from my mother’s womb and called me by His grace to reveal His Son in me that I might preach Him among the heathen.” 2074 But when writing to the Corinthians he does not say we preach “the Son” but “Christ crucified,” herein doing no violence to his commission, but recognising the same to be Jesus, Christ, Lord, only begotten, and God the Word. For the same reason too at the beginning of his letter to the Romans he calls himself “servant of Jesus Christ” and describes himself as “separated unto the gospel of God, which He had promised afore by His prophets in the Holy Scriptures, concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; and declared to be the Son of God with power” 2075 and so on. He calls the same both Jesus Christ, and Son of David, and Son of God, as God and Lord of all, and yet in the middle of his epistle, after making mention of the Jews, he adds, “whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all God blessed for ever, amen.” 2076 Here he says that He who according to the flesh derived His descent from the Jews is eternal God and is praised by the right minded as Lord of all created things. The same teaching is given us in the Apostle’s words to the excellent Titus “Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.” 2077 Here he calls the same both Saviour, and great God, and Jesus Christ. And in another place he writes, “In the kingdom of Christ and of God.” 2078 Moreover the chorus of the angels announced to the shepherds “Unto you is born this day in the city of David…Christ the Lord.” 2079
But to men who meditate on God’s law day and night, it is indeed needless to write all the proofs of this kind; the above are sufficient to persuade even the most obstinate opponents not to divide the divine titles. One point, however, I cannot endure to omit. He is alleged to have said that there are many Christs but one Son. Into this error I suppose he fell through ignorance. For if he had read the divine Scripture, he would have known that the title of the Son has also been bestowed by our bountiful Lord on many. The lawgiver Moses, the writer of the ancient history, says “And the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair and they took them wives of them,” 2080 and the God of all Himself said to this Prophet “Thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Israel is my son even my first-born.” 2081 In the great song he says “Rejoice O ye nations with His people and let all the sons of God be strong in Him;” 2082 and by the mouth of the prophet Isaiah He says “I have nourished and brought up sons (children) and they have rebelled against me;” 2083 and through the thrice blessed David “I have said ye are gods and all of you are children of the Most High,” 2084 and to the Romans the wise Paul wrote in this manner, “For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. For the Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God. And if children, then heirs; heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ: if so be that we suffer with Him that we may be also glorified together;” 2085 and to the Galatians he writes “And because ye are sons God hath sent forth the spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Wherefore thou art no more a servant but a son; and if a son then an heir of God through Jesus Christ.” 2086 The lesson he gives to the Ephesians is “in love having predestinated us into the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to Himself.” 2087
If then, because the name of the Christ is common, we ought not to glorify the Christ as God, we shall equally shrink from worshipping Him as Son, since this also is a name which has been bestowed upon many. And why do I say the Son? The very name of God itself has been given by God to many. “The Lord the God of gods hath spoken and called the earth.” 2088 And “I have said Ye are gods,” 2089 and “Thou shalt not revile the gods.” 2090 Many too have appropriated this name to themselves. The dæmons who have deceived mankind have given this title to idols; whence Jeremiah exclaims, “The gods that have not made the heavens and the earth even they shall perish from the earth and from under these heavens;” 2091 and again “They made to themselves gods of silver and gods of gold;” 2092 and the prophet Isaiah when he had mocked the making of the idols, and said “He burneth part thereof in the fire with part thereof he eateth flesh he warmeth himself and saith Aha I am warm I have seen the fire,” 2093 went on “and the residue thereof he maketh a god and falleth down unto it and saith ‘Deliver me for thou art my god’” 2094 and so the prophet laments over them and says “Know that their heart is ashes.” 2095 And the Psalmist David has taught us to sing “For all the gods of the nations are idols, but the Lord made the heavens.” 2096
But this common use of titles gives no offence to men who are instructed in true religion. We are aware that the dæmons have falsely bestowed upon themselves and on idols the divine name, while the saints have received this honour of free grace.
In reality and by nature it is the God of all, and His only-begotten Son and the Holy Spirit which are God. This is distinctly taught us by the admirable Paul in the words “For though there be that are called gods whether in heaven or in earth, as there are gods many and lords many, but to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in Him; and one Lord by whom are all things and we by Him.” 2097 And the Holy Spirit is called the Spirit of God and so also is the soul of man, for, it is written, “His breath goeth forth,” 2098 and “O ye spirits and souls of the righteous bless ye the Lord,” 2099 and the Psalmist David called the angels spirits. “Who maketh His angels spirits and His ministers a flame of fire.” 2100 Why indeed do I mention the angels and the souls of men? Even the dæmons are so called by the Lord “He shall take unto him seven other spirits more wicked than himself and they shall enter in, and the last state of that man shall be worse than the first.” 2101 But even this application of the name does not offend the pious reader, for the Father and His only begotten Son and His Holy Spirit are one God by nature; and the divine Word made man, our Lord Jesus Christ, is by nature one Son, only begotten of the Father; and the Comforter who completes the number of the Trinity is one Holy Ghost. Thus though many are named fathers, we worship one Father, the Father before the ages, who Himself gave this title to men, as the Apostle says, “For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom every fatherhood in heaven and earth is named.” 2102 Let us not then, because others are called christs, rob ourselves of the worship of our Lord Jesus Christ. For just as though many are called gods and fathers, there is one God and Father over all and before the ages; and though many are called sons, there is one real and natural Son; and though many are styled spirits there is one Holy Ghost; just so though many are called christs there is one Lord Jesus Christ by Whom are all things. And very properly does the Church cling to this name; for she has heard Paul, escorter of the Bride, exclaiming “I have espoused you to one husband that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ,” 2103 and again “Husbands love your wives as Christ also loved the Church,” 2104 and again “For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery; but I speak concerning Christ and the Church.” 2105 Listen to him as he says “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us,” 2106 and elsewhere “Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized unto Jesus Christ were baptized into His death,” 2107 and in another place, “For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ,” 2108 and again “Put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lust thereof.” 2109
They who are blessed by the boons of God and have learnt to know these passages and others like them, kindled with warm love for their bountiful Master, constantly carry on their lips this His dearest name and cry in the words of the Song of Songs “My beloved is mine and I am his;” “I sat down under his shadow with great delight, and his fruit was sweet to my taste.” 2110 And besides all this that name of ours which we love so well we have derived from the name of Christ. We are called Christians. 2111
Of this name the Lord of all says, “The Lord God shall call His servants by another name which shall be blessed on the earth” 2112 and the following is the reason why the Church specially clings to this name. When the only-begotten Son of God was made man, then He was named Christ, then human nature received the beams of intellectual light; then the heralds of the truth shed their beams upon the world. Teachers of the Church, however, constantly used the names of the only begotten without distinction; at one time they glorify the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost; at another the Father with Christ and the Holy Ghost; yet as far as the sense is concerned there is here no difference. Wherefore after the Lord had commanded to baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost the blessed Peter said to them who received his preaching and asked what they must do, “Believe and be baptized every one of you in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,” 2113 as though this name contained in itself all the potency of the divine command. The same teaching is clearly given us by the great Basil, luminary of the Cappadocians, 2114 or rather of the world. His words are “the name of Christ is the confession of the whole.” It indicates at once the Father, who anointed, the Son, who was anointed, and the Holy Ghost whereby He was anointed. Furthermore the thrice blessed Fathers assembled in council at Nicæa, after saying that we must believe in one God, the Father, added “and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God.” Thereby they teach that the Lord Jesus Christ is Himself the only begotten Son of God.
To what has been said it must also be added that we must not affirm that after the ascension the Lord Christ is not Christ but only begotten Son. The divine Gospels and the history of the Acts and the Epistles of the Apostle himself were, as we know, written after the ascension. It is after the ascension that the divine Paul exclaims “Seeing then that we have a great High Priest that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.” 2115 And again, “For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into Heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us.” 2116 And again after speaking of our hope in God he adds “which hope we have as an anchor both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil; whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus made an High Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.” 2117 And when, writing to the blessed Titus about the second advent he says, “Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.” 2118 And to the Thessalonians he wrote in similar terms “For they themselves show of us what manner of entering in we had unto you, and how we turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God; and to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.” 2119 And again “And the Lord make you to increase and abound in love one toward another, and toward all men, even as we do toward you: to the end he may stablish your hearts unblamable in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his saints.” 2120 And again when writing to the same a second time he says, “Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him.” 2121 And a little further on when predicting the destruction of antichrist he adds, “Whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming.” 2122 And when exhorting the Romans to concord he says, “But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at naught thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. For it is written, as I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.” 2123 And the Lord Himself when announcing His second advent besides other things says too this “Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west, so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be.” 2124
And after the immortality and incorruptibility of His body He called Himself Son of Man, naming Himself from the nature which was seen, inasmuch as the divine nature is indeed invisible to angels, as the Lord Himself had said “No one hath seen God at any time.” 2125 And to the great Moses He said “There shall no man see me and live.” 2126
The words “Henceforth know we no man after the flesh; yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh; yet now henceforth know we Him no more,” 2127 were not written by the divine Apostle in order to annul the assumed nature, but for the confirmation of our own future incorruption, immortality, and spiritual life.
The Apostle therefore continues “Therefore if any man be in Christ he is a new creature; old things are passed away; behold all things are become new.” 2128 He speaks of what is to be in the future as though it had already come to pass. We have not yet been gifted with immortality, but we shall be; and when so gifted we shall not become bodiless, but we shall put on immortality. “For” says the divine Apostle, “we would not be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.” 2129 And again “For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.” 2130 Thus he did not speak of the Lord as bodiless, but taught us to believe that even the visible nature is incorruptible, and glorified with the divine glory. This instruction he has given us yet more clearly in the Epistle to the Philippians; “For our conversation” he writes “is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ; who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body.” 2131 By these words he teaches us distinctly that the body of the Lord is a body, but a divine body, and glorified with the divine glory.
Let us, then, not shun the name whereby we enjoy salvation, and whereby all things are made new, as says our teacher himself in his Epistle to the Ephesians,—“According to His good pleasure which He hath purposed in Himself; that in the dispensation of the fulness of time He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth, even in Him.” 2132 Let us rather learn from this blessed language how we are bound to glorify our benefactor, by connecting the name of Christ with our God and Father. In his Epistle to the Romans the Apostle says “my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, but now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith; to God only will be glory through Jesus Christ forever. Amen.” 2133 Writing to the Ephesians he thus gives praise—“Now unto Him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us, unto Him be glory in the Church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen.” 2134 And a little before he says, “For this cause I bow my knee unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named.” 2135 And considerably farther on he says “Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.” 2136 And when he requites with benediction the liberality of the Philippians he says “But my God shall supply all your need according to His riches in glory by Christ Jesus.” 2137 And for the Hebrews he prayed, “Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus Christ, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, make you perfect in every good work, to do His will, working in you that which is well pleasing in His sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.” 2138 And not only when glorifying, but also when exhorting and protesting, the Apostle conjoins the Christ with God the Father. To the blessed Timothy he exclaims “I charge thee therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ.” 2139 And again “I give thee charge in the sight of God who quickeneth all things, and before Jesus Christ, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession; that thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ; which in His times He shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords; who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see; to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.” 2140
These are the lessons we have learnt from the divine Apostles; this is the teaching given us by John and Matthew, those mighty rivers of the gospel message. The latter says “The book of the generation of Jesus Christ the son of David, the son of Abraham;” 2141 and the former when he shewed the things which were before the ages wrote, “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him.” 2142
Footnotes
316:2046Cf. note on page 288. This letter, or rather doctrinal statement is incomplete. Garnerius supposes it to have been written during Theodoret’s retirement after the Council of Chalcedon. There he cut himself off from society and wished to devote himself to study and contemplation.
317:20471 Cor. viii. 6
317:20481 Thess. iii. 11
317:20492 Thess. 2:16, 17
317:2050Romans xv. 30
317:20511 Cor. i. 10
317:20522 Cor. xiii. 14
317:2053Romans i. 1
317:20541 Cor. i. 1
317:2055Titus i. 1
317:2056Romans i. 7
318:2057Romans xvi. 4
318:2058Matt. i. 21
318:2059Deut. viii. 15
318:2060Psalm cxii. 4
318:2061Hebrews vii. 21
318:2062Hebrews iv. 14
318:2063Psalm xlv. 6
318:2064Psalm xlv. 7
318:2065Ps. 2:6, 7, 8, lxx.
318:2066Ps. 2:1, 2
318:2067Matt. xvi. 16
318:2068It will be observed that our author omits the verse containing the famous paronomasia, and that what he regards the Saviour as confirming is not any supposed authority on the part of the speaker but the identification of Himself with the Christ and of the Christ with the Son of the living God.
318:20691 Cor. 3:10, 11
318:2070Gal. ii. 19
318:2071Phil. i. 21
318:20721 Cor. ii. 2
318:20731 Cor. 1:23, 24
318:2074Gal. 1:15, 16
319:2075Romans i. 1-4
319:2076Romans ix. 5
319:2077Titus ii. 13
319:2078Ephes. v. 5. Here the A.V. rather obscures the force of the original. The R.V. alters to “in the kingdom of Christ and God,” but even this hardly brings out Theodoret’s views of ἐν τῆ βασιλεί& 139· τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ Θεοῦ, “in the kingdom of the Christ and God.” The mss. do not vary. At the same time it will be borne in mind that the anarthrous use of “Θεός” is not infrequent, and that some commentators (cf. Alford ad loc.) would hesitate to ground on this passage the argument of the text. The reading of א and Β in John i. 18 “ὁ μονογενὴς Θεός” is significant.
319:2079Luke ii. 11
319:2080Gen. vi. 2
319:2081Exodus iv. 22
319:2082Deut. xxxii. 43, lxx.
319:2083Is. i. 2
319:2084Psalm lxxxii. 6
319:2085Romans viii. 14-17
319:2086Gal. 4:6, 7
319:2087Eph. 1:4, 5. Observe the position of “in love” which agrees with the margin of R.V.
319:2088Psalm l. 1, lxx.
319:2089Psalm lxxxii. 6
319:2090Exodus ii. 28
319:2091Jeremiah x. 11
319:2092This seems to be an inaccurate quotation of Baruch vi. 11. cf. p. 165 n.
319:2093Isaiah xliv. 16
319:2094Isaiah xliv. 17
319:2095Isaiah xliv. 20, lxx.
319:2096Psalm xcvi. 5
320:20971 Cor. 8:5, 6
320:2098Psalm cxlvi. 4
320:2099Song of the three holy children 63
320:2100Psalm civ. 4
320:2101Matt. 12:43, Luke 11:26Matt. xii. 43. Luke xi. 26. Observe difference of tense and variation.
320:2102Ephes. iii. 14. R.V. marg. It will be seen that the argument of Theodoret does not admit of the translation “whole family” as in A.V.
320:21032 Cor. xi. 2
320:2104Ephes. v. 25
320:2105Eph. 5:31, 32
320:2106Gal. iii. 13
320:2107Rom. vi. 3
320:2108Gal. iii. 27
320:2109Rom. xiii. 14
320:2110Cant. 2:16, 3
320:2111Acts xi. 26. “The word seems to have been in the first instance a nickname fastened by the heathen populace of Antioch on the followers of Christ, who still continued to style themselves the ‘disciples’ or the ‘saints’ or the ‘brethren’ or the ‘believers,’ and the like. The biting gibes of the Antiochene populace which stung to the quick successive emperors—Hadrian, M. Aurelius, Severus, Julian—would be little disposed to spare the helpless adherents of this new ‘superstition.’ Objection indeed has been taken to the Antiochene origin of the name on the ground that the termination is Roman, like Pompeianus, Cæsarianus, and the like. But this termination, if it was Latin, was certainly Asiatic likewise, as appears from such words as ᾽Ασιανός, βακτριανός, Σαρδιανός, Τραλλιανός, ᾽Αρειανός, Μενανδριανός, Σαβελλιανός. The next occurrence of the word in a Christian document is on the occasion of St. Paul’s appearance before Festus (a.d. 60). It is not however put in the mouth of a believer, but occurs in the scornful jest of Agrippa, ‘With but little persuasion thou wouldest fain make me a Christian’ (Acts xxvi. 28). The third and last example occurs a few years later. In the first Epistle of St. Peter, presumably about a.d. 66 or 67, the Apostle writes ‘Let not any of you suffer as a murderer or a thief…but if (he suffers) as a Christian, let him not be ashamed but glorify God’ (1 Pet. 4.15). Here again the term is not the Apostle’s own, but represents the charge brought against the believers by their heathen accusers. In the New Testament there is no indication that the name was yet adopted by the disciples of Christ as their own. Thus Christian documents again confirm the statement of Tacitus that as early as the Neronian persecution this name prevailed, and the same origin also is indirectly suggested by those notices, which he directly states—not ‘qui sese appellabant Christianos’ but ‘quos vulgus appellabat Christianos.’ It was a gibe of the common people against ‘the brethren.’” Bp. Lightfoot Ap. Fathers, II. i. 417.
320:2112Isa. 65:15, 16, lxx.
321:2113Acts ii. 38. “Believe” substituted for “repent.”
321:2114i.e. of Cæsarea. The Cappadocian Cæsarea originally called Mazaca is still Kasaria.
321:2115Heb. iv. 14. On the opinion of the Pauline authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews cf. note on page 37. The Alexandrian view is shewn to have affected the Eastern Church. For the reading “Jesus Christ” instead of Jesus the Son of God on which Theodoret’s argument depends there is no manuscript authority.
321:2116Heb. ix. 24
321:2117Heb. 6:19, 20
321:2118Titus ii. 13. Cf. note on page 319 on the passage Ephes. v. 5. Here, however, the position of the article is in favour of the interpretation “Jesus Christ, the great God and our Saviour” which was generally adopted by the Greek orthodox Fathers in their controversy with the Arians and by the majority of ancient and modern commentators. But see Alford ad loc. for such arguments as may be adduced in favour of taking σωτήρ as anarthrous like Θεός
321:21191 Thess. 1:9, 10
321:21201 Thess. 3:12, 13
321:21212 Thess. ii. 1
321:21222 Thess. ii. 8
321:2123Rom. 14:10, 16
321:2124Matt. 24:23, 27Matt. xxiv. 23 and 27
321:2125John i. 18. The “no man” of A.V. does not admit of Theodoret’s argument.
321:2126Ex. xxxiii. 20, lxx. οὐδεὶς ὄψεται
322:21272 Cor. v. 16
322:21282 Cor. v. 17
322:21292 Cor. v. 4
322:21301 Cor. xv. 53
322:2131Phil. 3:20, 21
322:2132Eph. 1:9, 10
322:2133Rom. 16:25, 26, 27
322:2134Eph. 3:20, 21
322:2135Eph. iii. 14. A.V.
322:2136Eph. v. 20
322:2137Phil. iv. 19
322:2138Heb. 13:20, 21
322:21392 Tim. iv. 1
322:21401 Tim. 6:13, 14, 15, 16
322:2141Matt. i. 1
323:2142John 1:1, 2, 3. Here this document abruptly terminates.
CXLVII. 2143 To John, Bishop of Germanicia.
Immediately on receipt of your holiness’s former letter I replied. About the present state of affairs, it is impossible to entertain any good hope. I apprehend that this is the beginning of the general apostasy. For when we see that those who lament what was done as they say, by violence, at Ephesus, show no signs of repentance, but abide by their unlawful deeds and are building up a superstructure at once of injustice and of impiety; when we see that the rest take no concerted action to deny their deeds and do not refuse to hold communion with men who abide by their unlawful action, what hope of good is it possible for us to entertain? Had they been expressing their admiration of what has happened as though all had been well and rightly done, it would only have been proper for them to abide by what they themselves commend. But if, as they say, they are lamenting what has been done and stating it to have been done by force and violence, why in the world do they not repudiate what has been unlawfully done? Why is the present, which lasts for such a little time, preferred before what is sure to come to pass? Why in the world do they openly lie and deny that any innovation has been introduced into doctrine? On account of what murders and witchcrafts have I been expelled? What adulteries did the man commit? What tombs did the man violate? It is perfectly clear even to outsiders that it was for doctrine that I and the rest were expelled. Why the Lord Domnus too, because he would not accept “the Chapters” 2144 was deposed by these excellent persons who called them admirable and confessed that they abided by them. I had read their propositions, and they rejected me as the head and front of the heresy and expelled others for the same reason. 2145
What has happened proves plainly enough that they supposed the Saviour to have laid down the law of practical virtue rather for Hamaxobians 2146 than for them. When some men had given in charges against Candidianus, the Pisidian, 2147 accusing him of several acts of adultery and other iniquities, it is said that the president of the council remarked, “If you are bringing accusation on points of doctrine, we receive your charges; we have not come here to decide about adulteries.” Accordingly Athenius and Athanasius 2148 who had been expelled by the Eastern Synod were bidden to return to their own churches; just as though our Saviour had laid down no laws about conduct, and had only ordered us to observe doctrines—which those most sapient persons have been foremost in corrupting. Let them then cease to mock; let them no longer attempt to conceal the impiety which they have confirmed by blows as well as by words. If this is not the case, let them tell us the reasons of the massacres; let them own in writing the distinction between the natures of our Saviour, and that the union is without confusion; let them declare that after the union both Godhead and manhood remained unimpaired. “God is not mocked.” 2149 Let the chapters be denied which they have often repudiated, and now at Ephesus have sanctioned. Do not let them trick your holiness by their lies. They used to praise my utterances at Antioch, being brethren, and when made readers, and ordained deacons, presbyters and bishops; and at the end of my discourse they used to embrace me and kiss me, on head, on breast, on hands; and some of them would cling to my knees, calling my doctrine apostolic,—the very doctrine that they have now condemned, and anathematized. They used to call me luminary, not only of the East, but of the whole world, and now I forsooth have been proscribed and, so far as lies in their power, I have not even bread to eat. They have anathematized even all who converse with me. But the man whom but a little while ago they deposed and called Valentinian and Apollinarian they have honoured as a martyr of the faith, rolling at his feet, asking his pardon and calling him spiritual father. Do even woodlice change their colour to match the stones or chameleons their skin to suit the leaves, as these men do their mind to match the times? I give up to them see, dignity, rank, and all the luxury of this life. On the side of the apostolic doctrines I await the evils which they deem terrible, finding sufficient consolation in the thought of the judgment of the Lord. For I hope that for the sake of this injustice the Lord will remit me many of my sins.
Now I implore your holiness to beware of the fellowship of iniquity and to insist on their repudiation of what has been done. If they refuse shun them as traitors to the faith. That your reverence should wait awhile to see if the tempest will pass, we have not thought subject for blame. But after the ordination of the primate of the East 2150 every man’s mind will be made manifest. Deign, Sir, to pray for me. At this time I am sorely in want of that help that I may hold out against all that is being devised against me.
Footnotes
323:2143The following letters omitted in the volume of Sirmondus have been published in the Auctarium of Garnerius and elsewhere. The following letter number CXLVII is the CXXVth in all the manuscripts. Schulze remarks that he would have replaced it in its own rank but for the confusion which would thus have been introduced in quotation. John, bishop of Germanicia is also the recipient of Letter CXXXIII. This is written a few days after the former, late in 449 or at the beginning of 450.
323:2144i.e. the twelve articles or chapters couched in the form of anathema against the heads of Nestorian doctrine, appended to Cyril’s third letter to Nestorius.
323:2145It has been pointed out before (Page 293) that at the Latrocinium Domnus was compelled to yield his presidential seat as Patriarch of Antioch, Dioscorus presiding, the Roman legate sitting second, and Juvenal of Jerusalem third. “Cowed by the dictatorial spirit of Dioscorus and unnerved by the outrageous violence of Barsumas and his band of brutal monks he consented to revoke his former condemnation of Eutyches.” “This cowardly act of submission was followed by a still baser proof of weakness, the condemnation of the venerable Flavian. Dioscorus having thus by sheer intimidation obtained his ends revenged himself for their former opposition to his wishes upon those whose cowardice had made them the instruments of his nefarious designs, and proceeded to mete out to them the same measure they had dealt to Flavian. Domnus was the last to be deposed. The charges alleged against him were his reported approval of a Nestorian sermon preached before him at Antioch by Theodoret, on the death of Cyril, and some expressions in letters written by him to Dioscorus condemning the obscure character of Cyril’s anathematisms.”
Canon Venables in Dic. Chris. Biog. vol 1. p. 879.
323:2146i.e. wild nomad tribes who live in waggons (ἁμαξόβιοι). These Horace (Car. iii. 24, 10) takes as a better type of character than wealthy villa-builders;—
“Campestres melius Scythæ
Quorum plaustra vagas rite trahunt domos
Vivunt.”
323:2147Bishop of Antioch in Pisidia. He was of the orthodox party and stated himself to have been bred from childhood in the Catholic faith. (Conc. iv. 304.) His name is also written Calendio (Tillem. xv. 579, Dic. Chris. Biog. 1, 395).
323:2148Athanasius of Perrha, the delator of earlier letters (vide note on page 264) had been deposed from his bishopric at a synod of uncertain date held between 444 and 449 at Antioch under Domnus, and replaced by Sabinianus.
323:2149Gal. vi. 7
324:2150i.e. Maximus, who was appointed by the Latrocinium to succeed Domnus in the see of Antioch, and consecrated by Anatolius in defiance of right and usage. Or possibly the irregularity of the nomination of Maximus may lead Theodoret to regard the see as vacant. Garnerius understands the reference to be to an interval between the appointment and consecration of Maximus.
CXLVIII in the Edition of Garnerius.
Is “the minute of the most holy bishop Cyril, delivered to Posidonius, when sent by him to Rome, in the matter of Nestorius.” (Cyrill. Ep. XI. tom. lxxvii. 85.)
CXLIX is “Copy of the Letter written by John, Bishop of Antioch, to Nestorius.”
This letter has sometimes been supposed to have been really composed by Theodoret. 2151
Footnotes
324:2151Vide Migne Pat. lxxvii. 1449.
“A letter so admirable in tone and feeling, so happy in its expression, that it has been attributed to the practised pen of Theodoret.” (Canon Venables, Dict. Christ. Biog. iii. 350.) Tillemont describes it as “très belle, très bien faite et très digne de la réputation qu’avait ce prèlat.”
CL. Letter of Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus, to Joannes, Bishop of Antioch. 2152
I have been much distressed at reading the anathematisms which you have sent to request me to refute in writing, and to make plain to all their heretical sense. I have been distressed at the thought that one appointed to the shepherd’s office, entrusted with the charge of so great a flock and appointed to heal the sick among his sheep, is both himself unsound, and that to a terrible degree, and is endeavouring to infect his lambs with his disease and treats the sheep of his folds with greater cruelty than that of wild beasts. They, indeed, tear and rend the sheep that are dispersed and separated from the flock; but he in its very midst, and while thought to be its saviour and its guardian introduces secret error among the victims of their confidence in him. Against an open assault it is possible to take precautions, but when an attack is made in the guise of friendship, its victim is found off his guard and hurt is easily done him. Hence foes who make war from within are far more dangerous than those who attack from without.
I am yet more grieved that it should be in the name of true religion and with the dignity of a shepherd that he should give utterance to his heretical and blasphemous words, and renew that vain and impious teaching of Apollinarius which was long ago stamped out. Besides all this there is the fact that he not only supports these views but even dares to anathematize those who decline to participate in his blasphemies;—if he is really the author of these productions and they have not proceeded from some enemy of the truth who has composed them in his name and, as the old story has it, flung the apple of discord 2153 in the midst, and so fanned the flame on high.
But whether this composition comes from himself or from some other in his name, I, for my part, by the aid of the light of the Holy Ghost, in the investigation of this heretical and corrupt opinion, according to the measure of the power given me, have refuted them as best I could. I have confronted them with the teaching of evangelists and apostles. I have exposed the monstrosity of the doctrine, and proved how vast is its divergence from divine truth. This I have done by comparing it with the words of the Holy Spirit, and pointing out what strange and jarring discord there is between it and the divine.
Against the hardihood of this anathematizing, thus much I will say, that Paul, the clear-voiced herald of truth, anathematized those who had corrupted the evangelic and apostolic teaching and boldly did so against the angels, not against those who abided by the laws laid down by theologians; these he strengthened with blessings, saying, “And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them and mercy and on the Israel of God.” 2154 Let then the author of these writings reap from the Apostle’s curse the due rewards of his labours and the harvest of his seeds of heresy. We will abide in the teaching of the holy Fathers.
To this letter I have appended my counter arguments, that on reading them you may judge whether I have effectively destroyed the heretical propositions. Setting down each of the anathematisms by itself, I have annexed the counter statement that readers may easily understand, and that the refutation of the dogmas may be clear. 2155
Footnotes
324:2152This letter may be dated in February 431. Celestine and Cyril had written to John of Antioch in relation to the condemnation of Nestorius by the western bishops at Rome in August 430. Theodoret was at Antioch on the arrival of these letters and hence additional probability is given to the theory that he wrote the reply referred to in the preceding note. Then came the publication of Cyril’s chapter or anathemas which Theodoret undertook to refute. Letter CL. is prefixed to his remarks on them.
324:2153The “old story” is a comparatively late addition to the myth of the marriage of Peleus.
325:2154Gal. vi. 16
325:2155The Refutation of the anathematisms of Cyril is to be found in Migne Pat. lxxvi. Col. 393. Vide also the prolegomena.
CLI. Letter or Address of Theodoret to the Monks of the Euphratensian, the Osrhoene, Syria, Phœnicia, and Cilicia. 2156
When I contemplate the condition of the Church at the present crisis of affairs,—the tempest which has recently beset the holy ship, the furious blasts, the beating of the waves, the deep darkness of the night, and, besides all this, the strife of the mariners, the struggle going on between oarsmen, the drunkenness of the pilots, and, lastly, the untimely action of the bad,—I bethink me of the laments of Jeremiah and cry with him, “my bowels, my bowels! I am pained at my very heart, my heart maketh a noise in me,” 2157 and to put away despondency’s great cloud by the drops from my eyes, I have recourse to founts of tears. Amid a storm so wild it is fitting that the pilots be awake, to battle with the tempest, and take heed for the safety of the ship: the sailors ought to cease from their strife, and strive to undo the danger alike by prayer and skill: the mariners ought to keep the peace, and quarrel neither with one another nor with the pilots, but implore the Lord of the sea to banish the darkness by His rod. No one now is willing to do anything of the kind; and, just as happens in a night-engagement, we cannot recognise one another, we leave our enemies alone, and waste our weapons against our own side; we wound our comrades for foes, while all the while the bystanders laugh at our drunken folly, enjoy our disasters, and are delighted to see us engaged in mutual destruction. The responsibility for all this lies with those who have striven to corrupt the apostolic faith, and have dared to add a monstrous doctrine to the teaching of the Gospels; with them that have accepted the impious “Chapters” which they have sent forth with anathematisms to the imperial city, and have confirmed them, as they have imagined, by their own signatures. But these “Chapters” have sprouted without doubt from the sour root of Apollinarius; they are tainted with Arian and Eunomian error; look into them carefully, and you will find that they are not clear of the impiety of Manes and Valentinus. 2158
In his very first chapter he rejects the dispensation 2159 which has been made on our behalf, teaching that God the Word did not assume human nature, but was Himself changed into flesh, thus laying down that the incarnation took place not in reality but in semblance and seeming. This is the outcome of the impiety of Marcion, Manes, and Valentinus.
In his second and third chapters, as though quite oblivious of what he had stated in his preface, he brings in the hypostatic union, and a meeting by natural union, and by these terms he represents that a kind of mixture and confusion was effected of the divine nature and of the form of the servant. This comes of the innovation of the Apollinarian heresy.
In his fourth chapter he denies the distinction of the terms of evangelists and apostles, and refuses to allow, as the teaching of the orthodox Fathers has allowed, the terms of divine dignity to be understood of the divine nature, while the terms of humility, spoken in human sense, are applied to the nature assumed; whence the rightminded can easily detect the kinship with impiety. For Arius and Eunomius, asserting the only begotten Son of God to be a creature, and made out of the non-existent, and a servant, have ventured to apply to His godhead what is said in lowly and human sense; establishing by such means the difference of substance and the unlikeness. Besides this, to be brief, he argues that the very impassible and immutable Godhead of the Christ suffered, and was crucified, dead, and buried. This goes beyond even the madness of Arius and Eunomius, for this pitch of impiety has not been reached even by them that dare to call the maker and creator of the universe a creature. Furthermore he blasphemes against the Holy Ghost, denying that It proceeds from the Father, in accordance with the word of the Lord, but maintaining that It has Its origin of the Son. Here we have the fruit of the Apollinarian seed; here we come near the evil husbandry of Macedonius. Such are the offspring of the Egyptian, viler children of a vile father. This growth, which men, entrusted with the healing of souls, ought to make abortive while yet in the womb, or destroy as soon as it is born, as dangerous and deadly to mankind, is cherished by these excellent persons, and promoted with great energy, alike to their own ruin and to that of all who will listen to them. We, on the contrary, earnestly desire to keep our heritage untouched; and the faith which we have received, and in which we have been ourselves baptized, and baptize others, we strive to preserve uninjured and undefiled. We confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, perfect God and perfect man, of a reasonable soul and body, was begotten of the Father before the ages, as touching the Godhead; and in the last days for us men and our salvation (was born) of the Virgin Mary; that the same Lord is of one substance with the Father as touching the Godhead, and of one substance with us as touching the manhood. For there was an union of two natures. Wherefore we acknowledge one Christ, one Son, one Lord; but we do not destroy the union; we believe it to have been made without confusion, in obedience to the word of the Lord to the Jews, “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up.” 2160 If on the contrary there had been mixture and confusion, and one nature was made out of both, He ought to have said “Destroy me and in three days I shall be raised.” But now, to show that there is a distinction between God according to His nature, and the temple, and that both are one Christ, His words are “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up,” clearly teaching that it was not God who was undergoing destruction, but the temple. The nature of this latter was susceptible of destruction, while the power of the former raised what was being destroyed. Furthermore it is in obedience to the divine Scriptures that we acknowledge the Christ to be God and man. That our Lord Jesus Christ is God is asserted by the blessed evangelist John “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him and without Him was not anything made that was made.” 2161 And again, “That was the true light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.” 2162 And the Lord Himself distinctly teaches us, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.” 2163 And “I and my Father are one” 2164 and “I am in the Father and the Father in me,” 2165 and the blessed Paul in his epistle to the Hebrews says “Who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power” 2166 and in the epistle to the Philippians “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus; who being in the form of God thought it not robbery to be equal with God but made Himself of no reputation and took upon Him the form of a servant.” 2167 And in the Epistle to the Romans, “Whose are the fathers and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came who is over all God blessed for ever. Amen.” 2168 And in the epistle to Titus “Looking for that blessed hope and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.” 2169 And Isaiah exclaims “Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon His shoulder; and His name shall be called, Angel of great counsel, Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, powerful, the Prince of Peace, the Father of the Age to come.” 2170 And again “In chains they shall come over and they shall fall unto thee. They shall make supplication unto thee saying, surely God is in thee and there is none else, there is no God. Verily thou art a God that hidest thyself, O God of Israel, the Saviour.” 2171 The name Emmanuel, however, indicates both God and man, for it is interpreted in the Gospel to mean “God with us,” 2172 that is to say “God in man,” God in our nature. And the divine Jeremiah too utters the prediction “This is our God and there shall none other be accounted of in comparison with him. He hath found out all the way of knowledge and hath given it unto Jacob His servant and to Israel His beloved and afterward did He show Himself upon earth and conversed with men.” 2173 And countless other passages might be found as well in the holy gospels and in the writings of the apostles as in the predictions of the prophets, setting forth that our Lord Jesus Christ is very God.
That after the Incarnation He is spoken of as Man our Lord Himself teaches in His words to the Jews “Why go ye about to kill me?” “A man that hath told you the truth.” 2174 And in the first Epistle to the Corinthians the blessed Paul writes “For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead,” 2175 and to show of whom he is speaking he explains his words and says, “For as in Adam all die even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” 2176 And writing to Timothy he says, “For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” 2177 In the Acts in his speech at Athens “The times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent; because He hath appointed a day in the which He will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom He hath ordained, whereof He hath given assurance unto all men, in that He hath raised him from the dead.” 2178 And the blessed Peter preaching to the Jews says, “Ye men of Israel, hear these words Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs which God did by Him in the midst of you,” 2179 and the prophet Isaiah when predicting the sufferings of the Lord Christ, whom but just before he had called God, calls man in the passage “A man of sorrows and acquainted with grief.” “Surely he hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows.” 2180 I might have collected other consentient passages of holy Scripture and inserted them in my letter had I not known you to be practised in the divine oracles as befits the man called blessed in the Psalms. 2181 I now leave the collection of evidence to your own diligence and proceed with my subject.
We confess then that our Lord Jesus Christ is very God and very man. We do not divide the one Christ into two persons, but we believe two natures to be united without confusion. We shall thus be able without difficulty to refute even the manifold blasphemy of the heretics: for many and various are the errors of those who have rebelled against the truth, as we shall proceed to point out. Marcion and Manes deny that God the Word assumed human nature and do not believe that our Lord Jesus Christ was born of a Virgin. They say that God the Word Himself was fashioned in human form and appeared as man rather in semblance than in reality.
Valentinus and Bardesanes admit the birth, but they deny the assumption of our nature and affirm that the Son of God employed the Virgin as it were as a mere conduit.
Sabellius the Libyan, Photinus, Marcellus the Galatian, and Paul of Samosata say that a mere man was born of the Virgin, but openly deny that the eternal Christ was God.
Arius and Eunomius maintain that God the Word assumed only a body of the Virgin.
Apollinarius adds to the body an unreasonable soul, as though the incarnation of God the Word had taken place not for the sake of reasonable beings but of unreasonable, while the teaching of the Apostles is that perfect man was assumed by perfect God, as is proved by the words “Who being in the form of God took the form of a servant;” 2182 for “form” is put instead of “nature” and “substance” and indicates that having the nature of God He took the nature of a servant.
When therefore we are disputing with Marcion, Manes and Valentinus, the earliest inventors of impiety, we endeavour to prove from the divine Scriptures that the Lord Christ is not only God but also man.
When, however, we are proving to the ignorant that the doctrine of Arius, Eunomius and Apollinarius about the œconomy is incomplete, we show from the divine oracles of the Spirit that the assumed nature was perfect.
The impiety of Sabellius, Photinus, Marcellus, and Paulus, we refute by proving by the evidence of divine Scripture that the Lord Christ was not only man but also eternal God, of one substance with the Father. That He assumed a reasonable soul is stated by our Lord Himself in the words “Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father save me from this hour; but for this cause came I unto this hour.” 2183 And again “My soul is exceeding sorrowful even unto death.” 2184 And in another place “I have power to lay down my soul (life A.V.) and I have power to take it again. No man taketh it from me.” 2185 And the angel said to Joseph, “Take the young child and His mother and go into the land of Israel; for they are dead which sought the young child’s soul (life A.V.)” 2186 And the Evangelist says “Jesus increased in wisdom and stature and in favour with God and man.” Now what increases in stature and wisdom is not the Godhead which is ever perfect, but the human nature which comes into being in time, grows, and is made perfect.
Wherefore all the human qualities of the Lord Christ, hunger, I mean, and thirst and weariness, sleep, fear, sweat, prayer, and ignorance, and the like, we affirm to belong to our nature which God the Word assumed and united to Himself in effecting our salvation. But the restitution of motion to the maimed, the resurrection of the dead, the supply of loaves, and all the other miracles we believe to be works of the divine power. In this sense I say that the same Lord Christ both suffers and destroys suffering; suffers, that is, as touching the visible, and destroys suffering as touching the ineffably indwelling Godhead. This is proved beyond question by the narrative of the holy evangelists, from whom we learn that when lying in a manger and wrapped in swaddling clothes, He was announced by a star, worshipped by magi and hymned by angels. Thus we reverent discern that the swaddling bands and the want of a bed and all the poverty belonged to the manhood; while the journey of the magi and the guiding of the star and the company of the angels proclaim the Godhead of the unseen. In like manner He makes His escape into Egypt and avoids the fury of Herod by flight, 2187 for He was man; but as the Prophet says “He shakes the idols of Egypt,” 2188 for He was by nature God. He is circumcised; He keeps the law; and offers offerings of purification, because He sprang from the root of Jesse. And, as man, He was under the law; and afterwards did away with the law and gave the new covenant, because He was a lawgiver and had promised by the prophets that He Himself would give it. He was baptized by John; and this shews His sharing what is ours. He is testified to by the Father from on high and is pointed out by the Spirit; this proclaims Him eternal. He hungered; but He fed many thousands with five loaves; the latter is divine, the former human. He thirsted and He asked for water; but He was the well of life; the former of His human weakness, the latter of His divine power. He fell asleep in the boat, but he put the tempest of the sea to sleep; the former of His human nature, the latter of His efficient and creative power which has gifted all things with their being. He was weary as he walked; but He healed the halt and raised dead men from their tombs; the former of human weakness, the latter of a power passing that of this world. He feared death and He destroyed death; the former shows that He was mortal, the latter that He was immortal or rather giver of life. “He was crucified,” as the blessed Paul says “through weakness.” 2189 But as the same Paul says “Yet He liveth by the power of God.” 2190 Let that word “weakness” teach us that He was not nailed to the tree as the Almighty, the Uncircumscribed, the Immutable and Invariable, but that the nature quickened by the power of God, was according to the Apostle’s teaching dead and buried, both death and burial being proper to the form of the servant. “He broke the gates of brass and cut the bars of iron in sunder” 2191 and destroyed the power of death and in three days raised His own temple. These are proofs of the form of God in accordance with the Lord’s words “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up.” 2192 Thus in the one Christ through the sufferings we contemplate the manhood and through the miracles we apprehend the Godhead. We do not divide the two natures into two Christs, and we know that of the Father God the Word was begotten and that of the seed of Abraham and David our nature was assumed. Wherefore also the blessed Paul says when discoursing of Abraham “He saith not and to seeds as of many; but as of one, and to thy seed which is Christ,” 2193 and writing to Timothy he says “Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel.” 2194 And to the Romans he writes “Concerning His son Jesus Christ…which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh.” 2195 And again “Whose are the fathers and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came.” 2196 And the Evangelist writes “The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham,” 2197 and the blessed Peter in the Acts says David “being a prophet and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his loins, He would raise up Christ to sit on his throne, he seeing this before spake of his resurrection,” 2198 and God says to Abraham “In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed,” 2199 and Isaiah “There shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse and a branch shall grow out of His roots; and there shall rest upon Him 2200 the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of piety and the spirit of the fear of the Lord shall fill Him.” 2201 And a little further on “And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek; and His rest shall be glorious.” 2202
From these quotations it is made plain that according to the flesh, the Christ was descended from Abraham and David and was of the same nature as theirs; while according to the Godhead He is Everlasting Son and Word of God, ineffably and in superhuman manner begotten of the Father, and co-eternal with Him as brightness and express image and Word. For as the word in relation to intelligence and brightness in relation to light are inseparably connected, so is the only begotten Son in relation to His own Father. We assert therefore that our Lord Jesus Christ is only begotten, and first born Son of God; only begotten both before the incarnation and after the incarnation, but firstborn after being born of the Virgin. For the name first-born seems to be in a sense contrary to that of only begotten, because the only Son begotten of any one is called only begotten, while the eldest of several brothers is called first-born. The divine Scriptures state God the Word alone to have been begotten of the Father; but the only begotten becomes also first-born, by taking our nature of the Virgin, and deigning to call brothers those who have trusted in Him; so that the same is only begotten in that He is God, first born in that He is Man. Thus acknowledging the two natures we adore the one Christ and offer Him one adoration, for we believe that the union took place from the moment of the conception in the Virgin’s holy womb. Wherefore also we call the holy Virgin both Mother of God 2203 and Mother of man, since the Lord Christ Himself is called God and man in the divine Scripture. The name Emmanuel proclaims the union of the two natures. If we acknowledge the Christ to be both God and Man and so call Him, who is so insensate as to shrink from using the term “Mother of man” with that of “Mother of God”? For we use both terms of the Lord Christ. For this reason the Virgin is honoured and called “full of grace.” 2204 What sensible man then would object to name the Virgin in accordance with the titles of the Saviour, when on His account she is honoured by the faithful? For He who was born of her is not worshipped on her account, but she is honoured with the highest titles on account of Him Who was born from her.
Suppose the Christ to be God only, and to have taken the origin of His existence from the Virgin, then let the Virgin be styled and named only “Mother of God” as having given birth to a being divine by nature. But if the Christ is both God and man and was God from everlasting (inasmuch as He did not begin to exist, being co-eternal with the Father that begat Him) and in these last days was born man of His human nature, then let him who wishes to define doctrine in both directions devise appellations for the Virgin with the explanation which of them befits the nature and which the union. But if any one should wish to deliver a panegyric and to compose hymns, and to repeat praises, and is naturally anxious to use the most august names; then, not laying down doctrine as in the former case, but with rhetorical laudation, and expressing all possible admiration at the mightiness of the mystery, let him gratify his heart’s desire, let him employ high names, let him praise and let him wonder. Many instances of this kind are found in the writings of orthodox teachers. But on all occasions let moderation be respected. All praise to him who said that “moderation is best,” although he is not of our herd. 2205
This is the confession of the faith of the Church; this is the doctrine taught by evangelists and apostles. For this faith, by God’s grace I will not refuse to undergo many deaths. This faith we have striven to convey to them that now err and stray, again and again challenging them to discussion, and eager to show them the truth, but without success. With a suspicion of their probably plain confutation, they have shirked the encounter; for verily falsehood is rotten and yokefellow of obscurity. “Every one,” it is written “that doeth evil cometh not to the light lest his deeds should be reproved” 2206 by the light.
Since, therefore, after many efforts, I have failed in persuading them to recognise the truth, I have returned to my own churches, filled at once with sorrow and with joy; with joy on account of my own freedom from error; and with sorrow at the unsoundness of my members. I therefore implore you to pray with all your might to our loving Lord, and to cry unto Him, “‘Spare Thy people, O Lord and give not Thy heritage to reproach.’ 2207 Feed us O Lord that we become not as we were in the beginning when Thou didst not rule over us nor was Thy name invoked to help us. ‘We are become a reproach to our neighbours, a scorn and derision to them that are round about us,’ 2208 because wicked doctrines have come into Thy inheritance. They have polluted Thy holy temple in that the daughters of strangers have rejoiced over our troubles. A little while ago we were of one mind and one tongue and now are divided into many tongues. But, O Lord our God, give us Thy peace which we have lost by setting Thy commandments at naught. O Lord we know none other than Thee. We call Thee by Thy name. ‘Make both one and break down the middle wall of the partition,’ 2209 namely the iniquity that has sprung up. Gather us one by one, Thy new Israel, building up Jerusalem and gathering together the outcasts of Israel. 2210 Let us be made once more one flock 2211 and all be fed by Thee; for Thou art the good Shepherd ‘Who giveth His life for the sheep ’ 2212 ‘Awake, why sleepest Thou O Lord, arise cast us not off forever.’ 2213 Rebuke the winds and the sea; give Thy Church calm and safety from the waves.”
These words and words like these I implore you to utter to the God of all; for He is good and full of loving-kindness and ever fulfils the will of them that fear Him. He will therefore listen to your prayer, and will scatter this darkness deeper than the plague of Egypt. He will give you His own calm of love, and will gather them that are scattered abroad and welcome them that have been cast out. Then shall be heard “the voice of rejoicing and salvation in the tabernacles of the righteous.” 2214 Then shall we cry unto Him we have been “glad according to the days wherein Thou hast afflicted us and the years wherein we have seen evil,” 2215 and you when you have been granted your prayer shall praise Him in the words “Blessed be God which not turned away my prayer nor His mercy from me.” 2216
Proof that after the Incarnation our Lord Jesus Christ, was one Son.
The authors of slanders against me allege that I divide the one Lord Jesus Christ into two sons. But so far am I from holding this opinion that I charge with impiety all who dare to say so. For I have been taught by the divine Scripture to worship one Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, God the Word incarnate. For we confess the same to be both God eternal, and made man in the last days for the sake of man’s salvation; but made man not by the change of the Godhead but by the assumption of the manhood. For the nature of this godhead is immutable and invariable, as is that of the Father who begat Him before the ages. And whatever would be understood of the substance of the Father will also be wholly found in the substance of the only begotten; for of that substance He is begotten. This our Lord taught when He said to Philip “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father” 2217 and again in another place “All things that the Father hath are mine,” 2218 and elsewhere “I and the Father are one,” 2219 and very many other passages may be quoted setting forth the identity of substance.
It follows that He did not become God: He was God. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God; and the Word was God.” 2220 He was not man: He became man, and He so became by taking on Him our nature: So says the blessed Paul—“Who being in the form of God thought it not robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, and took upon Him the form of a servant.” 2221 And again: “For verily He took not on Him the nature of angels; but He took on Him the seed of Abraham.” 2222 And again; Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also Himself likewise took part of the same.” 2223 Thus He was both passible and impassible; mortal and immortal; passible, on the one hand, and mortal, as man; impassible, on the other, and immortal, as God. As God He raised His own flesh, which was dead;—as His own words declare: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” 2224 And as man, He was passible and mortal up to the time of the passion. For, after the resurrection, even as man He is impassible, immortal, and incorruptible; and He discharges divine lightnings; not that according to the flesh He has been changed into the nature of Godhead, but still preserving the distinctive marks of humanity. Nor yet is His body uncircumscribed, for this is peculiar to the divine nature alone, but it abides in its former circumscription. This He teaches in the words He spake to the disciples even after His resurrection “Behold my hands and feet that it is I myself; handle me and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have.” 2225 While He was thus beheld He went up into heaven; thus has He promised to come again, thus shall He be seen both by them that have believed and them that have crucified, for it is written “They shall look on Him whom they pierced.” 2226 We therefore worship the Son, but we contemplate in Him either nature in its perfection, both that which took, and that which was taken; the one of God and the other of David. For this reason also He is styled both Son of the living God and Son of David; either nature receiving its proper title. Accordingly the divine scripture calls him both God and man, and the blessed Paul exclaims “There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave Himself a ransom for all.” 2227 But Him whom here he calls man in another place he describes as God for he says “Looking for that blessed hope and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.” 2228 And yet in another place he uses both names at once saying “Of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came who is over all God blessed for ever. Amen.” 2229
Thus he has stated the same Christ to be of the Jews according to the flesh, and God over all as God. Similarly the prophet Isaiah writes “A man of sorrows and acquainted with grief.…Surely He hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows,” 2230 and shortly afterwards he says “Who shall declare His generation?” 2231 This is spoken not of man but of God. Thus through Micah God says “Thou Bethlehem in the land of Judah art not the least among the princes of Judah, for out of thee shall come a governor that shall rule my people Israel, whose goings forth have been as of old from everlasting.” 2232 Now by saying “From thee shall come forth a ruler” he exhibits the œconomy of the incarnation; and by adding “whose goings forth have been as of old from everlasting” he declares the Godhead begotten of the Father before the ages.
Since we have been thus taught by the divine scripture, and have further found that the teachers who have been at different periods illustrious in the Church, are of the same opinion, we do our best to keep our heritage inviolate; worshipping one Son of God, one God the Father, and one Holy Ghost; but at the same time recognising the distinction between flesh and Godhead. And as we assert them that divide our one Lord Jesus Christ into two sons to trangress from the road trodden by the holy apostles, so do we declare the maintainers of the doctrine that the Godhead of the only begotten and the manhood have been made one nature to fall headlong into the opposite ravine. These doctrines we hold; these we preach; for these we do battle.
The slander of the libellers that represent me as worshipping two sons is refuted by the plain facts of the case. I teach all persons who come to holy Baptism the faith put forth at Nicæa; and, when I celebrate the sacrament of regeneration I baptize them that make profession of their faith in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, pronouncing each name by itself. And when I am performing divine service in the churches it is my wont to give glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost; not sons, but Son. If then I uphold two sons, whether of the two is glorified by me, and whether remains unhonoured? For I have not quite come to such a pitch of stupidity as to acknowledge two sons and leave one of them without any tribute of respect. It follows then even from this fact that the slander is proved slander,—for I worship one only begotten Son, God the Word incarnate. And I call the holy Virgin “Mother of God” 2233 because she has given birth to the Emmanuel, which means “God with us.” 2234 But the prophet who predicted the Emmanuel a little further on has written of him that “Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulders; and his name is called Angel of great counsel, wonderful, counsellor, mighty God, powerful, Prince of peace, Father of the age to come.” 2235 Now if the babe born of the Virgin is styled “Mighty God,” then it is only with reason that the mother is called “Mother of God.” For the mother shares the honour of her offspring, and the Virgin is both mother of the Lord Christ as man, and again is His servant as Lord and Creator and God.
On account of this difference of term He is said by the divine Paul to be “without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days nor end of life.” 2236 He is without father as touching His humanity; for as man He was born of a mother alone. And He is without mother as God, for He was begotten from everlasting of the Father alone. And again He is without descent as God while as man He has descent. For it is written “The book of the generation of Jesus Christ the son of David, the son of Abraham.” 2237 His descent is also given by the divine Luke. 2238 So again, as God, He has no beginning of days for He was begotten before the ages; neither has He an end of life, for His nature is immortal and impassible. But as man He had both a beginning of days, for He was born in the reign of Augustus Cæsar, and an end of life, for He was crucified in the reign of Tiberius Cæsar. But now, as I have already said, even His human nature is immortal; and, as He ascended, so again shall He come according to the words of the Angel—“This same Jesus which is taken up from you into Heaven shall so come in like manner as ye have seen Him go into Heaven.” 2239
This is the doctrine delivered to us by the divine prophets; this is the doctrine of the company of the holy apostles; this is the doctrine of the great saints of the East and of the West; of the far-famed Ignatius, who received his archpriesthood by the right hand of the great Peter, and for the sake of his confession of Christ was devoured by savage beasts; 2240 and of the great Eustathius, who presided over the assembled council, and on account of his fiery zeal for true religion was driven into exile. 2241 This doctrine was preached by the illustrious Meletius, at the cost of no less pains, for thrice was he driven from his flock in the cause of the apostles‘ doctrines; 2242 by Flavianus, 2243 glory of the imperial see; and by the admirable Ephraim, instrument of divine grace, who has left us in the Syriac tongue a written heritage of good things; 2244 by Cyprian, the illustrious ruler of Carthage and of all Libya, who for Christ’s sake found a death in the fire; 2245 by Damasus, bishop of great Rome, 2246 and by Ambrose, glory of Milan, who preached and wrote it in the language of Rome. 2247
The same was taught by the great luminaries of Alexandria, Alexander and Athanasius, men of one mind, who underwent sufferings celebrated throughout the world. This was the pasture given to their flocks by the great teachers of the imperial city, by Gregory, shining friend and supporter of the truth; by John, teacher of the world, by Atticus, their successor alike in see and in sentiment. 2248 By these doctrines Basil, great light of the truth, and Gregory sprung from the same parents, 2249 and Amphilochius, 2250 who from him received the gift of the high-priesthood, taught their contemporaries, and have left the same to us in their writings for a goodly heritage. Time would fail me to tell of Polycarp, 2251 and Irenæus, 2252 of Methodius 2253 and Hippolytus, 2254 and the rest of the teachers of the Church. In a word I assert that I follow the divine oracles and at the same time all these saints. By the grace of the spirit they dived into the depths of God-inspired scripture and both themselves perceived its mind, and made it plain to all that are willing to learn. Difference in tongue has wrought no difference in doctrine, for they were channels of the grace of the divine spirit, using the stream from one and the same fount.
Footnotes
325:2156This document did not appear in the original edition of the Letters. A fragment in Latin was published in the Auctarium of Garnerius. The complete composition is given by Schulze from a ms. in the Imperial Library at Vienna. The date may be assigned as early in 431. As Cyril had weaned the monks of Egypt and even of Constantinople from the cause of Nestorius, so Theodoret attempts to win over the solitaries of the East from Cyril.
325:2157Jer. iv. 19
325:2158“Nihil contumeliosius,” remarks Garnerius, “in Cyrilli personam et doctrinam dici potest.” Some have even thought the expressions too bitter for Theodoret. But the mild man could hit hard sometimes. He felt warmly for Nestorius and against Cyril, and (accepting Tillemont’s date) he was now about 38.
325:2159οἰκονομία. Vide p. 72.
326:2160John ii. 19
326:2161John i. 1
326:2162John i. 9
326:2163John xiv. 9
326:2164John x. 30
326:2165John x. 38transposed.
326:2166Hebrews i. 3
326:2167Phil. 2:5, 6, 7
326:2168Romans ix. 5
326:2169Tit. ii. 13
326:2170Is. ix. 6. (LXX. Alex.)
326:2171Isa. 45:14, 15
326:2172Matt. i. 23
327:2173Bar. 3:35, 36, 37. From the time of Irenæus the book of Baruch, friend and companion of Jeremiah, was commonly quoted as the work of the great prophet. e.g. Iren. adv. Hær. v. 35, 1. cf. note on p. 165.
327:2174John 7:19, John 8:40John vii. 19 and viii. 40
327:21751 Cor. xv. 21
327:21761 Cor. xv. 22
327:21771 Tim. ii. 5
327:2178Acts 17:30, 31
327:2179Acts ii. 22
327:2180Isa. 53:3, 4Isaiah liii. 3 and 4
327:2181Psalm i. 2
327:2182Phil. 2:6, 7Phil. ii. 6 and 7
327:2183John xii. 27
327:2184Matt. xxvi. 38
328:2185John x. 18varied.
328:2186Matt. ii. 20
328:2187Vide note on Page 203.
328:2188Isaiah xix. 1
328:21892 Cor. xiii. 4
328:21902 Cor. xiii. 4
328:2191Psalm cvii. 16
328:2192John ii. 19
328:2193Gal. iii. 16
328:21942 Tim. ii. 8
328:2195Romans i. 3
328:2196Romans ix. 5
328:2197Matt. i. 1
329:2198Acts ii. 30
329:2199Gen. xxii. 18
329:2200Here in the LXX comes in “The spirit of God.” It is unlikely that Theodoret should have intended to omit this, and the omission is probably due as in similar cases to the carelessness of a copyist in the case of a repetition of a word.
329:2201Isa. 11:1, 2, 3, 7
329:2202Isaiah xi. 10
329:2203On the word Θεοτόκος cf. note on Page 213.
Jeremy Taylor (ix. 637 ed. 1861) defends it on the bare ground of logic which no doubt originally recommended it. “Though the blessed virgin Mary be not in Scripture called Θεοτόκος ‘the mother of God,’ yet that she was the mother of Jesus and that Jesus Christ is God, that we can prove from Scripture, and that is sufficient for the appellation.”
329:2204Luke i. 28
329:2205Cleobulus of Lindos is credited with the maxim ἄριστον μέτρον. Theognis, (335) transmits the famous μηδὲν ἄγαν attributed by Aristotle (Rhet. ii. 12, 14) to Chilon of Sparta. Ovid makes Phœbus say to Phæthon “Medio tutissimus ibis” (Met. ii. 137); and quotations from many other writers may be found all
“Turning to scorn with lips divine
The falsehood of extremes!”
330:2206John iii. 20
330:2207Joel ii. 17
330:2208Psalm lxxix. 4
330:2209Cf. Ephes. ii. 14
330:2210Psalm cxlvii. 2
330:2211John x. 10
330:2212John x. 11
330:2213Psalm xliv. 23
330:2214Psalm cxviii. 15
330:2215Psalm xc. 15
330:2216Psalm lxvi. 20
330:2217John xiv. 9
330:2218John xvi. 15
330:2219John x. 30
330:2220John i. 1
330:2221Phil. 2:6, 7
330:2222Heb. ii. 16
330:2223Heb. ii. 14
331:2224John ii. 29
331:2225Luke xxiv. 39
331:2226John 19:37, Zech. 12:10John xix. 37. Cf. Zec. xii. 10
331:22271 Tim. 2:5, 6
331:2228Tit. ii. 13
331:2229Rom. ix. 5. The first implicit denial of the sense here given by Theodoret to this remarkable passage is said to be found in an assertion of the Emperor Julian that neither Paul nor Matthew nor Mark ever ventured to call Jesus God. In the early church it was commonly rendered in its plain and grammatical sense, as by Irenæus, Tertullian, Athanasius, and Chrysostom. Cf. Alford in loc.
331:2230Isa. 53:3, 4
331:2231Isaiah liii. 8
331:2232Matt. 2:6, Mic. 5:2Matt. ii. 6 and Mic. v. 2
331:2233Θεοτόκος. cf. p. 213.
332:2234Matt. i. 23
332:2235Is. ix. 6. LXX. Alex.
332:2236Heb. vii. 3
332:2237Matt. i. 1
332:2238Luke iii. 23
332:2239Acts i. 11
332:2240The martyrdom of Ignatius may be placed within a few years of 110,—before or after. In the 4th c. Oct. 17 was named as the day both of his birth and death. Bp. Lightfoot. Ap. Fathers II. i. 30 and 46.
332:2241i.e. Eustathius of Berœa and Antioch, who, according to Theodoret (H. E. i. 6, p. 43.), sat at Nicæa on Constantine’s right hand. (Contra. I. Soz. i. 19.) He was exiled on account of the accusation got up against him by Eusebius of Nicomedia.
332:2242Meletius of Antioch. cf. pp. 92, 93. He presided at Constantinople in 381, and died while the Council was sitting.
332:2243Of Constantinople, murdered at the Latrocinium.
332:2244Vide p. 129.
332:2245cf. Ep. LII. St. Cyprian was beheaded at Carthage, Aug. 13, 258, his last recorded utterance being his reply to the reading of the sentence “That Thascius Cyprianus be beheaded with the sword,” “Thanks be to God.” Theodoret’s “fire” is either an error, or means the fiery trial of martyrdom.
332:2246Vide p. 82.
332:2247cf. pp. 110, 174.
332:2248i.e. Gregory of Nazianzus, put in possession of St. Sophia by Theodosius I. Nov. 24, 380, Chrysostom, consecrated by Theophilus of Alexandria, Feb. 26, 398; and Atticus, who succeeded Arsacius the usurper in 406.
332:2249Gregory of Nyssa. cf. p. 129.
332:2250Of Iconium. cf. p. 114.
332:2251†155.
332:2252† c. 202.
332:2253Commonly known as bishop of Patara, though Jerome speaks of him as of Tyre. The place and time of his death are doubtful. Eusebius calls him a contemporary. (cf. Jer. Cat. 83, and Socr. vi. 13.)
332:2254According to Döllinger the first anti-pope. cf. reff. p. 177.
CLII. Report of the (Bishops) of the East to the Emperor, giving information of their proceedings, and explaining the cause of the delay in the arrival of the Bishop of Antioch. 2255
In obedience to the order of your pious letter we have journeyed to the Ephesian metropolis. There we have found the affairs of the Church in confusion, and disturbed by internecine war. The cause of this is that Cyril of Alexandria and Memnon of Ephesus have banded together and mustered a great mob of rustics, and have forbidden both the celebration of the great feast of Pentecost, and the evening and morning offices. 2256
They have shut the sacred churches and martyrs’ shrines; they have assembled apart with the victims of their deceit; they have wrought innumerable iniquities, trampling under foot alike the canons of the holy Fathers, and your own decrees. And the action has been taken in face of the order given both in writing and by word of mouth by the most excellent count Candidianus, 2257 envoy of your Christ-loving majesty, that the council must await the arrival of the very holy bishops, coming from all quarters of the Empire, and then and not till then formally assemble in obedience to your piety’s commands. Moreover Cyril of Alexandria had written to me, the bishop of Antioch, two days before the meeting of their synod, that the whole council was awaiting my arrival. We have therefore deposed both the aforenamed, Cyril and Memnon, and have excluded them from all the services of the church. The rest, who have participated in their iniquity, we have excommunicated, until they shall reject and anathematize the Chapters 2258 issued by Cyril, which are full of the Eunomian and Arian heresies, and shall, in obedience to your piety’s command, assemble together with us, and shall in an orderly manner and with all exactitude, together with ourselves, examine into the questions at issue, and confirm the pious doctrine of the holy Fathers.
As to the delay in my own arrival be it known to your piety that, in consideration of the distance of the way by land,—and this was our route,—I have come very quickly, I have travelled forty stages without pausing to rest on the way; so your Christian majesty may learn from the inhabitants of the towns on the route. Besides this I was detained many days in Antioch by the famine there; by the daily tumults of the people; and by the unusual severity of the rainy season, which caused the torrents to swell, and threatened danger to the town.
Footnotes
333:2255Cyril’s party met on June 22, 431,—numbering 198, in the Church of the Virgin. John of Antioch with his fourteen supporters did not arrive till the 27th. Unable to start from their diocese before April 26, the octave of Easter, they did not assemble at Antioch till May 10, and then were delayed by a famine. Immediately on their arrival the “Conciliabulum” of the 43 anti-Cyrillians met with indecent precipitancy.
333:2256Both parties, regarding their opponents as excommunicate, forbade them to perform their sacred functions.
333:2257“Comes domesticorum” commander of the guards, was representative of Theodosius II. and Valentinian III. at Ephesus. Candidianus was at first disposed to demur to the condemnation of Nestorius as disorderly and irregular, and to side with the Orientals.
333:2258cf. p. 292.
CLIII. Report of the same to the Empresses Pulcheria and Eudoxia.
We had expected to be able to report to your pious majesties in different terms, but we are now compelled to make known to you the following facts, forced as we are by the irregular exercise of despotic power by Cyril of Alexandria and Memnon of Ephesus. The proper course to have been pursued, in accordance with the laws of the Church, and the command of your pious majesties, would have been to wait for the arrival of the godly bishops on the road, and in common with them to examine into the questions at issue concerning the true faith, and investigate the point offered for discussion, and, after exact enquiry, to confirm the doctrines of the apostles. They had written to me that they would wait for our arrival. They heard that we were only three stages off. Then they assembled an unconstitutional council by themselves, and have ventured on proceedings iniquitous, irregular, and bristling with absurdities. And this they have done though the most honourable count Candidianus, sent by your pious and Christian majesties for good order’s sake, expressly charged them, alike in writing and by word of mouth, to wait for the arrival of the godly bishops who had been convened, and to attempt no innovation on the true faith, but to take their stand on the directions of our godly-minded sovereigns. Now in spite of their having heard the imperial letter and the advice of the most honourable count Candidianus, they have nevertheless made naught of due order. As the prophet says “They hatch cockatrice’ eggs, and weave the spider’s web; and he that would eat of their eggs when he breaks them findeth rottenness, and therein is a viper,” 2259 Wherefore we confidently cry “Their webs shall not become garments, neither shall they cover themselves with their works.” 2260
They have shut the churches and the martyrs’ shrines; they have forbidden the celebration of the holy feast of Pentecost; besides this they have sent the minions of their disorderly despotism into bishops’ private houses, uttering shocking threats, and forcing them to affix their signatures to illegal acts. We therefore considering all their preposterous conduct, have deposed the aforenamed Cyril and Memnon, and deprived them of their episcopate. Their associates in irregularity, whether influenced by sycophancy or by fear, we have excommunicated, until, coming to a knowledge of their own wounds, they shall heartily repent, shall anathematize the heretical Chapters of Cyril, which are tainted with the heresy of Apollinarius, Arius, and Eunomius, shall recover the faith of the Fathers in Council at Nicæa, and, in obedience to the pious commands of our Christian sovereigns, shall, peacefully and without any tumult, assemble in synod, be willing to examine with care the questions submitted to them, and honestly protect the purity of the faith of the Gospel.
Footnotes
333:2259Is. lix. 5, lxx.
333:2260Is. lix. 6
CLIV. Report of the same to the Senate of Constantinople. 2261
Footnotes
334:2261This Report, couched in almost identical terms with the preceding, I omit, although commonly accepted as the composition of Theodoret.
CLV. Letter of John, Bishop of Antioch and his Supporters, to the Clergy of Constantinople. 2262
Footnotes
334:2262This is also merely a short summary of CLII. and CLIII.
CLVI. Letter of the same to the people of Constantinople. 2263
Footnotes
334:2263Omitted as being a repetition of the preceding.
CLVII. Report of the Council of (the Bishops of) the East to the Victorious Emperor, announcing a second time the deposition of Cyril and of Memnon. 2264
Your piety, which shines forth for the good of the empire and of the churches of God, has commanded us to assemble at Ephesus, in order to bring about peace and gain for the Church, rather than to confuse and disturb it. And the commands of your majesty plainly and distinctly indicate your pious and peaceful intentions for the churches of Christ. But Cyril of Alexandria, a man, it would seem, born and bred for the bane of the churches, after taking into partnership the audacity of Memnon of Ephesus, has first of all transgressed against your quieting and pious decree, and has so shewed his general depravity. Your majesty had ordered an investigation and careful testing to be made concerning the faith, and that with the consent and concord of all. Cyril, challenged, or rather himself convicting himself, on the count of the Apollinarian doctrines, by means of the letter which he lately sent to the imperial city, with anathematisms, whereby he is convicted of sharing the views of the impious and heretic Apollinarius, pays no heed to this condition of things, and, as though we were living with no emperor to govern us, is proceeding to every kind of lawlessness. He ought himself to be called to account for his unsound opinion about our Lord Jesus Christ; but, usurping an authority given him neither by the canons, nor by your edicts, he is hurrying headlong into every kind of disorder and illegality.
Moved by these things the holy Synod, which has refused to accept his devices for the damage of the faith, for the aforesaid reasons deposes him. It deposes Memnon also, who has been his counsellor and abettor through all, who has kept up constant agitation against the very holy bishops for refusing to assent to his pernicious heterodoxy; who has shut the churches and every place of prayer, as if we were living among the heathen and the enemies of God; who has brought in the Ephesian mob, so that every day we are in supreme danger, while we look not to defence, but heed the right doctrines of true religion. For the destruction of these men is identical with the establishment of orthodoxy.
From his own Chapters your majesty can have no difficulty in perceiving his impious mind. He is convicted of trying, so to say, to raise from Hades the impious Apollinarius, who died in his heresy, and of attacking the churches and the orthodox faith. He is shewn in his publications to anathematize at once evangelists and apostles and them that succeeded them as forefathers of the Church, who, moved not by their own imaginations, but by the holy Spirit, have preached the true faith, and proclaimed the gospel; a faith and gospel indeed opposed to what this man holds and teaches and by inculcating which he wishes to give his own private iniquity the mastery of the world. Since this is intolerable to us we have followed the proper course, relying at once on the divine grace and on your majesty’s good will.
We know that you give to nothing higher honour than to the sacred faith in which both you and your thrice blessed forefathers have been brought up. From them you have received the perpetual sceptre of empire, ever putting down the opponents of the apostolic doctrines. Such an opponent is the aforesaid Cyril, who, with the aid of Memnon, has captured Ephesus as he might some fortress, and justly shares with his ally the sentence of deposition. Justly: for, besides all that has been said, they have boldly tried every means of assault and every violence against us, who, to come together in council in ratification of your edict, have disregarded every claim of home and country and self.
We are now the prey of tyranny, unless your piety intervene and order us to assemble in some other place, near at hand, where we shall be able, from the scriptures, and from the writings of the Fathers, to refute beyond contradiction both Cyril and the victims of his ingenuity. We have mercifully expelled these men from communion with the suggested hope of salvation in case they should repent; although, as if on some campaign of uncivilized soldiery, they have up to this moment furnished him with the means of his illegality. Some were deposed long ago, and have been restored by Cyril. Some have been excommunicated by their own metropolitans, and admitted by him again into communion. Others have been impaled on various accusations, and have been promoted by him to honour. All through, the main motive of his action has been the endeavour to achieve his heretical purpose by the force of numbers, for he does not reckon as he ought that in what relates to true religion, it is not numbers that are required, but rather correctness of doctrine and the truth of the doctrine of the apostles. Men are needed who are competent to establish these points not by audacity and masterful self-assertion but by pious use of apostolic testimony and example.
For all these reasons we beseech and implore your majesty to bear prompt aid to assaulted truth, and to remedy without delay these men’s masterful readiness; for, like a hurricane, it is sweeping the less moderate among us into pernicious heresy. Your piety has had care for the churches in Persia and among the barbarians; it is only right that you should not neglect those which are tossed by the storm within the boundaries of the Roman empire.
Footnotes
334:2264The Latin version of the title begins “Relatio orientalis conciliabuli.” So the rival and hurried gathering of the Easterns was styled. The following letter is a further justification of their action, and illustrates the readiness and ability, if not the temper and prudence, of the bishop of Cyrus, its probable author.
CLVIII. Report of (the Bishops of) the East to the Very Pious Emperor, which they delivered with the preceding Report to the Right Honourable Count Irenæus.
On receiving the letter of your piety we entertained hopes that the Egyptian storm which has lately struck the churches of God would be driven away. But we have been disappointed. Those men have been made even yet more daring by their madness; they have given no heed to the sentence of deposition justly and in due forth passed upon them, nor have become any more moderate in consequence of the rebuke of your majesty. They have trampled down alike the laws of your piety, and the canons of the holy Fathers, and, some of them being deposed and some excommunicated, keep festivals, and celebrate communion, in Houses of Prayer. And we, as we have already informed your Christ-loving majesty, on the receipt of your clemency’s kindly letter, though our only desire was to pray in the church of the Apostles, have not only been prevented, but actually stoned, and chased for a considerable distance, so that we were compelled to effect our safety by flight at full speed. Our opponents on the contrary think that they may act just as they please. They have declined to make investigation of the questions at issue, and to undertake the defence of Cyril’s heretical Chapters, rejecting the plain proofs of the impiety which they contain. They are impudent from mere impudence, while the examination of the questions before us requires not impudence, but calmness, knowledge, and skill in matters of doctrine.
Under these circumstances we have been under the necessity of sending forward the most honourable Count Irenæus, to approach your piety, and to explain the position of affairs. He has accurate information concerning all that has occurred, and has learned from us many modes of cure, whereby it may be possible to bring about the restoration of tranquillity to the holy churches of God. We beseech your clemency to grant him patient audience, and to give orders for the prompt carrying out of whatever measures may seem good to your piety, that we be not here crushed beyond all endurance.
CLIX. Letter of the same to the Præfect and to the Master. 2265
Footnotes
335:2265Written at the same time and under the same circumstances as the former, of which it is an abbreviation, and is consequently omitted.
CLX. Letter of the same to the Governor and Scholasticus. 2266
Footnotes
335:2266Omitted as merely repeating the representation of CLVII.
CLXI. Report presented to the Emperor by John, Archbishop of Antioch and his supporters through Palladius Magistrianus. 2267
Footnotes
335:2267This document defends the action of the conciliabulum, speaking of Cyril, in consequence of their depositions as “lately” bishop of Alexandria, and demanding the exile of Memnon.
CLXII. Letter of Theodoretus to Andreas, Bishop of Samosata, written from Ephesus. 2268
Writing from Ephesus I salute your holiness, I congratulate you on your infirmity, and deem you dear to God, in that you have known what evil deeds have been going on here by report, and not by personal experience. Evil indeed! They transcend all imagination and all incidents of history; they compel a continual downpour of tears. The body of the Church is in peril of dismemberment;—nay, rather I may say it has received the first incision;—unless the wise Healer restore and re-connect the unsound and severed limbs. Once again the Egyptian is raging against God, and warring with Moses and Aaron His servants, and the more part of Israel are on the side of the foe; for all too few are the sound who willingly suffer for true religion’s sake. Ancient principles are trodden under foot. Deposed men perform priestly functions, and they who have deposed them sit sighing at home. Men excommunicated by the same sentence as the deposed have relieved the deposed of their deposition of their own free will. Such is the mockery of a synod held by Egyptians, by Palestinians, by men from the Pontic and Asian dioceses, and by the West in their company. 2269
What players in a pantomime, in the days of paganism, even in any farce so held up religion to ridicule? Indeed what farce-writer ever performed such a play? What dramatist ever wrote so sad a tragedy? Such and so great are the troubles that have beset God’s Church, whereof I have narrated but a very small part.
Footnotes
336:2268This letter may be dated “towards the end of July or in the beginning of August 431, after the restitution of Cyril and Memnon on July 16, and before the departure of Theodoret from Ephesus on August 20.” Garnerius. Andrew of Samosata wrote objections to Cyril’s Chapters in the name of the bishops of the East. He was prevented by illness from being present at Ephesus in 431, as he was also from the synod assembled at Antioch in 444 to hear the cause of Athanasius of Perrha. He was a warm supporter of Nestorius.
This letter exists only in the Latin Version, and is to be found also in Mansi Collect. Conc. ix. 293.
336:2269In Ep. CLXI, the numbers are specified;—“Of Egyptians fifty; of Asiani under Memnon, leader of the tyranny, forty; of the heretics in Pamphylia called Messalianitæ, twelve; besides those attached to the same metropolitan” (i.e. Amphilochius of Side) “and others deposed and excommunicated in divers places by synods or bishops, who constitute nothing but a mere turbulent and disorderly mob, entirely ignorant of the divine decrees.”
CLXIII. First Letter of the Commissioners of the East, sent to Chalcedon, among whom was Theodoretus. 2270
On our arrival at Chalcedon, for neither we ourselves nor our opponents were permitted to enter Constantinople, on account of the seditions of the excellent monks, we heard that eight days before we had appeared (behold the glory of the most pious prince) the lord Nestorius was dismissed from Ephesus, free to go where he would; whereat we are much distressed, since verily deeds done illegally and informally now seem to have some force. Let your holiness however be assured that we shall eagerly join the battle for the Faith, and are willing to fight even unto death. To-day, the 11th of the month Gorpiæum, 2271 we are expecting our very pious Emperor to cross over to the Rufinianum, 2272 and there to hear the trial.
We therefore beg your holiness to pray the Lord Christ to help us to be able to confirm the faith of the holy Fathers, and to pluck up by the roots these Chapters which have sprouted to the damage of the Church. We implore your holiness to think and act with us, and to abide in your ready devotion to the orthodox faith. When this letter was written the lord Himerius 2273 had not yet met us, being peradventure hindered on the road. But do not let this trouble you. Only let your piety strenuously support us, and we trust that gloom will disappear, and the truth shine forth.
Footnotes
336:2270Another version of the title runs “To the very holy and wise synod assembled at Ephesus, Joannes, Paulus, Apringius, Theodoretus, greeting.” The letter may be dated in Sept. 431. Paul, bishop of Emesa, was ultimately an active peacemaker in the dispute. Apringius was bishop of Chalcis.
It only exists in the Latin.
336:2271The Macedonian name for September.
336:2272A villa in the vicinity of Chalcedon.
336:2273Metropolitan of Nicomedia; one of the “Conciliabulum.”
CLXIV. Second Epistle of the same to the same, expressing premature triumph in Victory. 2274
Through the prayers of your holiness our most pious prince has granted us an audience, and by God’s grace we have got the better of our opponents, as all our views have been accepted by the most Christ-loving emperor. The reports of others were read, and what seemed unfit to be received, and had no further importance, he rejected. They were full of Cyril, and petitioned that he might be summoned to give an account of himself. So far they have not prevailed, but have heard discourses on true religion, that is on the system of the Faith, and that the faith of the blessed Fathers was confirmed. We further refuted Acacius 2275 who had laid down in his Commentaries that the Godhead is passible. At this our pious emperor was so shocked at the enormity of the blasphemy that he flung off his mantle, and stepped back. We know that the whole assembly welcomed us as champions of true religion.
It has seemed good to our most pious emperor that anyone should explain his own views, and report them to his piety. We have replied that it is impossible for us to make any other exposition than that made by the blessed Fathers at Nicæa, and so it has pleased his majesty. We therefore offered the form subscribed by your holiness. Moreover, the whole population of Constantinople is continually coming out to us to implore us to fight manfully for the Faith. We do our best to restrain them, to avoid giving offence to our opponents. We have sent a copy of the expositing, that two copies may be made, and you may subscribe them both.
Footnotes
336:2274Also only in Latin.
336:2275Bishop of Melitene in Armenia Secunda, an ardent anti-Nestorian, who remonstrated with Cyril for consenting to make peace with the Orientals.
CLXV. Letter of the same to the same. 2276
To the very pious bishops now in Ephesus: Johannes, Himerius, Paulus, Apringius, Theodoretus, greeting. For the fifth time an audience has been granted us. We entered largely into the question of the heretical Chapters, and swore again and again to the very pious emperor that it was impossible for us to hold communion with our opponents unless they rejected the Chapters. We pointed out moreover that even if Cyril did abjure his Chapters he could not be received by us, because he had become the heresiarch of so impious a heresy. Nevertheless we gained no ground, because our adversaries were urgent, and their hearers could neither restrain them in their insolent endeavour, nor compel them to come to enquiry and argument. They thus evade the investigation of the Chapters, and allow no discussion concerning them. We, however, as you entreat, are ready to insist to the death. We refuse to receive Cyril and his Chapters; we will not admit these men to Communion till the improper additions to the Faith be rejected. We therefore implore your holiness to continue to show at once our mind and our efforts. The battle is for true religion; for the only hope we have,—on account of which we look forward to enjoying, in the world to come, the loving-kindness of our Saviour. As to the very pious and holy bishop Nestorius, be it known to your piety that we have tried to introduce a word about him, but have hitherto failed, because all are ill-affected toward him. We will notwithstanding do our best, though this is so, to take advantage of any opportunity that may offer, and of the goodwill of the audience, to carry out this purpose, God helping us. But that your holiness may not be ignorant of this too, know that we, seeing that the partisans of Cyril have deceived everyone by domineering, cheating, flattering, and bribing, have more than once besought the very pious emperor and most noble princes both to send us back to the East, and let your holiness go home. For we are beginning to learn that we are wasting time in vain, without nearing our end, because Cyril everywhere shirks discussion, in his conviction that the blasphemies published in his Twelve Chapters can be openly refuted. The very pious emperor has determined, after many exhortations, that we all go every one to his own home, and that, further, both the Egyptian and Memnon of Ephesus are to remain in their own places. So the Egyptian will be able to go on blindfolding by bribery. The one, after crimes too many to tell, is to return to his diocese. The other, an innocent man, is barely permitted to go home. We and all here salute you and all the brotherhood with you.
Footnotes
337:2276Only in Latin.
CLXVI. First Petition of the Commissioners, addressed from Chalcedon, to the Emperor.
It had been much to be desired that the word of true religion should not be adulterated by ridiculous explanations, and least of all by men who have obtained the priesthood and high office in the churches, and who have been induced, we know not how, by ambition, by lust of authority, and by certain poor promises, to despise all the commandments of Christ. Their only motive has been the desire to pay court to a man who has the presumption to hope that he and his abettors will be able to manage the whole business with success; I mean Cyril of Alexandria. Of his own frivolity he has intruded into the holy churches of God heretical doctrines which he believes himself able to support by argument. He expects to escape the chastisement of sinners by the sole help of Memnon and the bishops of the aforesaid conspiracy.
We are lovers of silence; in general we advise a philosophic course of action. Now, however, sensible that to be silent and to cultivate philosophy would be to throw away the Faith, we turn in supplication to you who, next to the Goodness on high, are the sole preserver of the world. We know that it specially belongs to you to be anxious for true religion, as having, up to this present day, continually protected it, and being in turn protected by it.
We beg you therefore to receive this treatise, as though our defence were to be pleaded in the presence of the most holy God; not because we are less active in the sacred cause, but because we are devoted to true religion, and are speaking in its behalf. For in Christian times the clergy have no more bounden duty than to bear testimony before so faithful a prince, however ready we might have been to yield our bodies and to lay down our lives a thousand times in the battle for the faith. We therefore beseech you by God who seeth all things, by our Lord Jesus Christ who will judge all men in righteousness, by the Holy Ghost by whose grace you hold your empire, and by the elect angels who are your guardians and whom one day you shall see standing by the awful throne, and ceaselessly offering unto God that dread doxology which it is now sought to corrupt; we beseech your piety, besieged as you now are by the craftiness of certain men who are forbidding access to you, and are supporting the introduction into the faith of heretical Chapters, utterly at variance with sound doctrine, and tainted with heresy, to order all who subscribe them, or assent to them, and wish, after your promised pardon, to dispute further, to come forth and submit to the discipline of the Church. Nothing, sir, is more worthy of an emperor than to fight for the truth, for which you hurried to join battle with Persians and other barbarians, when Christ granted you to win fair victories in acknowledgment of your zeal towards Him. We beseech you that the questions at issue may be put before your piety in writing, for thus their purport will be more easily perceived, and the transgressors will be convicted for all future time. If however anyone, heedless of the utterances for which he shall be at fault, shall wish by his teaching to prevail over the right faith, it will be the part of your justice and judgment to consider whether the very name of teachers has not been thrown away by men who are reluctant to run any risks concerning the doctrines which they introduce, refusing to be obedient to your orders, that they may escape conviction for having done wrong; nor reckoning them worth refutation, that their mutual conspiracy be not proved fruitless. For now it is clear, from those that have been ordained by them that some of them, in return for this impiety, have bethought them of obliging certain persons by the concession of dignities and have devised certain other means. This will become still more clear; and your piety will soon see that they will distribute the rewards of their treachery, as though they were the spoils of the faith of Christ.
But we, of whom some were long ago ordained by the very pious Juvenal, bishop of Jerusalem, have kept silence, although it was our duty to contend for the canon, that we might not seem to be troubled for our own reputation’s sake. We are now perfectly well aware of his active trickery through Phœnicia Secunda and Arabia. We really have not time to attend to such things. We are men who have preferred rather to be deprived of the very places of which the ministry has been entrusted to us, and so of our life, than of our ready zeal for the faith. To the attempts of those men we will oppose the sentence of God and of your piety.
Now also we beg that true religion may be your one and primary care, and that the brightness of orthodoxy, which at length with difficulty blazed forth in the days of Constantine of holy name, was maintained by your blessed grandfather and father, and was extended by your majesty among the Persians and other barbarians, be not allowed to grow dim in the very innermost courts of your imperial palace, or, in your serenity’s days, to be dispersed.
You will not send, sir, a divided Christianity into Persia; nor here at home will there be anything great, while we are distressed by disputes, and while there is no one existing on their side to settle them; no one will take part in a divided Word and Sacraments; no one without loss of faith will cut himself off from such famous fathers and saints who have never been condemned. No imperial successes will be permitted to a people at variance among themselves; a burst of derision will be roused from the enemies of true religion; and all the other noxious consequences of their malignant controversy are too numerous to reckon.
If there is anyone who thinks little of the science of theology, let that one be any one in the world rather than he to whom the Lord has given the supreme government of the world. Our petition is that your piety will give judgment, for God will guide your intelligence into exact comprehension. Finally, should this be impracticable (and all the engagements of your piety we cannot know) we beseech your serenity to give us leave to travel safely home. We are aware that to the dioceses entrusted to us cause of offence is given by so protracted a delay, on account of those men who even in sacred matters look out for opportunities of dissension whence no advantage can be derived.
CLXVII. Second Petition of the same, sent from Chalcedon to Theodosius Augustus.
Your piety has been informed on several occasions, both by ourselves in person and by our emissaries, that the doctrine of the true faith seems to stand in danger of being corrupted, and that the body of the Church is apparently being rent asunder by men who are turning everything upside down, trampling upon all church order, and all imperial law, and throwing everything into confusion that they may confirm the heresy propounded by Cyril of Alexandria. For when we were first summoned by your piety to Ephesus, to enquire into the question which had arisen and to confirm the evangelic and apostolic faith laid down by the holy Fathers, before the arrival of all the bishops who had been convened, the holders of their own private Council confirmed in writing the heretical Chapters, which are at one with the impiety of Arius, Eunomius and Apollinarius. Some they deceived; some they terrified; others already charged with heresy, they received into communion; and others who had not communicated with them were bribed into so doing; others again were fired with the hope of dignities for which they were unfit; so these men gathered round them a great crowd of adherents, as though they had no idea that true religion is shewn not by numbers, but by truth.
The dispatch of your piety was read a second time by the most honourable Count Candidianus, ordering that the questions recently raised be examined in a quiet and brotherly manner. When however all the pious bishops were assembling, the reading had no effect.
Then came the noble Palladius Magistrianus, bringing another dispatch from your majesty, to the effect that all enactments passed privately and apart must be rescinded; that the Council must be assembled afresh and the true doctrine ratified; but, as usual, this your pious mandate was treated with contempt by these unscrupulous persons.
Then again arrived the right honourable Master John, at that time “Comes Largitionum,” bringing another pious letter to the effect that the depositions of the three had been decreed, that the offences which had sprung up were to be removed, and the faith laid down at Nicæa by the holy and blessed Fathers was to be ratified by all. As usual these universal mockers transgressed this law too.
For after hearing the letter they did not change their mode of action; they held communion with the deposed; spoke of them as bishops, and refused to allow the Chapters, which had been propounded to the loss and corruption of the pious faith to be rejected; notwithstanding their having been frequently summoned by us to discussion. For we had ready to hand a plain refutation of the heretical Chapters.
In evidence of these statements we have the right honourable Master, who when both sides had been summoned a third and a fourth time, not venturing to make this conduct an excuse on account of their disobedience, thought it worth while to summon us hither.
We came at once; on our arrival we allowed ourselves no rest making our petition, both before your piety and before the illustrious assembly, that they would take up the quarrel for the Chapters and enter into discussion concerning them, or on the other hand reject them as contrary to the right faith, abiding by the faith as laid down by the blessed fathers in council at Nicæa.
They refused to do anything of the kind; they persisted in their heretical procedure; yet they were allowed to attend the churches, and to perform their priestly functions. We, however, alike at Ephesus and here, have been for a long time deprived of communion; alike there and here we have undergone innumerable perils; and while we were being stoned and all but slain by slaves dressed up as monks, we took it all for the best, as willingly enduring such treatment in the cause of the truth.
Afterwards it seemed good to your majesty that we and the opposite party should assemble once again, that the recalcitrant might be compelled to examine the doctrines. While we were waiting for this to come to pass your piety set out for the city, and ordered the very men who were being accused of heresy and had been therefore some of them deposed by us, and others excommunicated and thereafter to be subjected to the discipline of the Church, to come to the city and perform priestly functions, and ordain. 2277 We however who in the cause of true religion have undertaken a struggle so tremendous; we who have shrunk from no peril in our battle for right doctrine, have neither been bidden to enter the city to serve the cause of the imperilled Faith and strive for orthodoxy; nor have we been permitted to return home; 2278 but here we are in Chalcedon distressed and groaning for the Church oppressed by schism.
Wherefore since we are in receipt of no reply we have thought it necessary to inform your piety by this present letter, before God and Christ and the Holy Ghost, that if any one shall have been ordained (before the settlement of right doctrines) by these men of heretical opinions, he must necessarily be cut off from the whole church, as well from the clergy as the dissentient laity. For none of the pious will endure that communion be granted to heretics, and their own salvation be nullified.
And when this shall have come to pass, then your piety shall be compelled to act against your will. For the schism will grow beyond all expectation, and thereby the champions of true religion will be saddened, unable to endure the loss of their own souls, and the establishment of those impious doctrines of Cyril which the contentious are desirous of defending.
Many indeed of the supporters of true religion will never allow the acceptance of Cyril’s doctrines; we shall never allow it, who all are of the diocese of the East of your province, of the diocese of Pontus, of Asia, of Thrace, of Illyricum and of the Italies, and who also sent to your piety the treatise of the most blessed Ambrose, written against this nascent superstition.
To avoid all this, and the further troubling of your piety, we beg, beseech, and implore you to issue an edict that no ordination take place before the settlement of the orthodox faith, on account of which we have been convened by your Christ-loving highness.
Footnotes
339:2277i.e. Maximianus, in succession to Nestorius, Oct. 25, 431.
339:2278Nestorius was permitted to return to his old monastery at Antioch.
CLXVIII. Third Demand of the same, addressed from Chalcedon to the Sovereigns.
We never expected the summons of your piety to meet with this result. We were honourably convoked, as priests by prince; we were convoked to ratify the faith of the holy Fathers; and therefore, in due obedience to a pious prince, we came. On our arrival we were no less faithful to the Church, not less respectful to your edict. From the day of our arrival at Ephesus till the present moment we have without intermission followed your behests.
As it seems, however, our moderation, in these times, has not been of the slightest use to us; nay, rather, so far as we can see, it has stood very much in our way. We indeed who have thus behaved have been up to the present time detained in Chalcedon; and now we are told that we may go home. They however who have thrown everything into confusion, who have filled the world with tumult, who are striving to rend churches in twain, and who are the open assailants of true religion, perform priestly functions, crowd the churches, and as they imagine have authority to ordain, though in truth it is illegally claimed by them, stir up seditions in the church, and what ought to be spent upon the poor they throw away upon their bullies.
But you are not only their emperor; you are ours too. For no small portion of your empire is the East, wherein the right faith has ever shone, and, besides, the other provinces and dioceses from which we have been convened.
Let not your majesty despise the faith which is being corrupted, in which you and your forefathers have been baptized; on which the Church’s foundations are laid; for which most holy martyrs have rejoiced to suffer countless kinds of death; by aid of which you have vanquished barbarians and destroyed tyrants; which you are needing now in your war for the subjugation of Africa. For on your side will fight the God of all if you struggle on behalf of His holy doctrines and forbid the dismemberment of the body of the church: for dismembered it will be if the opinion prevail which Cyril has introduced into the Church and other heretics have confirmed.
To these truths we have often already borne testimony before God both in Ephesus and in this place. I have furnished information to your holiness, giving an account as before the God of all. For this is required of us, as is taught in the divine Scripture both by prophets and apostles; as says the blessed Paul “I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth the dead, and of Lord Jesus Christ, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession;” 2279 and as God charged Ezekiel to announce to the people, adding threats and saying, “when thou givest him not warning,…his blood will I require at thine hand.” 2280
In awe of this sentence, once again we inform your majesty that they who have been permitted to hold churches, and who teach the doctrines of Apollinarius, Arius, and Eunomius, perform all sacred functions irregularly and in violation of the canons, and destroy the souls of all who approach them; if, indeed, any shall be found willing to listen to them. For by the grace of God whose Providence is over all, and who wishes all men to be saved, the more part of the people is sound, and warmly attached to pious doctrines. It is on their account that we grieve.
And in our anguish and alarm lest the plague creeping on by little and little should attack more, and the evil become general, we thus instruct your serenity, and continue to give you exhortation; we implore your majesty to yield to our prayers and to prohibit any addition to be made to the Faith of the holy Fathers assembled in council at Nicæa.
And if after this our entreaty your piety reject this doctrine, which was given in the presence of God, we will shake off the dust of our feet against you, and cry with the blessed Paul, “We are pure from your blood.” 2281 For we cease not night and day from the moment of our arrival at this distinguished council to bear witness to prince, nobles, soldiers, priests and people, that we hold fast the Faith delivered to us by the Fathers.
Footnotes
340:22791 Tim. vi. 13
340:2280Ez. iii. 18
341:2281Acts xx. 26
CLXIX. Letter written by Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus, from Chalcedon to Alexander of Hierapolis. 2282
We have left no means untried, of courtesy, of sternness, of entreaty, of eloquence before the most pious emperor, and the illustrious assembly, testifying before God who sees all things and our Lord Jesus Christ who shall judge the world in justice, 2283 and the Holy Spirit and his elect angels, lest the Faith be despised which is now being corrupted by the maintainers and bold subscribers of heretical doctrines: and that charge be given for it to be laid down in the same terms as at Nicæa and for the rejection of the heresy introduced to the loss and ruin of true religion. Up to this time however we have produced not the slightest effect, our hearers being carried now in one direction and now in another.
Nevertheless all these difficulties have not been able to deter me from urging my point, but by God’s grace I have pressed on. I have even stated to our pious emperor with an oath that it is perfectly impossible for Cyril and Memnon to be reconciled with me, and that we can never communicate with any one who has not previously repudiated the heretical Chapters. This then is our mind. The object of men who “seek their own not the things which are Jesus Christ’s” 2284 is to be reconciled with them against our will. But this is no business of mine, for God weighs our motives and tries our character, nor does He inflict chastisement for what is done against our will. Be it known to your holiness that if ever I said a word about our friend 2285 either before the very pious emperor or the illustrious assembly, I was at once branded as a rebel. So intensely is he hated by the court party. This is most annoying. The most pious emperor, especially, cannot bear to hear his name mentioned and says publicly “Let no one speak to me of this man.” On one occasion he gave an instance of this to me. Nevertheless as long as I am here I shall not cease to serve the interests of this our father, knowing that the impious have done him wrong.
My desire is that both your piety and I myself get quit of this. No good is to be hoped from it, in as much as all the judges trust in gold, and contend that the nature of the Godhead and manhood is one.
All the people however by God’s grace are in good case, and constantly come out to us. I have begun to discourse to them and have celebrated very large communions.
On the fourth occasion I spoke at length about the faith and they listened with such delight that they did not go away till the seventh hour but held out even till the midday heat. An enormous crowd was gathered in a great court, with four verandahs, and I preached from above from a platform near the roof.
All the clergy with the excellent monks are on the contrary utterly opposed to me, so that when we came back from the Rufinianum, after the visit of the very pious emperor, stone throwing began and many of my companions were wounded, by the people and false monks.
The very pious emperor knew that the mob was gathered against me and coming up to me alone he said, “I know that you are assembling improperly.” Then, said I, “As you have allowed me to speak hear me with favour. Is it fair for excommunicated heretics to be doing duty in churches, while I, who am fighting for the Faith and am therefore excluded by others from communion, am not allowed to enter a church?” He replied “What am I to do?” I said, “What your comes largitionum did at Ephesus. When he found that some were assembling, but that we were not assembling, he stopped them saying, ‘If you are not peaceful I will allow neither party to assemble.’ It would have become your piety also to have given directions to the bishop here to forbid both the opposite party and ourselves to assemble before our meeting together to make known your righteous sentence to all.” To this he replied “It is not for me to order the bishop;” and I answered “Neither shall you command us, and we will take a church, and assemble. Your piety will find that there are many more on our side than on theirs.” In addition to this I pointed out that we had neither reading of the holy Scripture, nor oblation; but only “prayer for the Faith and for your majesty, and pious conversation.” So he approved, and made no further prohibition. The result is that increased crowds flock to us, and gladly listen to our teaching. I therefore beg your piety to pray that our case may have an issue pleasing to God. I am in daily danger, suspecting the wiles of both monks and clergy, as I witness alike their influence and their negligence.
Footnotes
341:2282Dated by Garnerius at the end of September or beginning of October 431, before the order had been given for the withdrawal of the Easterns and the entry of the other party to consecrate a bishop.
341:2283cf. 2 Tim. iv. 1
341:2284Phil. ii. 21
341:2285i.e. Nestorius.
CLXX. Letter of certain Easterns, who had been sent to Constantinople, to Bishop Rufus.
To our most godly and holy fellow-minister Rufus, Joannes, Himerius, Theodoretus, and the rest, send greeting in the Lord. 2286
True religion and the peace of the Church suffer, we think, in no small degree, from the absence of your holiness. Had you been on the spot you might have put a stop to the disturbances which have arisen, and the violence that has been ventured on, and might have fought on our side for the subjection of the heresies introduced into the orthodox Faith, and that doctrine of apostles and evangelists which, handed down from time to time from father to son, has at length been transmitted to ourselves.
And we do not assert this without ground, for we have learnt the mind of your holiness from the letter written to the very godly and holy Julianus, bishop of Sardica, for that letter as is right charged the above named very godly bishop to fight for the Faith laid down by the blessed fathers assembled in council at Nicæa, and not to allow any corruption to be introduced into those invincible definitions which are sufficient at once to exhibit the truth and to refute falsehood. So your holiness rightly, justly, and piously advised, and the recipient of the letter followed your counsel. But many of the members of the council, to use the word of the prophet, “have gone aside,” and have “altogether become filthy,” 2287 for they have abandoned the Faith which they received from the holy Fathers, and have subscribed the twelve Chapters of Cyril of Alexandria, which teem with Apollinarian error, are in agreement with the impiety of Arius and Eunomius, and anathematize all who do not accept their unconcealed unorthodoxy. To this plague smiting the Church vigorous resistance has been offered by us who have assembled from the East, and others from different dioceses, with the object of securing the ratification of the Faith delivered by the blessed Fathers at Nicæa. For in it, as your holiness knows, there is nothing lacking whether for the teaching of evangelic doctrines, or for the refutation of every heresy.
For the sake of this Faith we continue to struggle, despising alike all the joys and sorrows of mortal life, if only we may preserve untouched this heritage of our fathers. For this reason we have deposed Cyril and Memnon; the former as prime mover in the heresy, and the latter as his aider and abettor in all that has been done to ratify and uphold the Chapters published to the destruction of the Church. We have also excommunicated all that have dared to subscribe and support these impious doctrines till they shall have anathematized them, and returned to the Faith of the Fathers at Nicæa.
But our long-suffering has done them no good. To this day they continue to do battle for those pernicious doctrines and have impaled themselves on the law of the canon which distinctly enacts “If any bishop deposed by a synod, or presbyter or deacon deposed by his own bishop, shall perform his sacred office, without waiting for the judgment of a synod, he is to have no opportunity for defending himself, not even in another synod: but also all who communicate with him are to be expelled from the church.” Now this law has been broken both by the deposed and the excommunicate. For immediately after the deposition and the excommunication becoming known to them, they performed sacred functions, and they continue to do so, in plain disbelief of Him who said “Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven.” 2288
With this we have thought well to acquaint your holiness at once, but in expectation of some favourable change, we have waited up to the present time. But we have been disappointed. They have continued to fight for this impious heresy, and pay no attention to the counsels of the very pious emperor. On five separate occasions he has met us, and ordered them either to reject the Chapters of Cyril as contrary to the Faith, or to be willing to do battle in their behalf, and to shew in what way they are in agreement with the confession of the Fathers. We have our proofs at hand, whereby we should have shewn that they are totally opposed to the teaching of orthodoxy, and for the most part in agreement with heresy.
For in these very Chapters the author of the noxious productions teaches that the Godhead of the only begotten Son suffered, instead of the manhood which He assumed for the sake of our salvation, the indwelling Godhead manifestly appropriating the sufferings as of Its own body, though suffering nothing in Its own nature; and further that there is made one nature of both Godhead and manhood,—for so he explains “The Word was made flesh,” 2289 as though the Godhead had undergone some change, and been turned into flesh.
And, further, he anathematizes those who make a distinction between the terms used by apostles and evangelists about the Lord Christ, referring those of humiliation to the manhood, and those of divine glory to the Godhead, of the Lord Christ. It is with these views that Arians and Eunomians, attributing the terms of humiliation to the Godhead, have not shrunk from declaring God the Word to be made and created, of another substance, and unlike the Father.
What blasphemy follows on these statements it is not difficult to perceive. There is introduced a confusion of the natures, and to God the Word are applied the words “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me;” 2290 and “Father, if it be possible let this cup pass from me,” 2291 the hunger, the thirst, and the strengthening by an angel; His saying “Now is my soul troubled,” 2292 and “my soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death,” 2293 and all similar passages belonging to the manhood of the Christ. Any one may perceive how these statements correspond with the impiety of Arius and Eunomius; for they, finding themselves unable to establish the difference of substance, connect, as has been said, the sufferings, and the terms of humiliation, with the Godhead of the Christ.
And be your reverence well assured that now in their churches the Arian teachers preach no other doctrine than that the supporters of the “homousion” at present hold the same views as Arius, and that, after long time, the truth has now at last been brought to light.
We on the contrary abide in the teaching, and follow in the pious footprints, of the blessed Fathers assembled at Nicæa, and of their illustrious successors, Eustathius of Antioch, Basil of Cæsarea, Gregory, John, Athanasius, Theophilus, Damasus of Rome, and Ambrose of Milan. For all these, following the words of the apostles, have left us an exact rule of orthodoxy, which all we of the East earnestly desire to preserve unmoved. The same is the wish of the Bithynians, the Paphlagonians, of Cappadocia Secunda, Pisidia, Mysia, Thessaly, and Rhodope, and very many more of the different provinces. The Italians too, it is evident, will not endure this new-fangled doctrine; for the very godly and holy Martinus, 2294 bishop of Milan, has written a letter to us, and has sent to the very pious emperor a work by the blessed Ambrose on the incarnation of the Lord, of which the teaching is opposed to these heretical Chapters.
And be it known to your holiness that Cyril and Memnon have not been satisfied with corrupting the orthodox Faith, but have trampled all the canons underfoot. For they have received into communion men excommunicated in various provinces and dioceses. Others lying under charges of heresy, and of the same mind as Celestius and Pelagius, (for they are Euchitæ, or Enthusiasts 2295 ) and therefore excommunicated by their diocesans and metropolitans, they have, in defiance of all ecclesiastical discipline received into communion, so swelling their following from all possible quarters, and shewing their eagerness to enforce their teaching less by piety than by violence. For when they had been stripped bare of piety they devised, in their extremity, another sort of force,—walls of flesh, with the idea that by their showers of bribery they might vanquish the faith of the Fathers. But so long as your holiness puts forth your strength, and you continue to fight, as you are wont, in defence of true religion, none of these devices will be of the least avail. We exhort you therefore, most holy sir, to beware of the communion of the unscrupulous introducers of this heresy; and to make known to all, both far and near, that these are the points for which the thrice blessed Damasus deposed the heretics Apollinarius, Vitalius, and Timotheus; and that the Epistle in which the writer has concealed his heresy and coloured it with a coating of truth, must not in simplicity be received. For in the Chapters he has boldly laid bare his impiety, and dared to anathematize all who disagree with him, while in the letter he has vilely endeavoured to harm the simpler readers.
Your holiness must therefore beware of neglecting this matter, lest when, too late, you see this heresy confirmed, you grieve in vain, and suffer affliction at being no longer able to defend the cause of truth.
We have also sent you a copy of the memorial which we have given to the most pious and Christ-loving emperor, containing the faith of the holy Fathers at Nicæa. wherein we have rejected the newly-invented heresies of Cyril, and adjudged them to be opposed to the orthodox faith.
Since in accordance with the orders of the very pious emperor only eight of us travelled to Constantinople, we have subjoined the copy of the order given us by the holy synod, that you may be acquainted with the provinces contained in it. Your holiness will learn them from the signatures of the metropolitans. We salute the brotherhood which is with you.
Footnotes
342:2286After pointing out that superscription, style, expression, sentiments, and circumstances all indicate Theodoret as the writer of this letter, Garnerius proceeds “The objection of Baronius that mention is made of Martinus, bishop of Milan, when there never was a Martinus bishop of Milan, is not of great importance. Theodoret at a distance might easily write Martinus for Martinianus, or a copyist might abbreviate the name to this form.” The date of the letter is marked as after the order to the bishops to remain at Constantinople, and before permission was given them to return home. The Letters were also written to Martinianus of Milan, to John of Ravenna, and to John of Aquileia, but only that to Rufus is extant. Rufus is probably the bishop of Thessalonica.
342:2287Ps. xiv. 3
343:2288Matt. xviii. 18
343:2289John i. 14
343:2290Ps. xxii. 1
343:2291Matt. xxvi. 39
343:2292John xii. 27
343:2293Matt. xxvi. 38
343:2294Vide note on superscription.
343:2295cf. note on p. 114. Celestius, an Irishman of good family, was associated with Pelagius at Rome. Both were condemned at Ephesus in 431. The connexion of Pelagius with the Euchitæ may be suggested by the denial of the former of original sin and the depreciation by the latter of baptism as producing no results.
CLXXI. Letter of Theodoret to John, Bishop of Antioch, after the Reconciliation. 2296
God, who governs all things in wisdom, who provides for our unanimity, and cares for the salvation of His people, has caused us to be assembled together, and has shewn us that the views of all of us are in agreement with one another. We have assembled together, and read the Egyptian Letter; 2297 we have carefully examined its purport, and we have discovered that its contents are quite in accordance with our own statements, and entirely opposed to the Twelve Chapters, against which up to the present time we have continued to wage war, as being contrary to true religion. Their teaching was that God the Word was carnally made flesh; that there was an union of hypostasis, and that the combination in union was of nature, and that God the Word was the first-born from the dead. They forbade all distinction in the terms used of our Lord, and further contained other doctrines at variance with the seeds sown by the apostles, and outcome of heretical tares. The present script, however, is beautified by apostolic nobility of origin. For in it our Lord Jesus Christ is exhibited as perfect God and perfect man; it shews two natures, and the distinction between them; an unconfounded union, made not by mixture and compounding, but in a manner ineffable and divine, and distinctly preserving the properties of the natures; the impassibility and immortality of God the Word; the passibility and temporary surrender to death of the temple, and its resurrection by the power of the united God; that the holy Spirit is not of the Son, nor derives existence from the Son, but proceeds from the Father, and is properly stated to be of the Son, as being of one substance. 2298 Beholding this orthodoxy in the letter, we have hymned Him who heals our stammering tongues, and changes our discordant noises into the harmony of sweet music. 2299
Footnotes
344:2296This Letter appears to be that of the Euphratensian synod. (“probat prmum hæc vox ἐν κοινῷ, in conventu: deinde pluralis numerus ubique positus.” Garnerius.)
Garnerius would date it during the negotiations for reconciliation, when John of Antioch visited Acacius at Berœa, after the Orientals had accepted Cyril’s formula of faith. Schulze would rather place it after the negotiations were over.
344:2297Presumably the letter written by Cyril to Acacius, setting forth his own view, and representing that peace might be attained if the Orientals would give up Nestorius. It exists in Latin. Synod. Mansi, V. 831.
344:2298Vide p. 279. Note.
344:2299The following paragraph, found only in the Vatican ms., and described by Schulze as “inept,” is omitted. It has no significance.
CLXXII. Letter of Theodoretus to Nestorius. 2300
To the very reverend and religious lord and very holy Father, Nestorius, the bishop Theodoretus sends greeting in the Lord. Your holiness is, I think, well aware that I take no pleasure in cultivated society, nor in the interests of this life, nor in reputation, nor am I attracted by other sees. Had I learnt this lesson from no other source, the very solitude of the city 2301 over which I am called to preside would suffice to teach me this philosophy. It is not indeed distinguished only for solitude, but also by very many disturbances which may check the activity even of those who most delight in them.
Let no one therefore persuade your holiness that I have accepted the Egyptian writings as orthodox, with my eyes shut, because I covet any see. For really, to speak the truth, after frequently reading and carefully examining them, I have discovered that they are free from all heretical taint, and I have hesitated to put any stress upon them, though I certainly have no love for their author, who was the originator of the disturbances which have agitated the world. For this I hope to escape punishment in the day of Judgment, since the just Judge examines motives. But to what has been done unjustly and illegally against your holiness, not even if one were to cut off both my hands would I ever assent, God’s grace helping me and supporting my infirmity. This I have stated in writing to those who require it. I have sent to your holiness my reply to what you wrote to me, that you may know that, by God’s grace, no time has changed me like the centipedes and chameleons who imitate by their colour the stones and leaves among which they live. I and all with me salute all the Brotherhood who are with you in the Lord.
Footnotes
344:2300Of this letter the Greek copies have perished. Three Latin versions exist.
(i) In Synod c. 120. Mens. v. 898.
(ii) In synodi quintæ collatione. Mans. IX. 294.
(iii) A version of Marius Mercator from the Recension of Garnerius. The two latter are both given in Migne, Theod. IV. 486. The translation given follows the former of these two. The date appears to be not long after the receipt by Theodoret of the Chapters of Cyril.
344:2301cf. p. 307.
CLXXIII. Letter to Andreas, Monk of Constantinople. 2302
“God is faithful who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape that ye may be able to bear it,” 2303 and convicts falsehood,—although now refuted assertion of the falsehood is approved,—and the power of truth has been shewn. For, lo, they, who by their impious reasoning had confused the natures of our Saviour Christ, and dared to preach one nature, and therefore insulted the most holy and venerable Nestorius, high priest of God, their mouths held, as the prophet says, with bit and bridle 2304 and turned from wrong to right, have once again learnt the truth, adopting the statement of him who in the cause of truth has borne the brunt of the battle. For instead of one nature they now confess two, anathematizing all who preach mixture and confusion. They adore the impassible Godhead of Christ; they attribute passion to the flesh; they distinguish between the terms of the Gospels, ascribing the lofty and divine to the Godhead, and the lowly to the manhood. Such are the writings now brought from Egypt.
Footnotes
345:2302cf. Epp. CXLIII and CLXXVII.
345:23031 Cor. x. 13
345:2304Ps. xxxi. 9
CLXXIV. To Himerius, Bishop of Nicomedia. 2305
We wish to acquaint your holiness that on reading and frequently discussing the letter brought from Egypt we find it in harmony with the doctrine of the Church. Of the twelve Chapters we have proved the contrary, and up to the present time we continue to oppose them. We have therefore determined, if your holiness has recovered the churches divinely entrusted to you, that you ought to communicate with the Egyptians and Constantinopolitans and others who have fought with them against us, because they have professed to hold our faith, or I should rather say the faith of the apostles; but not to give your consent to the alleged condemnation of the very holy and venerable Nestorius. For we hold it impious and unjust in the case of charges in which both appeared as defendants to lavish favour on the one and shut the door of repentance on the other. Far more unjust and impious is it to condemn an innocent man to death. Your holiness should be assured that you ought not to communicate with them before you have recovered your churches. For this not only I but all the holy bishops of our district decreed in the recent Council.
Footnotes
345:2305Himerius was of the “Conciliabulum,” and a staunch Nestorian. LeQuien points out that he, as well as Theodoret, became ultimately reconciled to the victorious party.
CLXXV. To Alexander of Hierapolis. 2306
I have already informed your holiness that if the doctrine of the very holy and venerable bishop, my lord Nestorius, is condemned, I will not communicate with those who do so. If it shall please your holiness to insert this in the letter which is being sent to Antioch so be it. Let there then, I beseech you, be no delay!
Footnotes
345:2306This according to Marius Mercator is the conclusion of a letter to Alexander of Hierapolis. Garnerius had edited it as the conclusion of the preceding letter to Himerius. Vide Mans. v. 880.
CLXXVI. Letter to the same Alexander after he had learnt that John, Bishop of Antioch, had Anathematized the Doctrine of Nestorius. 2307
Be it known to your holiness that when I read the letter addressed to the emperor I was much distressed, because I know perfectly well that the writer of the letter, being of the same opinions, has unwisely and impiously condemned one who has never held or taught anything contrary to sound doctrine. But the form of anathema, though it be more likely than his assent to the condemnation, to grieve a reader, nevertheless has given me some ground of comfort, in that it is laid down not in wide general terms, but with some qualification. For he has not said “We anathematize his doctrine” but “whatever he has either said or held other than is warranted by the doctrine of the apostles.”
Footnotes
345:2307This letter was also edited by Garnerius as addressed to Himerius but is inscribed by Schulze to Alexander of Hierapolis. It is to be found complete in Mans. 927.
CLXXVII. Letter to Andreas, Bishop of Samosata. 2308
The illustrious Aristolaus has sent Magisterianus from Egypt with a letter of Cyril in which he anathematizes Arius, Eunomius, Apollinarius and all who assert Christ’s Godhead to be passible and maintain the confusion and commixture of the two natures. Hereat we rejoice, although he did withhold his consent from our statement. He requires further subscription to the condemnation which has been passed, and that the doctrine of the holy bishop Nestorius be anathematized. Your holiness well knows that if any one anathematizes, without distinction, the doctrine of that most holy and venerable bishop, it is just the same as though he seemed to anathematize true religion.
We must then if we are compelled anathematize those who call Christ mere man, or who divide our one Lord Jesus Christ into two sons and deny His divinity, etc.
Footnotes
346:2308This letter is to be found complete in Latin in Mans. Synod. 840, Schulze’s Index inscribing it to Andreas the Constantinopolitan monk. cf. Ep. CLXII. and note.
CLXXVIII. Letter to Alexander of Hierapolis. 2309
I think that more than all the very holy and venerable bishop, my lord John, must have been gratified at my refusing either to give my consent to the condemnation of the very holy and venerable bishop Nestorius or to violate the pledges made at Tarsus, Chalcedon and Ephesus. 2310
He remembers also what was frequently received from us at Antioch after our departure.
Let no one therefore deceive your holiness into the belief that I should ever do this, for God is without doubt on my side and strengthening me.
Footnotes
346:2309The complete letter is given in another Latin version Baluz. Synod. LXVI. Garnerius makes it the conclusion of the letter to Andrew of Samosata.
346:2310The order of events is reversed. John and his friends went from Ephesus to Chalcedon, from Chalcedon via Ancyra to Tarsus, where he was in his own patriarchate, and held a council, confirming Cyril’s deposition, and pledging its members never to abandon Nestorius. Again at Antioch the same course was repeated.
CLXXIX. Letter of Cyril to John, Bishop of Antioch, against Theodoret. 2311
Footnotes
346:2311Vide Migne LXXVII. 327. Cyril. Ep. lxiii.
CLXXX. Letter of Theodoretus, as some suppose, to Domnus, Bishop of Antioch, written on the Death of Cyril, Bishop of Alexandria. 2312
At last and with difficulty the villain has gone. The good and the gentle pass away all too soon; the bad prolong their life for years.
The Giver of all good, methinks, removes the former before their time from the troubles of humanity; He frees them like victors from their contests and transports them to the better life, that life which, free from death, sorrow and care, is the prize of them that contend for virtue. They, on the other hand, who love and practise wickedness are allowed a little longer to enjoy this present life, either that sated with evil they may afterwards learn virtue’s lessons, or else even in this life may pay the penalty for the wickedness of their own ways by being tossed to and fro through many years of this life’s sad and wicked waves.
This wretch, however, has not been dismissed by the ruler of our souls like other men, that he may possess for longer time the things which seem to be full of joy. Knowing that the fellow’s malice has been daily growing and doing harm to the body of the Church, the Lord has lopped him off like a plague and “taken away the reproach from Israel.” 2313 His survivors are indeed delighted at his departure. The dead, maybe, are sorry. There is some ground of alarm lest they should be so much annoyed at his company as to send him back to us, or that he should run away from his conductors like the tyrant of Cyniscus in Lucian. 2314
Great care must then be taken, and it is especially your holiness’s business to undertake this duty, to tell the guild of undertakers to lay a very big and heavy stone upon his grave, for fear he should come back again, and show his changeable mind once more. Let him take his new doctrines to the shades below, and preach to them all day and all night. We are not at all afraid of his dividing them by making public addresses against true religion and by investing an immortal nature with death. He will be stoned not only by ghosts learned in divine law, but also by Nimrod, Pharaoh and Sennacherib, or any other of God’s enemies.
But I am wasting words. The poor fellow is silent whether he will or no, “his breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth, in that very day his thoughts perish.” 2315 He is doomed too to silence of another kind. His deeds, detected, tie his tongue, gag his mouth, curb his passion, strike him dumb and make him bow down to the ground.
I really am sorry for the poor fellow. Truly the news of his death has not caused me unmixed delight, but it is tempered by sadness. On seeing the Church freed from a plague of this kind I am glad and rejoice; but I am sorry and do mourn when I think that the wretch knew no rest from his crimes, but went on attempting greater and more grievous ones till he died. His idea was, so it is said, to throw the imperial city into confusion by attacking true doctrines a second time, and to charge your holiness with supporting them. But God saw and did not overlook it. “He put his hook into his nose and his bridle into his lips,” 2316 and turned him to the earth whence he was taken. Be it then granted to your holiness’s prayers that he may obtain mercy and pity and that God’s boundless clemency may surpass his wickedness. I beg your holiness to drive away the agitations of my soul. Many different reports are being bruited abroad to my alarm announcing general misfortunes. It is even said by some that your reverence is setting out against your will for the court, but so far I have despised these reports as untrue. But finding every one repeating one and the same story I have thought it right to try and learn the truth from your holiness that I may laugh at these tales if false, or sorrow not without reason if they are true.
Footnotes
346:2312This letter is inserted in the Act. Synod. (vide Mans. ix. 295) as addressed to John, but Garnerius, with general acceptance, has substituted Domnus. Its genuineness was contested by Baronius (an. vi. 23) not only on the ground of its ascription to John who predeceased Cyril four years; but also because its expressions are at once too Nestorian in doctrine and too extreme in bitterness to have been penned by Theodoret. Garnerius is of opinion that the extreme Nestorianism and bitterness of feeling are no arguments against the authorship of Theodoret; and, as we have already had occasion to notice, our author can on occasion use very strong language, as for instance in Letter CL. p. 324, where he alludes to Cyril as a shepherd not only plague smitten himself but doing his best to inflict more damage on his flock than that caused by beast of prey, by infecting his charge with his disease.
“It must be needless to add that Cyril’s character is not to be estimated aright by ascribing any serious value to a coarse and ferocious invective against his memory, which was quoted as Theodoret’s in the fifth General Council (Theodor. Ep. 180; see Tillemont, xiv. 784). If it were indeed the production of the pen of Theodoret, the reputation which would suffer from it would assuredly be his own.” Canon Bright. Dict. Christ. Biog. I.
“The long and bitter controversy in which both parties did and said many things they must have had cause deeply to regret, was closed by the death of Cyril, June 9, or 27, 444. With Baronius, ‘the cautious’ Tillemont, Cardinal Newman and Dr. Bright, we should be glad to ‘utterly scout’ the idea, that the ‘atrocious letter’ on Cyril’s death ascribed to Theodoret by the Fifth Œcumenical Council (Theod. ed. Schulze, Ep. 180; Labbe, v. 507) which he was said to have delivered by way of pæan (Bright u. s. 176) and ‘the scarcely less scandalous’ sermon (ib.) can have been written by him. ‘To treat it as genuine would be to vilify Theodoret.’ ‘The Fathers of the Council’ writes Dr. Newman ‘are no authority on such a matter’ (Hist. Sketches p. 359). A painful suspicion of their genuineness, however, still lingers and troubles our conception of Theodoret. The documents may have been garbled, but the general tone too much resembles that of undisputed polemical writings of Theodoret’s to allow us entirely to repudiate them. We wish we could. Neander (vol. iv. p. 13, note, Clark’s tr.) is inclined to accept the genuineness of the letter, the arguments against which he does not regard as carrying conviction, and to a large extent deriving their weight from Tillemont’s ‘Catholic standpoint.’ That Theodoret should speak in this manner of Cyril’s character and death cannot, he thinks, appear surprising to those who, without prejudice, contemplate Cyril and his relations to Theodoret. The playful description, after the manner of Lucian, of a voyage to the Shades below, is not to be reckoned a very sharp thing even in Theodoret. The advice to put a heavy stone over his grave to keep Cyril down is sufficient proof that the whole is a bitter jest. The world felt freer now Cyril was gone; and he does not shrink from telling a friend that he could well spare him. ‘The exaggeration of rhetorical polemics requires many grains of allowance.’” Canon Venables. Dict. Christ. Biog. iv.
347:23131 Sam. xvii. 26
347:2314Lucian. “Cataplus sive Tyrannus.”
Cyniscus and Megapenthes come to the shore of Styx in the same batch of ghosts.
Megapenthes begs hard of Clotho to let him go back again, but Cyniscus the philosopher, who professes great delight at having died at last, refuses to get into the boat. “No; by Zeus, not till we have bound this fellow here, and set him on board, for I am afraid he will get over you by his entreaties.”
347:2315Ps. cxlvi. 4
347:2316Isaiah xxxvii. 29
CLXXXI. Letter to Abundius, Bishop of Como. 2317
To my dear lord and very holy brother Abundius Theodoretus sends greeting in the Lord. I have discovered that your piety religiously preserves the true and apostolic faith; and I have thanked Almighty God that the truth which was in peril has been renewed and brought to light by your holiness.
Of old, after the flood, it came to pass that Noah and his sons were left for seed of the human race. Just so in our own day are reserved the fathers of the West, that by them the holy churches of the East may be able to preserve that true religion which has been threatened with devastation and destruction by a new and impious heresy. Well may we quote those words of the prophet “Except the Lord of hosts had left unto us a very small remnant we should have been as Sodom and we should have been like unto Gomorrah.” 2318 So upon us from this impious heresy the wrath of God has fallen like a flood and invasion.
Now we acknowledge the presence of our Saviour in a human body, and one Son of God, His perfect Godhead and His perfect manhood. We do not divide our one Lord Jesus Christ into two sons for He is one; but we recognise the distinction between God and man; we know that one is of the Father, the other of the seed of David and Abraham, according to the divine Scriptures, and that the divine nature is free from passion, the body which was before subject to passion being now itself too free from passion; for after the resurrection it is plainly delivered from all passion.
This we have learnt from the letter of the very holy and religious Archbishop our lord Leo. For we have read what he wrote to Flavianus, of holy and blessed memory, and have thanked the loving-kindness of the Lord because we have found an advocate and defender of the truth. To this letter I have given my adhesion, and have subjoined a copy of it to my present epistle, which I have also subscribed and have thereby proved that I obey the apostolic rules, that is true doctrines; that I abide in them to this day, and am suffering in their cause.
Assent has also been given by my lord Ibas and my lord Aquilinus against whom the inventors of the new heresy have armed the imperial power.
It remains for you with your very holy colleagues to bring aid to the sacred Church, and to drive away the war that threatens it. Banish the impious party which has been roused against the truth; give back the churches their ancient peace; so will you receive from the Lord, Who has promised to grant this boon, the fruits of your apostolic labours.
All the very religious and godly presbyters and reverend deacons and brethren by your holiness I greet; and I and all who are with me salute your reverence. 2319
Footnotes
347:2317This letter may be dated from Nicerte in the autumn of 450 when Abundius was at Constantinople on a mission from Leo, after the failure to get Theodosius to agree to the summary of the Council in the West. Theodosius died a few days after the arrival of the envoys at Constantinople. Theodoret is anxious to encourage the Roman Legates to support the orthodox cause in the Imperial city, to repair the mischief caused by the Latrocinium, and to show the court that he and his friends Ibas and Aquilinus had the support of Leo. Abundius, fourth bishop of Como (450–469) represented Leo at Chalcedon. Manzoni, in the Promessi Sposi, reminds us of the local survival of the name.
347:2318Isaiah i. 9
348:2319After all the storms of controversy and quarrel which we have followed in the course of the dialogues and letters of the Blessed Bishop of Cyrus; after the lurid leap of grim pleasantry which, if not actually penned by Theodoret, indicates a temper that must have often shown itself in these troubled times; there is something pathetic and encouraging in the conciliatory conclusion of this last letter. Cyril has been dead for years, and his weaknesses are forgotten in a confession which his more moderate opponents could accept. The subscription of Theodoret to the tome of Leo is an earnest of harmony and concord. The calmer wisdom of the West asserts the truth which underlay the furious disputes of the subtler East. The last word of the drama is Peace.
Jerome and Gennadius
Lives of Illustrious Men.
Translated, with Introduction and Notes,
by
Ernest Cushing Richardson, Ph.D.
Librarian of Princeton College.
Jerome and Gennadius.
Lives of Illustrious Men.
————————————
I. Introduction.
This combined work of Jerome and Gennadius is unique and indispensable in the history of early Christian literature, giving as it does a chronological history in biographies of ecclesiastical literature to about the end of the fifth century. For the period after the end of Eusebius’ Church History it is of prime value.
1. Time and Place of Composition, and Character.
1. The work of Jerome was written at Bethlehem in 492. It contains 135 writers from Peter up to that date. In his preface Jerome limits the scope of his work to those who have written on Holy Scriptures, but in carrying out his plans he includes all who have written on theological topics; whether Orthodox or Heretic, Greek, Latin, Syriac, and even Jews and Heathen (Josephus, Philo, Seneca). The Syriac writers mentioned are however few. Gennadius apologizes for the scanty representation which they have in Jerome on the ground that the latter did not understand Syriac, and only knew of such as had been translated.
The motive of the work was, as the preface declares, to show the heretics how many and how excellent writers there were among the Christians. The direct occasion of the undertaking was the urgency of his friend Dexter, and his models were first of all Suetonius, and then various Greek and Latin biographical works including the Brutus of Cicero.
Jerome expressly states in his preface that he had no predecessor in his work, but very properly acknowledges his indebtedness to the Church History of Eusebius, from whom he takes much verbatim. The first part of the work is taken almost entirely from Eusebius.
The whole work gives evidence of hasty construction (e.g., in failure to enumerate the works of well-known writers or in giving only selections from the list of their writings) but too much has been made of this, for in such work absolute exhaustiveness is all but impossible, and in the circumstances of those days, such a list of writers and their works is really remarkable. He apologizes in the preface for omitting such as are not known to him in his “Out of the way corner of the earth.” He has been accused of too great credulity, in accepting e.g., the letters of Paul to Seneca as genuine, but on the other hand he often shows himself both cautious (Hilary, Song of S.) and critical (Minutius Felix De Fato).
The work was composed with a practical purpose rather than a scientific one and kept in general well within that purpose—giving brief information about writers not generally known. This is perhaps why in writings of the better known writers like Cyprian he does not enumerate their works.
2. The work of Gennadius was written about 430 according to some, or 492 to 495 according to others. Ebert with the Benedictins and others before him, makes an almost conclusive argument in favor of the earlier date on the ground that Gennadius speaks of Timotheus Aelurus who died in 477 as still living. This compels the rejection of the paragraph on Gennadius himself as by a later hand but this should probably be done at any rate, on other grounds. The mss. suggest that Gennadius ended with John of Antioch, although an hypothesis of three editions before the year 500, of which perhaps two were by Gennadius, has grounds. The bulk of the work at least was composed about 480 (probably chapters 1–90) and the remainder added perhaps within a few years by Gennadius or more probably two other hands.
Gennadius style is as bare and more irregular than Jerome’s but he more frequently expresses a critical judgment and gives more interesting glimpses of his own—the semi-Pelagian—point of view. The work appears more original than Jerome’s and as a whole hardly less valuable, though the period he covers is so much shorter.
2. Literature.
1. The literature on Jerome is immense. The most often quoted general works are Zöckler, Hieronymus. Gotha, 1865 and Thierry, St. Jérome Par. 1867. On Jerome in general the article by Freemantle in Smith and Wace Dict. of Christian Biography is the first for the English reader to turn to. Ceillier and other patrologies, while sufficiently full for their purpose, give very little special treatment to this work, Ebert (Gesch. chr.-Lat.-Lit. Lpz. 1874) being a partial exception to this statement. The best literary sources are the prolegomena and notes to the various editions of the work itself. Much the same may be said of Gennadius though the relative importance of his catalogue among his writings gives that a larger proportionate attention. In English the article by Cazenove in Smith and Wace and in French the account in the Histoire litteraire de la France are the best generally accessible references.
2. Literature on the writers mentioned by Jerome and Gennadius. Any one who cares to follow up in English the study of any of the writers mentioned in the Lives of illustrious men will find tools therefor: 1. For the earlier writers to the time of Eusebius, Eusebius Church History tr. M’Giffert (N. Y. Chr. Lit. Co.) notes. 2. For the whole period: Smith and Wace Dict. of Christian Biography, 4 vols. and more accessible to most (though a cheap reprint of Smith and Wace is now threatened) Schaff. Church Hist. (N. Y. Scribners) where at the end of each volume an account is given of the chief writers of the period including admirable bibliographical reference.
Of course the best source is the works themselves: The Ante-Nicene Fathers, ed. Coxe, The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers ed. Schaff and Wace. (N. Y. Christian Literature Co.) For further research the student is referred to the list of Patrologies and Bibliographies in the supplementary volume of the Ante-Nicene Fathers, to the bibliography of Ante-Nicene Fathers in the same volume, to Chevalier. Dict. des sources hist. and the memoranda by Sittl, in the Jahresberichte ü. d. fortschr. d. class. Alterthwiss. 1887 sq.
3. Manuscripts.
The manuscripts of Jerome and Gennadius are numerous. The translator has seen 84 mss. of Jerome and 57 of Gennadius and has certain memoranda of at least 25 more and hints of still another score. It is certainly within bounds to say that there are more than 150 mss. of Jerome extant and not less than 100 of Gennadius.
The oldest of those examined (and all the oldest of which he could learn were seen) are at Rome, Verona, Vercelli, Montpellier, Paris, Munich and Vienna.
4. Editions.
The editions of Jerome are relatively as numerous as the mss. The Illustrious men is included in almost all the editions of his collected works, in his collected “minor writings” and in many of the editions of his epistles (most of the editions in fact from 1468 to about 1530.)
It is several times printed separately or with Gennadius or other catalogues. The editions of Gennadius are less numerous but he is often united with Jerome in the editions of Jerome’s collected works, and generally in the separate editions.
The following list of editions is printed as illustrative. It does not pretend to be complete, but is simply a list of such as have been personally examined by the translator up to date; s. l. et a (6) + 390 ff, 62, 11.; s. l. et a. (1468?) 223ff, 2 col. 50 11.; Rome 1468. P. de Max; (Compluti?) 1470; Rome 1470; Mogunt 1470; s. l. et a. (Augsb. Zainer 1470); s. l. et a. 1470, 4º 23 11: s. a. “JA. RV” 1471?; Rome 1479; Parma 1480; Ven. 1488; Basil 1489; Ven. 1490; Basil 1492 Norimb. 1495; s. l. 1496?; Basil 1497; Lyons, 1508; Paris 1512; Lyons 1513; Lyons 1518 Basil 1525 Lyons 1526 (Erasmus); Basil 1526 (Erasm) Basil 1529 Lyons 1530 Paris 1534; Frankfort 1549; Bas. 1553; Bas. 1565; Rome 1565–; Rome 1576 Colon 1580; Paris 1609; Helmst 1611–12 Cologne 1616; Frf. [1622]; Antw. 1639 Frf. 1684; Paris 1706 (Martianay & Pouget); Helmst. 1700; Hamb. 1718; Veron. 1734–42 (Vallarsi); repr. 1766–72; Florence 1791; Paris 1865 (Migne); Lpz. 1879 (Herding) Turin 1875, 1877, 1885 (Jerome only).
Andreas, Erasmus, Victorinus, Graevius, Martianay, Miraeus, Fabricius, Cyprian are among the earlier editors but Erasmus is facile princeps in popularity of reprint. The edition of Vallarsi in 1734–42 was a decided advance toward a critical text. Various editors before him had made use of various mss. especially the “Corbeiensis” or “Sangermanensis” but secondarily mss. at Wulfenbüttel, Munich, the Bodleian, Nürnberg, “Sigbergensis,” “Gemblacensis,” “Marcianus” and others. Vallarsi founded his edition largely on a Verona ms. (still there) on the “Corbeiensis” so much used and praised before (now Paris Lat. 12161 “St. Crucis” one at Lucca of the 9th century and more or less on mss. employed by previous editors. This edition has remained the standard and is the one adopted for the Migne edition.
The most recent edition which pretends to a critical character is that of Herding (Lpz. 1879). The editions by Tamietti are simply school editions of Jerome only, and make no pretensions to a critical text. The edition of Herding is founded on a transcript of Vat. Reg. 2077, 7th century; Bamberg 677, 11th century; Bern, 11 cent. and a much mutilated Nürnberg ms. of the 14th century. But it appears that the transcript of Vaticanus only covered the Jerome and a few scanty readings from Gennadius and the same is true of the collation made for this editor later from the Paris ms. (Corbeiensis).
Sittl, (Jahresber; u. class. Alterthumsw. 1888. 2 p. 243) says that the edition “without the preface which contains a collation of Codex Corbeiensis would be worthless.” This is a little strong, for the readings he gives from Vaticanus have a decided value in default of other sources for its readings and his strict following of this often produces a correct reading against Vallarsi who was naturally inclined to follow Veronensis and Corbeiensis both of which were probably a good deal manipulated after they left the hand of Gennadius. The collation of Corbeiensis besides excluding Gennadius is not over exact and some of the most effaced pages seem to have been given up entirely by the collator.
5. Translations.
An early translation of Jerome’s work into Greek was made by Sophronius and used by Photius. A translation purporting to be his is given by Erasmus. There has been a good deal of controversy over this, some even accusing Erasmus of having forged it entire. It is an open question with a general tendency to give Erasmus the benefit of the doubt. The present translator while holding his judgment ready to be corrected by the finding of a ms. or other evidence, inclines to reject in toto, regarding it as for the most part translated by Erasmus from some South German or Swiss ms., or, if that be not certain, at least that the translation is too little established to be of any use for textual purposes. There is a modern translation of select words of Jerome in French by Matougues. The chief sources for comparison used by the translator have been Sophronius (or Erasmus) Matougues, M’Giffert’s Eusebius for the first part of Jerome where he takes so liberally from Eusebius, and scattered selections here and there in Ceillier, Smith and Wace, Dict. and other literary-historical works.
6. The Present Translation.
1. Text. It was proposed at first to make the translation from the text of Herding. This, and all editions, gave so little basis for scientific certainty in regard to various readings that a cursory examination of mss. was made. At the suggestion of Professor O. von Gebhardt of Berlin the examination was made as thorough and systematic as possible with definite reference to a new edition. The translator hoped to finish and publish the new text before the translation was needed for this series, but classification of the mss. proved unexpectedly intricate and the question of the Greek translation so difficult that publication has been delayed. The material has however been gathered, analyzed, sifted and arranged sufficiently to give reasonable certainty as to the body of the work and a tolerably reliable judgment on most of the important variations.
While anxious not to claim too much for his material and unwilling to give a final expression of judgment on disputed readings, until his table of mss. is perfected, he ventures to think that for substantial purposes of translation, if not for the nicer ones of a new text, the material and method which he has made use of will be substantially conclusive.
The following translation has been made first from the text of Herding and then corrected from the manuscripts in all places where the evidence was clearly against the edition. In places where the evidence is fairly conclusive the change has been made and a brief statement of evidence given in the notes. When the evidence is really doubtful the reading has been allowed to stand with evidence generally given.
The materials of evidence used are 1. eight mss. collated entire by the translator A. Parisinus (Corbeiensis or Sangermanensis 7 cent.) T. Vaticanus Reg., 7 cent.; 25 Veronensis, 8 cent.; 30 Vercellensis 8 cent.; 31 Monspessalanensis 8 or 9 cent.; a Monacensis 8 cent.; e Vindobonensis 8 or 9; H. Parisinus 10 or 9.
2. Occasional support from readings gathered by him from other mss., chiefly 10 Cassenatensis 9 cent.; 21 Florentinus, 11 cent.; 32 Toletanus 13 cent.; 40 Guelferbyrtinus, 10? cent.
3. Readings from mss. mentioned by other editors.
4. The various editions, but mainly confined to Vallarsi and Herding in Jerome, Fabricius and Herding in Gennadius.
The translator has examined nearly 90 mss. and secured more or less readings from nearly all with reference to an exact table. The readings of several are extensive enough to have pretty nearly the value of full collations. Quotations are occasionally made from these (e.g. from 10, 21, 29, 32, 40, etc.) but practically quotations from the eight mentioned mss. cover the evidence and without a table more would rather obscure than otherwise.
There is no opportunity here to discuss the relative value of these used. It may be said however that they are the oldest mss., and include pretty much all the oldest. Though age itself is by no means conclusive, the fact that they certainly represent several independent groups makes it safe to say that a consensus of seven against one or even six against any two (with certain reservations) or in the case of Gennadius of 5 against 2 is conclusive for a reading. As a matter of fact against many readings of Herding and even of Vallarsi, are arranged all these mss., and against some nearly all or even every ms. seen, e.g. Her. p. 73 d. 12 reads morti dari with Migne-Fabricius but all these mss. have mutandam and so 91. 22 “seven” for “eight.” On p. 161. 7. Her. omits Asyncritus against mss. and all modern eds., so 44. 3. “Ponti,” 51. 7 “ut quidem putant;” 77. 25. “firmare” and a score of other places.
Of course this is not enough evidence or discussion for a critical scholastic text but for the practical illustrative purpose in hand will serve. Any evidence which does not give a well digested genealogy of mss. and the evidence for their classification must be reckoned as incomplete,—all that the above evidence can claim to do, is to give the translator’s judgment respecting the readings and illustrative evidence, but it is not probable that the completed table will alter many (if any) of these readings which are given in view of a tentative table which will likely prove final.
The Translation itself. The plan of this work includes (a) a translation, in which the translator has tried to give a fair representation of the text in a not too ragged form but has failed to improve on the original. The works were written as science rather than literature and have many facts but no style. The translator has therefore aimed rather at representing these facts than at producing a piece of polite literature. (b) Notes are subjoined including, first the brief biographical data which every one wants first to orient himself by, secondly textual notes, and thirdly, occasional explanatory notes.
II. Jerome.
Lives of Illustrious Men.
————————————
Preface.
You have urged me, Dexter, 2320 to follow the example of Tranquillus 2321 in giving a systematic account of ecclesiastical writers, and to do for our writers what he did for the illustrious men of letters among the Gentiles, namely, to briefly set before you all those who have published 2322 any memorable writing on the Holy Scriptures, from the time of our Lord’s passion until the fourteenth year of the Emperor Theodosius. 2323 A similar work has been done by Hermippus 2324 the peripatetic, Antigonus Carystius, 2325 the learned Satyrus, 2326 and most learned of all, Aristoxenus the Musician, 2327 among the Greeks, and among the Latins by Varro, 2328 Santra, 2329 Nepos, 2330 Hyginus, 2331 and by him through whose example you seek to stimulate 2332 us,—Tranquillus.
But their situation and mine is not the same, for they, opening the old histories and chronicles could as if gathering from some great meadow, weave some 2333 small crown at least for their work. As for me, what shall I do, who, having no predecessor, have, as the saying is, the worst possible master, namely myself, and yet I must acknowledge that Eusebius Pamphilus in the ten books of his Church History has been of the utmost assistance, and the works of various among those of whom we are to write, often testify to the dates of their authors. And so I pray the Lord Jesus, 2334 that what your Cicero, who stood at the summit of Roman eloquence, did not scorn to do, compiling in his Brutus, a catalogue of Latin orators, this I too may accomplish in the enumeration of ecclesiastical writers, and accomplish in a fashion worthy of the exhortation which you made. But if, perchance any of those who are yet writing have been overlooked by me in this volume, they ought to ascribe it to themselves, rather than to me, for among those whom I have not read, I could not, in the first place, know those who concealed their own writings, and, in the second place, what is perhaps well known to others, would be quite unknown to me in this out of the way corner of the earth. 2335 But surely when they are distinguished by their writings, they will not very greatly grieve over any loss in our non-mention of them. Let Celsus, Porphyry, and Julian learn, rabid as they are against Christ, let their followers, they who think the church has had no philosophers or orators or men of learning, learn how many and what sort of men founded, built and adorned it, and cease to accuse our faith of such rustic simplicity, and recognize rather their own ignorance.
In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, farewell. 2336
Footnotes
359:2320Dexter. Compare chapters 132 and 106.
359:2321Tranquillus. C. Suetonius Tranquillus (about a.d. 100). De illustribus grammaticis; De claris rhetoribus.
359:2322Published or handed down “Prodiderunt.” Some mss. read “tradiderunt,” and Jerome usually employs “Edo” for publish.
359:2323Fourteenth year of the Emperor Theodosius. a.d. 492.
359:2324Hermippus of Smyrna. (3rd century b.c.) Lives of distinguished men.
359:2325Antigonus. Antigonus of Carystus (Reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus?).
359:2326Satyrus. A Peripatetic (Reign of Ptolemy Philopator) “wrote a collection of biographies.”
359:2327Aristoxenus the musician. A Peripatetic, pupil of Aristotle, wrote lives of various Philosophers.
359:2328Varro. M. Terentius Varro the “most learned of the Romans” (died b.c. 28) published among other things a series of “portraits of seven hundred remarkable personages” (Ramsay in Smith’s Dictionary).
359:2329Santra. Santra the Grammarian?
359:2330Nepos. Cornelius Nepos friend of Cicero wrote Lives of Illustrious men.
359:2331Hyginus. Caius Julius Hyginus, freedman of Augustus and friend of Ovid.
359:2332Seek to stimulate 30 31 a [H e 21] and the mass of mss. also Fabricius; stimulate. A.T. Migne. Her.
359:2333SomeA H 25 31 e 21. Fabricius; No T a? Migne Her.
359:2334The Lord Jesus A H T 25 31 e; The Lord Jesus Christ a; Our Lord Jesus Christ Bamb. Bern; My Lord Jesus Christ Norimb.
359:2335Out of the way corner of the earth i.e., Bethlehem.
359:2336In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ farewell T 25 31 a 21; do. omitting Christ A; omit all H e.
List of Writers.
1. Simon Peter.
2. James, the brother of our Lord.
3. Matthew, surnamed Levi.
4. Jude, the brother of James.
5. Paul, formerly called Saul.
6. Barnabas, surnamed Joseph.
7. Luke, the evangelist.
8. Mark, the evangelist.
9. John, the apostle and evangelist.
10. Hermas.
11. Philo Judæus.
12. Lucius Annæus Seneca.
13. Josephus, son of Matthias.
14. Justus of Tiberias.
15. Clemens the bishop.
16. Ignatius the bishop.
17. Polycarp the bishop.
18. Papias the bishop.
19. Quadratus the bishop.
20. Aristides the philosopher.
21. Agrippa Castor.
22. Hegesippus the historian.
23. Justin the philosopher.
24. Melito the bishop.
25. Theophilus the bishop.
26. Apollinaris the bishop.
27. Dionysius the bishop.
27. Pinytus the bishop.
29. Tatian the heresiarch.
30. Phillip the bishop.
31. Musanus.
32. Modestus.
33. Bardesanes the heresiarch.
34. Victor the bishop.
35. Iranæus the bishop.
36. Pantænus the philosopher.
37. Rhodo, the disciple of Tatian.
38. Clemens the presbyter.
39. Miltiades.
40. Apollonius.
41. Serapion the bishop.
42. Apollonius the senator.
43. Theophilus another bishop.
44. Baccylus the bishop.
45. Polycrates the bishop.
46. Heraclitus.
47. Maximus.
48. Candidus.
49. Appion.
50. Sextus.
51. Arabianus.
52. Judas.
53. Tertullian the presbyter.
54. Origen, surnamed Adamantius.
55. Ammonius.
56. Ambrose the deacon.
57. Trypho the pupil of Origen.
58. Minucius Felix.
59. Gaius.
60. Berillus the bishop.
61. Hippolytus the bishop.
62. Alexander the bishop.
63. Julius the African.
64. Gemimus the presbyter.
65. Theodorus, surnamed Gregory the bishop.
66. Cornelius the bishop.
67. Cyprian the bishop.
68. Pontius the deacon.
69. Dionysius the bishop.
70. Novatianus the heresiarch.
71. Malchion the presbyter.
72. Archelaus the bishop.
73. Anatolius the bishop.
74. Victorinus the bishop.
75. Pamphilus the presbyter.
76. Pierius the presbyter.
77. Lucianus the presbyter.
78. Phileas the bishop.
79. Arnobius the rhetorician.
80. Firmianus the rhetorician, surnamed Lactantius.
81. Eusebius the bishop.
82. Reticius the bishop.
83. Methodius the bishop.
84. Juvencus the presbyter.
85. Eustathius the bishop.
86. Marcellus the bishop.
87. Athanasius the bishop.
88. Antonius the monk.
89. Basilius the bishop.
90. Theodorus the bishop.
91. Eusebius another bishop.
92. Triphylius the bishop.
93. Donatus the heresiarch.
94. Asterius the philosopher.
95. Lucifer the bishop.
96. Eusebius another bishop.
97. Fortunatianus the bishop.
98. Acacius the bishop.
99. Serapion the bishop.
100. Hilary the bishop.
101. Victorinus the rhetorician.
102. Titus the bishop.
103. Damasus the bishop.
104. Apollinarius the bishop.
105. Gregory the bishop.
106. Pacianus the bishop.
107. Photinus the heresiarch.
108. Phœbadius the bishop.
109. Didymus the Blind.
110. Optatus the bishop.
111. Acilius Severus the senator.
112. Cyril the bishop.
113. Euzoius the bishop.
114. Epiphanius the bishop.
115. Ephrem the deacon.
116. Basil another bishop.
117. Gregory another bishop.
118. Lucius the bishop.
119. Diodorus the bishop.
120. Eunomius the heresiarch.
121. Priscillianus the bishop.
122. Latronianus.
123. Tiberianus.
124. Ambrose the bishop.
125. Evagrius the bishop.
126. Ambrose the disciple of Didymus.
127. Maximus, first philosopher, then bishop.
128. Another Gregory, also a bishop.
129. John the presbyter.
130. Gelasius the bishop.
131. Theotimus the bishop.
132. Dexter, son of Pacianus, now prætorian prefect.
133. Amphilochius the bishop.
134. Sophronius.
135. Jerome the presbyter.
Chapter I.
Simon Peter 2337 the son of John, from the village of Bethsaida in the province of Galilee, brother of Andrew the apostle, and himself chief of the apostles, after having been bishop of the church of Antioch and having preached to the Dispersion 2338 —the believers in circumcision, 2339 in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia—pushed on to Rome in the second year of Claudius to overthrow Simon Magus, 2340 and held the sacerdotal chair there for twenty-five years until the last, that is the fourteenth, year of Nero. At his hands he received the crown of martyrdom being nailed to the cross with his head towards the ground and his feet raised on high, asserting that he was unworthy to be crucified in the same manner as his Lord. He wrote two epistles which are called Catholic, the second of which, on account of its difference from the first in style, is considered by many not to be by him. Then too the Gospel according to Mark, who was his disciple and interpreter, is ascribed to him. On the other hand, the books, of which one is entitled his Acts, another his Gospel, a third his Preaching, a fourth his Revelation, a fifth his “Judgment” are rejected as apocryphal. 2341
Buried at Rome in the Vatican near the triumphal way he is venerated by the whole world. 2342
Footnotes
361:2337Died 65–6 or 67.
361:2338Dispersion. The technical “Dispersion”—the Jews out of Judea. Cf. Peter 1. 1. See Westcott in Smith’s Dict. of Bible.
361:2339Circumcision a paraphrase for “Hebrews” in Eusebius and Rufinus.
361:2340Simon Magus. That Peter met Simon Magus in Rome is a post-apostolic legend. Compare the Clementine literature.
361:2341Apocryphal. For literature on apocryphal works see Ante-Nic. Fath. ed. Coxe (N. Y. Chr. Lit. Co.,) vol. 9 pp. 95 sq. The Acts, Gospel, Preaching and Revelation are mentioned by Eusebius. The Judgment was added by Jerome. This last has been much discussed of late in connection with the recently discovered Teaching of the Twelve. The identification of the Teaching with the Judgment is credited to Dr. von Gebhardt (Salmon in Smith and Wace Dict. v. 4 (1887) pp. 810–11). The recent literature of it is immense. Compare Schaff, Oldest Church Manual, and literature in Ante-Nic. Fath. vol. 9 pp. 83–86.
361:2342The textual variations on the chapter are numerous enough but none of them are sustained by the better mss. e.g. “First Simon Peter” “Simon Peter the Apostle” “Peter the Apostle”…“Called canonical”…“are considered apocryphal”…“the whole city.”
Chapter II.
James, 2343 who is called the brother of the Lord, 2344 surnamed the Just, the son of Joseph by another wife, as some think, but, as appears to me, the son of Mary sister of the mother of our Lord of whom John makes mention in his book, 2345 after our Lord’s passion at once ordained by the apostles bishop of Jerusalem, wrote a single epistle, which is reckoned among the seven Catholic Epistles and even this is claimed by some to have been published by some one else under his name, and gradually, as time went on, to have gained authority. Hegesippus who lived near the apostolic age, in the fifth book of his Commentaries, writing of James, says “After the apostles, James the brother of the Lord surnamed the Just was made head of the Church at Jerusalem. Many indeed are called James. This one was holy from his mother’s womb. He drank neither wine nor strong drink, ate no flesh, never shaved or anointed himself with ointment or bathed. He alone had the privilege of entering the Holy of Holies, since indeed he did not use woolen vestments but linen and went alone into the temple and prayed in behalf of the people, insomuch that his knees were reputed to have acquired the hardness of camels’ knees.” He says also many other things, too numerous to mention. Josephus also in the 20th book of his Antiquities, and Clement in the 7th of his Outlines mention that on the death of Festus who reigned over Judea, Albinus was sent by Nero as his successor. Before he had reached his province, Ananias the high priest, the youthful son of Ananus of the priestly class taking advantage of the state of anarchy, assembled a council and publicly tried to force James to deny that Christ is the son of God. When he refused Ananius ordered him to be stoned. Cast down from a pinnacle of the temple, his legs broken, but still half alive, raising his hands to heaven he said, “Lord forgive them for they know not what they do.” Then struck on the head by the club of a fuller such a club as fullers are accustomed to wring out garments 2346 with—he died. This same Josephus records the tradition that this James was of so great sanctity and reputation among the people that the downfall of Jerusalem was believed to be on account of his death. He it is of whom the apostle Paul writes to the Galatians that “No one else of the apostles did I see except James the brother of the Lord,” and shortly after the event the Acts of the apostles bear witness to the matter. The Gospel also which is called the Gospel according to the Hebrews, 2347 and which I have recently translated into Greek and Latin and which also Origen 2348 often makes use of, after the account of the resurrection of the Saviour says, “but the Lord, after he had given his grave clothes to the servant of the priest, appeared to James (for James had sworn that he would not eat bread from that hour in which he drank the cup of the Lord until he should see him rising again from among those that sleep)” and again, a little later, it says “‘Bring a table and bread,’ said the Lord.” And immediately it is added, “He brought bread and blessed and brake and gave to James the Just and said to him, ‘my brother eat thy bread, for the son of man is risen from among those that sleep.’” And so he ruled the church of Jerusalem thirty years, that is until the seventh year of Nero, and was buried near the temple from which he had been cast down. His tombstone with its inscription was well known until the siege of Titus and the end of Hadrian’s reign. Some of our writers think he was buried in Mount Olivet, but they are mistaken.
Footnotes
361:2343Died 62 or 63 (according to Josephus and Jerome) or 69 (Hegesippus).
361:2344Brother of the Lord. Gal. i. 19
361:2345in his book John xix. 25
362:2346garments A H 25 30 e 21; wet garments T e 29.
362:2347Gospel according to the Hebrews. Compare Lipsius Gospels apocr, in Smith and Wace, Dict. v. 2 pp. 709–12.
362:2348Origen. H 31 a e 1021; Adamantius A T 25.
Chapter III.
Matthew, 2349 also called Levi, apostle and aforetimes publican, composed a gospel of Christ at first published in Judea in Hebrew 2350 for the sake of those of the circumcision who believed, but this was afterwards translated into Greek though by what author is uncertain. The Hebrew itself has been preserved until the present day in the library at Cæsarea which Pamphilus so diligently gathered. I have also had the opportunity of having the volume described to me by the Nazarenes 2351 of Berœa, 2352 a city of Syria, who use it. In this it is to be noted that wherever the Evangelist, whether on his own account or in the person of our Lord the Saviour quotes the testimony of the Old Testament he does not follow the authority of the translators of the Septuagint but the Hebrew. Wherefore these two forms exist “Out of Egypt have I called my son,” and “for he shall be called a Nazarene.”
Footnotes
362:2349Died after 62.
362:2350Gospel…in Hebrew. Jerome seems to regard the Gospel according to the Hebrews mentioned by him above as the original Hebrew Text of Matthew. cf. Lightfoot, Ignatius v. 2. p. 295.
362:2351Nazarenes=Nasaraei. See Smith and Wace s.v.
362:2352Berœa some mss. read Veria and so Herding. The modern Aleppo.
Chapter IV.
Jude 2353 the brother of James, left a short epistle which is reckoned among the seven catholic epistles, and because in it 2354 he quotes from the apocryphal book of Enoch it is rejected by many. Nevertheless by age and use it has gained authority and is reckoned among the Holy Scriptures.
Footnotes
362:2353Died after 62.
362:2354in itH 31 a e 10 21; omit A T 25 30.
Chapter V.
Paul, 2355 formerly called Saul, an apostle outside the number of the twelve apostles, was of the tribe of Benjamin and the town of Giscalis 2356 in Judea. When this was taken by the Romans he removed with his parents to Tarsus in Cilicia. Sent by them to Jerusalem to study law he was educated by Gamaliel a most learned man whom Luke mentions. But after he had been present at the death of the martyr Stephen and had received letters from the high priest of the temple for the persecution of those who believed in Christ, he proceeded to Damascus, where constrained to faith by a revelation, as it is written in the Acts of the apostles, he was transformed from a persecutor into an elect vessel. As Sergius Paulus Proconsul of Cyprus was the first to believe on his preaching, he took his name from him because he had subdued him to faith in Christ, and having been joined by Barnabas, after traversing many cities, he returned to Jerusalem and was ordained apostle to the Gentiles by Peter, James and John. And because a full account of his life is given in the Acts of the Apostles, I only say this, that the twenty-fifth year after our Lord’s passion, that is the second of Nero, at the time when Festus Procurator of Judea succeeded Felix, he was sent bound to Rome, and remaining for two years in free custody, disputed daily with the Jews concerning the advent of Christ. It ought to be said that at the first defence, the power of Nero having not yet been confirmed, nor his wickedness broken forth to such a degree as the histories relate concerning him, Paul was dismissed by Nero, that the gospel of Christ might be preached also in the West. As he himself writes in the second epistle to Timothy, at the time when he was about to be put to death dictating his epistle as he did while in chains; “At my first defence no one took my part, but all forsook me: may it not be laid to their account. But the Lord stood by 2357 me and strengthened me; that through me the message might be fully proclaimed and that all the Gentiles might hear, and I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion” 2358 —clearly indicating Nero as lion on account of his cruelty. And directly following he says “The Lord delivered me from the mouth of the lion” and again shortly “The Lord delivered me 2359 from every evil work and saved me unto his heavenly kingdom,” 2360 for indeed he felt within himself that his martyrdom was near at hand, for in the same epistle he announced “for I am already being offered and the time of my departure is at hand.” 2361 He then, in the fourteenth year of Nero on the same day with Peter, was beheaded at Rome for Christ’s sake and was buried in the Ostian way, the twenty-seventh year after our Lord’s passion. He wrote nine epistles to seven churches: To the Romans one, To the Corinthians two, To the Galatians one, To the Ephesians one, To the Philippians one, To the Colossians one, To the Thessalonians two; and besides these to his disciples, To Timothy two, To Titus one, To Philemon one. The epistle which is called the Epistle to the Hebrews is not considered his, on account of its difference from the others in style and language, but it is reckoned, either according to Tertullian to be the work of Barnabas, or according to others, to be by Luke the Evangelist or Clement afterwards bishop of the church at Rome, who, they say, arranged and adorned the ideas of Paul in his own language, though to be sure, since Paul was writing to Hebrews and was in disrepute among them he may have omitted his name from the salutation on this account. He being a Hebrew wrote Hebrew, that is his own tongue and most fluently while the things which were eloquently written in Hebrew were more eloquently turned into Greek 2362 and this is the reason why it seems to differ from other epistles of Paul. Some read one also to 2363 the Laodiceans but it is rejected by everyone.
Footnotes
362:2355Died 67?, probably after 64 at least.
362:2356Giscalis, supposed thus to have originated at Giscalis and to have gone from there to Tarsus, but this is not generally accepted.
363:2357The Lord stood by all mss. and eds; God. Her.
363:2358lion. 2 Tim. 4. 16–17
363:2359from the mouth of the lion, and again shortly “The Lord delivered me”(substantially) A H 25 30 31 a e etc.; omit T. Her. There are slight variations; God H 21 Bamb Bern. Norimb.; I was delivered Val. Cypr. Tam. Par 1512 etc.
363:2360The Lord…kingdom 2 Tim. 4. 18
363:2361for I…at hand 2 Tim. 4. 6
363:2362intoH 31 a e. and many others; in A T 25 30.
363:2363also to A H T 25 30 a e Norimb, Bamb.; also 3l; omit, Her. who seems to have omitted on some evidence possibly Bern.
Chapter VI.
Barnabas 2364 the Cyprian, also called Joseph the Levite, ordained apostle to the Gentiles with Paul, wrote one Epistle, valuable for the edification of the church, which is reckoned among the apocryphal writings. He afterwards separated from Paul on account of John, a disciple also called Mark, 2365 none the less exercised the work laid upon him of preaching the Gospel.
Footnotes
363:2364Died in Salamis 53 (Ceillier Papebroch), 56 (Braunsberger), 61 (Breviarum romanum), 76 (Nirschl). The discussion of the date of his death is a good deal mixed up with the question of the authenticity of the work.
363:2365Mark Acts 15. 37
Chapter VII.
Luke 2366 a physician of Antioch, as his writings indicate, was not unskilled in the Greek language. An adherent of the apostle Paul, and companion of all his journeying, he wrote a Gospel, concerning which the same Paul says, “We send with him a brother whose praise in the gospel is among all the churches” 2367 and to the Colossians “Luke the beloved physician salutes you,” 2368 and to Timothy “Luke only is with me.” 2369 He also wrote another excellent volume to which he prefixed the title Acts of the Apostles, a history which extends to the second year of Paul’s sojourn at Rome, that is to the fourth 2370 year of Nero, from which we learn that the book was composed in that same city. Therefore the Acts of Paul and Thecla 2371 and all the fable about the lion baptized by him we reckon among the apocryphal writings, 2372 for how is it possible that the inseparable companion of the apostle in his other affairs, alone should have been ignorant of this thing. Moreover Tertullian who lived near those times, mentions a certain presbyter in Asia, an adherent of the apostle Paul, 2373 who was convicted by John of having been the author of the book, and who, confessing that he did this for love of Paul, resigned his office of presbyter. Some suppose that whenever Paul in his epistle says “according to my gospel” he means the book of Luke and that Luke not only was taught the gospel history by the apostle Paul who was not with the Lord in the flesh, but also by other apostles. This he too at the beginning of his work declares, saying “Even as they delivered unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word.” So he wrote the gospel as he had heard it, but composed the Acts of the apostles as he himself had seen. He was buried at Constantinople to which city, in the twentieth year of Constantius, his bones together with the remains of Andrew the apostle were transferred.
Footnotes
363:2366Died 83–4?
363:2367we send…churches 2 Cor. 8. 18
363:2368Luke…salutes you Col. 4. 14
363:2369Luke…with me 2 Tim. 4. 11
363:2370fourthA T H 25 30 31 Val. etc.; fourteenth. Her. Sigbert. S. Crucis.
363:2371Acts of Paul and Thecla (Acts = Journeyings) Cf. Acts of Paul and Thecla, tr. in Ante Nic. Fath. v. 8 pp. 487–92.
363:2372apocryphal writings A H 31 e a Bamb Norimb. Val. etc.; apocrypha Her. T 25 30.
363:2373apostle Paul A H e a etc. Val; omit Paul T 25 30 31 Her.
Chapter VIII.
Mark 2374 the disciple and interpreter of Peter wrote a short gospel at the request of the brethren at Rome embodying what he had heard Peter tell. When Peter had heard this, he approved it and published it to the churches to be read by his authority as Clemens in the sixth book of his Hypotyposes and Papias, bishop of Hierapolis, record. Peter also mentions this Mark in his first epistle, figuratively indicating Rome under the name of Babylon “She who 2375 is in Babylon elect together with you saluteth you 2376 and so doth Mark my son.” So, taking the gospel which he himself composed, he went to Egypt and first preaching Christ at Alexandria he formed a church so admirable in doctrine and continence of living that he constrained all followers of Christ to his example. Philo most learned of the Jews seeing the first church at Alexandria still Jewish in a degree, wrote a book 2377 on their manner of life as something creditable to his nation telling how, as Luke says, the believers had all things in common 2378 at Jerusalem, so he recorded that he saw 2379 was done at Alexandria, under the learned Mark. He died in the eighth year of Nero and was buried at Alexandria, Annianus succeeding him. 2380
Footnotes
364:2374Flourished 45 to 55?
364:2375She who A H T 25 30 31 a e Val etc; the church which. Her. and one mentioned by Vallarsi, also in Munich mss. 14370.
364:2376She who…saluteth you 1 Pet. 5. 13
364:2377a bookA H 31 a e etc; and Her.; omit T 25 30. This work entitled On a contemplative life is still extant but is generally regarded as not by Philo.
364:2378had all things in common Acts 2. 44
364:2379so…saw A H a e 31? Val.; so he saw and recorded. T 25 30 Her.
364:2380Annianus succeeding him A H T 25 30 a e Val etc.; omit Her. 31.
Chapter IX.
John, 2381 the apostle whom Jesus most loved, the son of Zebedee and brother of James, the apostle whom Herod, after our Lord’s passion, beheaded, most recently of all the evangelists wrote a Gospel, at the request of the bishops of Asia, against Cerinthus and other heretics and especially against the then growing dogma of the Ebionites, who assert that Christ did not exist before Mary. On this account he was compelled to maintain His divine nativity. But there is said to be yet another reason for this work, in that when he had read Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he approved indeed the substance of the history and declared that the things they said were true, but that they had given the history of only one year, the one, that is, which follows the imprisonment of John and in which he was put to death. So passing by this year the events of which had been set forth by these, he related the events of the earlier period before John was shut up in prison, so that it might be manifest to those who should diligently read the volumes of the four Evangelists. This also takes away the discrepancy which there seems to be between John and the others. He wrote also one Epistle which begins as follows “That which was from the beginning, that which we have heard, that which we have seen with our eyes and our hands handled concerning the word of life” which is esteemed of by all men who are interested in the church or in learning. The other two of which the first is “The elder to the elect lady and her children” and the other “The elder unto Gaius 2382 the beloved whom I love in truth,” are said to be the work of John the presbyter to the memory of whom another sepulchre is shown at Ephesus to the present day, though some think that there are two memorials of this same John the evangelist. We shall treat of this matter in its turn 2383 when we come to Papias his disciple. In the fourteenth year then after Nero 2384 Domitian having raised a second persecution he was banished to the island of Patmos, and wrote the Apocalypse, on which Justin Martyr and Irenæus afterwards wrote commentaries. But Domitian having been put to death and his acts, on account of his excessive cruelty, having been annulled by the senate, he returned to Ephesus under Pertinax 2385 and continuing there until the time of the emperor Trajan, founded and built churches throughout all Asia, and, worn out by old age, died in the sixty-eighth year after our Lord’s passion and was buried near the same city.
Footnotes
364:2381Exiled to Patmos 94–95.
364:2382GaiusA H 25 30 31 a e; Caius Her. T.
364:2383in its turn A H T 31 a e Val. etc; omit T. 25 30.
364:2384after Nero A H 30 31 a e. Bamb. Norimb. Cypr. Val.; omit T 25.
365:2385Pertinax A H T 25 30 31 a e Norimb. Cypr. etc; Nerva Pertinax Bamb. Ambros. Her.; Nerva principe. Val.
Chapter X.
Hermas 2386 2387 whom the apostle Paul mentions in writing to the Romans “Salute 2388 Phlegon, Hermes, Patrobas, Hermas 2389 and the brethren that are with them” 2390 is reputed to be the author of the book which is called Pastor and which is also read publicly in some churches of Greece. It is in fact a useful book and many of the ancient writers quote from it as authority, but among the Latins it is almost unknown.
Footnotes
365:2386The date of Hermas depends on what Hermas is supposed to be the author. He is supposed to be 1 the Hermas of the New Testament, or 2 the brother of Pius I (139–54) or 3 a still later Hermas. All these views have distinguished advocates, but this view of Jerome taken from Origen through Eusebius is not much accepted.
365:2387HermasA T 25 30 e; Herman Her. Val. a 31; Hermam H Cypr.
365:2388Salute(omitting Asyncritus) A H T 25 30 31 a e etc. Cypr.; add Asyncritus Val. Her. Greek from the New Testament.
365:2389Hermes Patrobas Hermas A H T 25 30 a e Val. Gr. etc.; omit Hermes. A Her.
365:2390Salute…them Rom. 15. 14
Chapter XI.
Philo 2391 the Jew, an Alexandrian of the priestly class, is placed by us among the ecclesiastical writers on the ground that, writing a book concerning the first church of Mark the evangelist at Alexandria, he writes to our praise, declaring not only that they were there, but also that they were in many provinces and calling their habitations monasteries. From this 2392 it appears that the church of those that believed in Christ at first, was such as now the monks desire to imitate, 2393 that is, such that nothing is the peculiar property of any one of them, none of them rich, none poor, that patrimonies are divided among the needy, that they have leisure for prayer and psalms, for doctrine also and ascetic practice, that they were in fact as Luke declares believers were at first at Jerusalem. They say that under Caius 2394 Caligula he ventured to Rome, whither he had been sent as legate of his nation, and that when a second time he had come to Claudius, he spoke in the same city with the apostle Peter and enjoyed his friendship, and for this reason also adorned the adherents of Mark, Peter’s disciple at Alexandria, with his praises. There are distinguished and innumerable works by this man: On the five books of Moses, one book Concerning the confusion of tongues, one book On nature and invention, one book On the things which our senses desire and we detest, one book On learning, one book On the heir of divine things, one book On the division of equals and contraries, one book On the three virtues, one book On why in Scripture the names of many persons are changed, two books On covenants, one book On the life of a wise man, one book Concerning giants, five books That dreams are sent by God, five books of Questions and answers on Exodus, four books On the tabernacle and the Decalogue, as well as books On victims and promises or curses, On Providence, On the Jews, On the manner of one’s life, On Alexander, and That dumb beasts have right reason, and That every fool should be a slave, and On the lives of the Christians, of which we spoke above, that is, lives of apostolic men, which also he entitled, On those who practice the divine life, because in truth they contemplate divine things and ever pray to God, also under other categories, two On agriculture, two On drunkenness. There are other monuments of his genius which have not come to our hands. Concerning him there is a proverb among the Greeks “Either Plato philonized, or Philo platonized,” that is, either Plato followed Philo, or Philo, Plato, so great is the similarity of ideas and language.
Footnotes
365:2391Visited Rome a.d. 40, and must have lived (Edersheim) ten or fifteen years after his return.
365:2392From this etc. Acts 2. 4; Acts 4. 32
365:2393desire to imitate the mss.; strive to be Cypr. Fabr. Val., on account of the difficult construction with imitate.
365:2394CaiusCypr. Fabr. Val.; Gaius all the mss.; omit Her.
Chapter XII.
Lucius Annæus Seneca 2395 of Cordova, disciple of the Stoic Sotion 2396 and uncle of Lucan the Poet, was a man of most continent life, whom I should not place in the category of saints were it not that those Epistles of Paul to Seneca and Seneca 2397 to Paul, which are read by many, provoke me. In these, written when he was tutor of Nero and the most powerful man of that time, he says that he would like to hold such a place among his countrymen as Paul held among Christians. He was put to death by Nero two years before Peter and Paul were crowned with martyrdom.
Footnotes
365:2395Died 65.
365:2396SotionCypr. Val. Her.; Phothion fotion, fotinus Socion or Sozonis, the mss.
365:2397and Seneca A H e a 21 10 Fabr. Val. etc.; or Seneca T 25 30 31 Her.
Chapter XIII.
Josephus, 2398 the son of Matthias, priest of Jerusalem, taken prisoner by Vespasian and his son Titus, was banished. Coming to Rome he presented to the emperors, father and son, seven books On the captivity of the Jews, which were deposited in the public library and, on account of his genius, was found worthy of a statue at Rome. He wrote also twenty books of Antiquities, from the beginning of the world until the fourteenth year of Domitian Cæsar, and two of Antiquities against Appion, the grammarian of Alexandria who, under Caligula, sent as legate on the part of the Gentiles against Philo, wrote also a book containing a vituperation of the Jewish nation. Another book of his entitled, On all ruling wisdom, in which the martyr deaths of the Maccabeans are related is highly esteemed. In the eighth book of his Antiquities he most openly acknowledges that Christ was slain by the Pharisees on account of the greatness of his miracles, that John the Baptist was truly a prophet, and that Jerusalem was destroyed because of the murder of James the apostle. He wrote also concerning the Lord after this fashion: “In this same time was Jesus, a wise man, if indeed it be lawful to call him man. For he was a worker of wonderful miracles, and a teacher of those who freely receive the truth. He had very many adherents also, both of the Jews and of the Gentiles, and was believed to be Christ, and when through the envy of our chief men Pilate had crucified him, nevertheless those who had loved him at first continued to the end, for he appeared to them the third day alive. Many things, both these and other wonderful things are in the songs of the prophets who prophesied concerning him and the sect of Christians, so named from Him, exists to the present day.”
Footnotes
366:2398Born a.d. 37, died after 97.
Chapter XIV.
Justus, 2399 2400 of Tiberias of the province Galilee, also attempted to write a History of Jewish affairs and certain brief Commentaries on the Scriptures but Josephus convicts him of falsehood. It is known that he wrote at the same time as Josephus himself.
Footnotes
366:2399Flourished 100.
366:2400Justusa 21 10 Fabr. Val.; Justinus others.
Chapter XV.
Clement, 2401 of whom the apostle Paul writing to the Philippians says “With Clement and others of my fellow-workers whose names are written in the book of life,” 2402 the fourth bishop of Rome after Peter, if indeed the second was Linus and the third Anacletus, 2403 although most of the Latins think that Clement was second after the apostle. 2404 He wrote, on the part of the church of Rome, an especially valuable Letter to the church of the Corinthians, which in some places is publicly read, and which seems to me to agree in style with the epistle to the Hebrews which passes under the name of Paul but it differs from this same epistle, not only in many of its ideas, but also in respect of the order of words, and its likeness in either respect is not very great. There is also a second Epistle under his name which is rejected by earlier writers, and a Disputation between Peter and Appion written out at length, which Eusebius in the third book of his Church history rejects. He died in the third year of Trajan and a church built at Rome preserves the memory of his name unto this day.
Footnotes
366:2401Bishop 91 or 2–101. Died 110 (Euseb. Ch. Hist.) It is by no means certain that Clemens Romanus is the Clemens mentioned in the New Testament. Compare discussions by Salmon in Smith and Wace, and M’Giffert in his translation of Eusebius.
366:2402With Clement…life Phil. 4. 3
366:2403Anacletus Val. Fabr. Her.; Anencletus, Anincletus, Anenclitus, H 25 31 e; Cletus (or Elitus). T 30 31; Anicletus, 10; Anecletus, A; Aneclitus, a.
366:2404apostle A H 25 30 31 a e; apostle Peter T Fabr. Val. Her.
Chapter XVI.
Ignatius, 2405 third bishop of the church of Antioch after Peter the apostle, condemned to the wild beasts during the persecution of Trajan, was sent bound to Rome, and when he had come on his voyage as far as Smyrna, where Polycarp the pupil of John was bishop, he wrote one epistle To the Ephesians, another To the Magnesians, a third To the Trallians, a fourth To the Romans, and going thence, he wrote To the Philadelphians and To the Smyrneans and especially To Polycarp, commending to him the church at Antioch. In this last 2406 he bore witness to the Gospel which I have recently translated, in respect of the person of Christ saying, “I indeed saw him in the flesh after the resurrection and I believe that he is,” and when he came to Peter and those who were with Peter, he said to them “Behold! touch me and see me how that I am not an incorporeal spirit” and straightway they touched him and believed. Moreover it seems worth while inasmuch as we have made mention of such a man and of the Epistle which he wrote to the Romans, to give a few “quotations” 2407 : “From Syria even unto Rome I fight with wild beasts, by land and by sea, by night and by day, being bound amidst ten leopards, that is to say soldiers who guard me and who only become worse when they are well treated. Their wrong doing, however is my schoolmaster, but I am not thereby justified. May I have joy of the beasts that are prepared for me; and I pray that I may find them ready; I will even coax them to devour me quickly that they may not treat me as they have some whom they have refused to touch through fear. And if they are unwilling, I will compel them to devour me. Forgive me my children, I know what is expedient for me. Now do I begin to be a disciple, and desire none of the things visible that I may attain unto Jesus Christ. Let fire and cross and attacks of wild beasts, let wrenching of bones, cutting apart of limbs, crushing of the whole body, tortures 2408 of the devil,—let all these come upon me if only I may attain unto the joy which is in Christ.”
When he had been condemned to the wild beasts and with zeal for martyrdom heard the lions roaring, he said “I am the grain of Christ. I am ground by the teeth of the wild beasts that I may be found the bread of the world.” He was put to death the eleventh year of Trajan and the remains of his body lie in Antioch outside the Daphnitic gate in the cemetery.
Footnotes
366:2405Bishop about 70, died about 107.
366:2406In this last etc. Eusebius from whom he quotes says Smyrneans. Lightfoot maintains that Jerome had never seen the Epistles of Ignatius.
366:2407quotations etc. This is taken bodily from Eusebius. The translation is M’Giffert’s adapted to the Latin of Jerome.
367:2408tortures A H T 25 30 31 e; all the tortures a. Fabr. Val. Her.
Chapter XVII.
Polycarp 2409 disciple of the apostle John and by him ordained bishop of Smyrna was chief of all Asia, where he saw and had as teachers some of the apostles and of those who had seen the Lord. He, on account of certain questions concerning the day of the Passover, went to Rome in the time of the emperor Antoninus Pius while Anicetus ruled the church in that city. There he led back to the faith many of the believers who had been deceived through the persuasion of Marcion and Valentinus, and when Marcion met him by chance and said “Do you know us” he replied, “I know the firstborn of the devil.” Afterwards during the reign of Marcus Antoninus and Lucius Aurelius Commodus in the fourth persecution after Nero, in the presence of the proconsul holding court at Smyrna and all the people crying out against him in the Amphitheater, he was burned. He wrote a very valuable Epistle to the Philippians which is read to the present day in the meetings in Asia.
Footnotes
367:2409Bishop 106 or 7—157–168 (?); 154 sq (Lipsius) Authorities differ as to dates of his death from 147–175. Bishop certainly (Salmon) 110.
Chapter XVIII.
Papias, 2410 the pupil of John, bishop of Hierapolis in Asia, wrote only five volumes, which he entitled Exposition of the words of our Lord, in which, when he had asserted in his preface that he did not follow various opinions but had the apostles for authority, he said “I considered what Andrew and Peter said, what Philip, what Thomas, what James, what John, 2411 what Matthew or any one else among the disciples of our Lord, what also Aristion and the elder John, disciples of the Lord had said, not so much that I have their books to read, as that their living voice is heard until the present day in the authors themselves.” It appears through this catalogue of names that the John who is placed among the disciples is not the same as the elder John whom he places after Aristion in his enumeration. This we say moreover because of the opinion mentioned above, where we record that it is declared by many that the last two epistles of John are the work not of the apostle but of the presbyter.
He is said to have published a Second coming of Our Lord or Millennium. Irenæus and Apollinaris and others who say that after the resurrection the Lord will reign in the flesh with the saints, follow him. Tertullian also in his work On the hope of the faithful, Victorinus of Petau and Lactantius follow this view.
Footnotes
367:2410130 (Salmon).
367:2411what John A H 25 30 31 a e; omit T Her.
Chapter XIX.
Quadratus, 2412 disciple of the apostles, after Publius bishop of Athens had been crowned with martyrdom on account of his faith in Christ, was substituted in his place, and by his faith and industry gathered the church scattered by reason of its great fear. And when Hadrian passed the winter at Athens to witness the Eleusinian mysteries and was initiated into almost all the sacred mysteries of Greece, those who hated the Christians took opportunity without instructions from the Emperor to harass the believers. At this time he presented to Hadrian a work composed in behalf of our religion, indispensable, full of sound argument and faith and worthy of the apostolic teaching. In which, illustrating the antiquity of his period, he says that he has seen many who, oppressed by various ills, were healed by the Lord in Judea as well as some who had been raised from the dead.
Footnotes
367:2412Flourished 126 (125)? Not the Athenian bishop (Salmon). Work not extant.
Chapter XX.
Aristides 2413 a most eloquent Athenian philosopher, and a disciple of Christ while yet retaining his philosopher’s garb, presented a work to Hadrian at the same time that Quadratus presented his. The work contained a systematic statement of our doctrine, that is, an Apology for the Christians, which is still extant and is regarded by philologians as a monument to his genius.
Footnotes
368:2413Flourished 125, apology presented about 133.
Chapter XXI.
Agrippa 2414 surnamed Castor, a man of great learning, wrote a strong refutation of the twenty-four volumes which Basilides the heretic had written against the Gospel, disclosing all his mysteries and enumerating the prophets Barcabbas and Barchob 2415 and all the other barbarous names which terrify the hearers, and his most high God Abraxas, whose name was supposed to contain the year according to the reckoning 2416 of the Greeks. Basilides died at Alexandria in the reign of Hadrian, and from him the Gnostic sects arose. In this tempestuous time also, Cochebas leader of the Jewish faction put Christians to death with various tortures.
Footnotes
368:2414Flourished about 130 or 135.
368:2415Various readings are Barcobus, Barcobeth, Barcho et, Bascobus et.
368:2416reckoning all but T and Her. which have nomenclature.
Chapter XXII.
Hegesippus 2417 who lived at a period not far from the Apostolic age, writing a History of all ecclesiastical events from the passion of our Lord, down to his own period, and gathering many things useful to the reader, composed five volumes in simple style, trying to represent the style of speaking of those whose lives he treated. He says that he went to Rome in the time of Anicetus, the tenth bishop after Peter, and continued there till the time of Eleutherius, bishop of the same city, who had been formerly deacon under Anicetus. Moreover, arguing against idols, he wrote a history, showing from what error they had first arisen, and this work indicates in what age he flourished. 2418 He says, “They built monuments and temples to their dead as we see up to the present day, 2419 such as the one to Antinous, servant to the Emperor Hadrian, in whose honour also games were celebrated, and a city founded bearing his name, and a temple with priests established.” The Emperor Hadrian is said to have been enamoured of Antinous.
Footnotes
368:2417Died 180. Wrote his history in part before 167, and published after 175.
368:2418He flourished T H a e 25 30 Val. Fabr.; They flourished Her.
368:2419up to the present day A H 31 e a; to day T 25 30.
Chapter XXIII.
Justin, 2420 a philosopher, and wearing the garb of philosopher, a citizen of Neapolis, a city of Palestine, and the son of Priscus Bacchius, laboured strenuously in behalf of the religion of Christ, insomuch that he delivered to Antoninus Pius and his sons and the senate, a work written Against the nations, and did not shun the ignominy of the cross. He addressed another book also to the successors of this Antoninus, Marcus Antoninus Verus and Lucius Aurelius Commodus. Another volume of his Against the nations, is also extant, where he discusses the nature of demons, and a fourth against the nations which he entitled, Refutation and yet another On the sovereignty of God, and another book which he entitled, Psaltes, and another On the Soul, the Dialogue against the Jews, which he held against Trypho, the leader of the Jews, and also notable volumes Against Marcion, which Irenæus also mentions in the fourth book 2421 Against heresies, also another book Against all heresies which he mentions in the Apology which is addressed to Antoninus Pius. He, when he had held διατριβάς in the city of Rome, and had convicted Crescens the cynic, who said many blasphemous things against the Christians, of gluttony and fear of death, and had proved him devoted to luxury and lusts, at last, accused of being a Christian, through the efforts and wiles of Crescens, he shed his blood for Christ.
Footnotes
368:2420Born about 104 (100?), Christian 133 (before 132 Holland) wrote apology about 150, died 167.
368:2421fourth book A T 25 30 Val. Her.; fifth H 31 a e Fabr. and early editions; The right reference is probably Bk. 4 ch. 10 but he himself is mentioned in book 5 and it is likely Jerome wrote 5.
Chapter XXIV.
Melito 2422 of Asia, bishop of Sardis, addressed a book to the emperor Marcus Antoninus Verus, a disciple of Fronto the orator, in behalf of the Christian doctrine. He wrote other things also, among which are the following: On the passover, two books, one book On the lives of the prophets, one book On the church, 2423 one book On the Lord’s day, one book On faith, one book On the psalms (?) one On the senses, one On the soul and body, one On baptism, one On truth, one On the generation of Christ, On His prophecy 2424 one On hospitality and another which is called the Key—one On the devil, one On the Apocalypse of John, one On the corporeality of God, and six books of Eclogues. Of his fine oratorical genius, Tertullian, in the seven books which he wrote against the church on behalf of Montanus, satirically says that he was considered a prophet by many of us.
Footnotes
368:2422Bishop about 150, died between 171 and 180.
368:2423On the church A 25 30 e a; omit T 3l e a [H].
369:2424On truth…prophecy A H 25 30 31 e a Val. etc; omit T Her.
Chapter XXV.
Theophilus, 2425 sixth bishop of the church of Antioch, in the reign of the emperor Marcus Antoninus Verus composed a book Against Marcion, which is still extant, also three volumes To Autolycus and one Against the heresy of Hermogenes and other short and elegant treatises, well fitted for the edification of the church. I have read, under his name, commentaries On the Gospel and On the proverbs of Solomon which do not appear to me to correspond in style and language with the elegance and expressiveness of the above works.
Footnotes
369:2425Bishop in 168, died after 181 (some 176–86).
Chapter XXVI.
Apollinaris, 2426 bishop of Hierapolis in Asia, flourished in the reign of Marcus Antoninus Verus, to whom he addressed a notable volume in behalf of the faith of the Christians. There are extant also five other books of his Against the Nations, two On truth andAgainst the Cataphrygians written at the time when Montanus was making a beginning with Prisca and Maximilla.
Footnotes
369:2426Claudius Apollinaris died before 180.
Chapter XXVII.
Dionysius, 2427 bishop of the church of Corinth, was of so great eloquence and industry that he taught not only the people of his own city and province but also those of other provinces and cities by his letters. Of these one is To the Lacedæmonians, another To the Athenians, a third To the Nicomedians, a fourth To the Cretans, a fifth To the church at Amastrina and to the other churches of Pontus, a sixth To the Gnosians and to Pinytus bishop of the same city, a seventh To the Romans, addressed to Soter their bishop, an eighth To Chrysophora a holy woman. He flourished in the reign of Marcus Antoninus Verus and Lucius Aurelius Commodus.
Footnotes
369:2427Bishop about 170, died about 180.
Chapter XXVIII.
Pinytus 2428 of Crete, bishop of the city of Gnosus, wrote to Dionysius bishop of the Corinthians, an exceedingly elegant letter in which he teaches that the people are not to be forever fed on milk, lest by chance they be overtaken by the last day while yet infants, but that they ought to be fed also on solid food, that they may go on to a spiritual old age. He flourished under Marcus Antoninus Verus and Lucius Aurelius Commodus. 2429
Footnotes
369:2428Died about 180.
369:2429That they may go on…Commodus A 25 30 31 e a Fabr. Val; omit T H? Her.
Chapter XXIX.
Tatian 2430 who, while teaching oratory, won not a little glory in the rhetorical art, was a follower of Justin Martyr and was distinguished so long as he did not leave his master’s side. But afterwards, inflated 2431 by a swelling of eloquence, he founded a new heresy which is called that of the Encratites, the heresy which Severus afterwards augmented in such wise that heretics of this party are called Severians to the present day. Tatian wrote besides innumerable volumes, one of which, a most successful book Against the nations, is extant, and this is considered the most significant of all his works. He flourished in the reign of Marcus Antoninus Verus and Lucius Aurelius Commodus.
Footnotes
369:2430Born about 130, died after 172.
369:2431inflated A H 30 31 a e Val etc.; elated T 25 Her.
Chapter XXX.
Philip 2432 bishop of Crete, that is of the city of Gortina, whom Dionysius mentions in the epistle which he wrote to the church of the same city, published a remarkable book Against Marcion and flourished in the time of Marcus Antoninus Verus and Lucius Aurelius Commodus.
Footnotes
369:2432Bishop about 160, died about 180.
Chapter XXXI.
Musanus, 2433 not inconsiderable among those who have written on ecclesiastical doctrine, in the reign of Marcus Antoninus Verus wrote a book to certain brethren who had turned aside from the church to the heresy of the Encratites.
Footnotes
369:2433Flourished 204?
Chapter XXXII.
Modestus 2434 also in the reign of Marcus Antoninus and Lucius Aurelius Commodus wrote a book Against Marcion which is still extant. Some other compositions pass under his name but are regarded by scholars as spurious.
Footnotes
370:2434Flourished 180–190.
Chapter XXXIII.
Bardesanes 2435 of Mesopotamia is reckoned among the distinguished men. He was at first a follower of Valentinus and afterwards his opponent and himself founded a new heresy. He has the reputation among the Syrians of having been a brilliant genius and vehement in argument. He wrote a multitude of works against almost all heresies which had come into existence in his time. Among these a most remarkable and strong work is the one which he addressed to Marcus Antoninus On fate, and many other volumes On persecution which his followers translated from the Syriac language into Greek. If indeed so much force and brilliancy appears in the translation, how great it must have been in the original.
Footnotes
370:2435Flourished about 172.
Chapter XXXIV.
Victor, 2436 thirteenth bishop of Rome, wrote, On the Paschal Controversy and some other small works. He ruled the church for ten years in the reign of the Emperor Severus.
Footnotes
370:2436Bishop about 190 (or 185 according to others) died 202 or 197.
Chapter XXXV.
Irenæus, 2437 a presbyter under Pothinus the bishop who ruled the church of Lyons in Gaul, being sent to Rome as legate by the martyrs of this place, on account of certain ecclesiastical questions, presented to Bishop Eleutherius certain letters under his own name which are worthy of honour. Afterwards when Pothinus, nearly ninety years of age, received the crown of martyrdom for Christ, he was put in his place. It is certain too that he was a disciple of Polycarp, the priest and martyr, whom we mentioned above. He wrote five books Against heresies and a short volume, Against the nations and another On discipline, a letter to Marcianus his brother On apostolical preaching, a book of Various treatises; also to Blastus, On schism, 2438 to Florinus On monarchy or That God is not the author of evil, also an excellent Commentary on the Ogdoad 2439 at the end of which indicating that he was near the apostolic period he wrote “I adjure thee whosoever shall transcribe this book, by our Lord Jesus Christ and by his glorious advent at which He shall judge the quick and the dead, that you diligently compare, after you have transcribed, and amend it according to the copy from which you have transcribed it and also that you shall similarly transcribe this adjuration as you find it in your pattern.” Other works of his are in circulation to wit: to Victor the Roman bishop On the Paschal controversy in which he warns him not lightly to break the unity of the fraternity, if indeed Victor believed that the many bishops of Asia and the East, who with the Jews celebrated the passover, on the fourteenth day of the new moon, were to be condemned. But even those who differed from them did not support Victor in his opinion. He flourished chiefly in the reign of the Emperor Commodus, who succeeded Marcus Antoninus Verus in power.
Footnotes
370:2437Born between 140 and 145, died 202 or later.
370:2438schismH A 31 a e Val. Eusebius etc: chrism A T 25 30.
370:2439Ogdoad“Octava” is translation for “Ogdoad” used by Eusebius and explained to refer to the Valentinian Ogdoads. (M’Giffert.)
Chapter XXXVI.
Pantaenus, 2440 a philosopher of the stoic school, according to some old Alexandrian custom, where, from the time of 2441 Mark the evangelist the ecclesiastics were always doctors, was of so great prudence and erudition both in scripture and secular literature that, on the request of the legates of that nation, he was sent to India by Demetrius bishop of Alexandria, where he found that Bartholomew, one of the twelve apostles, had preached the advent of the Lord Jesus according to the gospel of Matthew, and on his return to Alexandria he brought this with him written in Hebrew characters. Many of his commentaries on Holy Scripture are indeed extant, but his living voice was of still greater benefit to the churches. He taught in the reigns of the emperor Severus and Antoninus surnamed Caracalla.
Footnotes
370:2440At Alexandria about 179, died about 216.
370:2441T reads following the example of and makes a more manageable text.
Chapter XXXVII.
Rhodo, 2442 a native of Asia, instructed in the Scriptures at Rome by Tatian whom we mentioned above, published many things especially a work Against Marcion in which he tells how the Marcionites differ from one another as well as from the church and says that the aged Apelles, another heretic, was once engaged in a discussion with him, and that he, Rhodo, held Apelles up to ridicule because he declared that he did not know the God whom he worshipped. He mentioned in the same book, which he wrote to Callistion, that he had been a pupil of Tatian at Rome. He also composed elegant treatises On the six days of creation and a notable work against the Phrygians. 2443 He flourished in the reigns of Commodus and Severus.
Footnotes
370:2442Flourished 186.
371:2443Phrygians A 31 a e with Eusebius; Cataphrygians T 25 30 “according to the usage of the Latins” (cf. M’Giffert).
Chapter XXXVIII.
Clemens, 2444 presbyter of the Alexandrian church, and a pupil of the Pantaenus mentioned above, led the theological school at Alexandria after the death of his master and was teacher of the Catechetes. He is the author of notable volumes, full of eloquence and learning, both in sacred Scripture and in secular literature; among these are the Stromata, eight books, Hypotyposes eight books, Against the nations one book, On pedagogy 2445 three books, On the Passover, Disquisition on fasting and another book entitled, What rich man is saved? one book On Calumny, On ecclesiastical canons and against those who follow the error of the Jews, one book which he addressed to Alexander bishop of Jerusalem. He also mentions in his volumes of Stromata the work of Tatian Against the nations which we mentioned above and a Chronography of one Cassianus, a work which I have not been able to find. He also mentioned certain Jewish writers against the nations, one Aristobulus and Demetrius and Eupolemus who after the example of Josephus asserted the primacy of Moses and the Jewish people. There is a letter of Alexander the bishop of Jerusalem who afterwards ruled the church with Narcissus, on the ordination of Asclepiades the confessor, addressed to the Antiochians congratulating them, at the end of which he says “these writings honoured 2446 brethren I have sent to you by the blessed presbyter Clement, a man illustrious and approved, whom you also know and with whom now you will become better acquainted a man who, when he had come hither by the special providence of God, strengthened and enlarged the church of God.” Origen is known to have been his disciple. He flourished moreover during the reigns of Severus and his son Antoninus.
Footnotes
371:2444Born about 160, died about 217.
371:2445On pedagogy = “The Instructor.”
371:2446honoured literally “lordly” perhaps like the conventional formula “Lords and brethren.”
Chapter XXXIX.
Miltiades 2447 of whom Rhodo gives an account in the work which he wrote against Montanus, Prisca and Maximilla, wrote a considerable volume against these same persons, and other books Against the nations and the Jews and addressed an Apology to the then ruling emperors. He flourished in the reign of Marcus Antoninus and Commodus.
Footnotes
371:2447Flourished 180–190.
Chapter XL.
Apollonius, 2448 an exceedingly talented man, wrote against Montanus, Prisca and Maximilla a notable and lengthy volume, in which he asserts that Montanus and his mad prophetesses died by hanging, and many other things, among which are the following concerning Prisca and Maximilla, “if they denied that they have accepted gifts, let them confess that those who do accept are not prophets and I will prove by a thousand witnesses that they have received gifts, for it is by other fruits that prophets are shown to be prophets indeed. Tell me, does a prophet dye his hair? Does a prophet stain her eyelids with antimony? Is a prophet adorned with fine garments and precious stones? Does a prophet play with dice and tables? Does he accept usury? Let them respond whether this ought to be permitted or not, it will be my task to prove that they do these things.” He says in the same book, that the time when he wrote the work was the fortieth year after the beginning of the heresy of the Cataphrygians. Tertullian added to the six volumes which he wrote On ecstasy against the church a seventh, directed especially against Apollonius, in which he attempts to defend all which Apollonius refuted. Apollonius flourished in the reigns of Commodus and Severus.
Footnotes
371:2448Bishop about 196, flourished 210.
Chapter XLI.
Serapion, 2449 ordained bishop of Antioch in the eleventh year of the emperor Commodus, wrote a letter to Caricus and Pontius 2450 on the heresy of Montanus, in which he said “that you may know moreover that the madness of this false doctrine, that is the doctrine of a new prophecy, is reprobated by all the world, I have sent to you the letters of the most holy Apollinaris bishop of Hierapolis in Asia.” He wrote a volume also to Domnus, who in time of persecution went over to the Jews, and another work on the gospel which passes under the name of Peter, a work to the church of the Rhosenses in Cilicia who by the reading of this book had turned aside to heresy. There are here and there short letters of his, harmonious in character with the ascetic life of their author.
Footnotes
371:2449Bishop 199, died 211.
371:2450Caricus and Pontius. So Valesius and others with Eusebius but mss. except “a” have Carinus and it is interesting to note that the same ms. reads Ponticus with most mss. of Eusebius.
Chapter XLII.
Apollonius, 2451 a Roman senator under the emperor Commodus, having been denounced by a slave as a Christian, gained permission to give a reason for his faith and wrote a remarkable volume which he read in the senate, yet none the less, by the will of the senate, he was beheaded for Christ by virtue of an ancient law among them, that Christians who had once been brought before their judgment seat should not be dismissed unless they recanted.
Footnotes
372:2451Died about 185.
Chapter XLIII.
Theophilus, 2452 bishop of Cæsarea in Palestine, the city formerly called Turris Stratonis, in the reign of the emperor Severus wrote, in conjunction with other bishops, a synodical letter of great utility against those who celebrated the passover with the Jews on the fourteenth day of the month.
Footnotes
372:2452Died about 190.
Chapter XLIV.
Bacchylus, 2453 bishop of Corinth, was held in renown under the same emperor Severus, and wrote, as representative of all the bishops who were in Achaia, an elegant work On the passover.
Footnotes
372:2453Bishop about 190–200.
Chapter XLV.
Polycrates 2454 bishop of the Ephesians with other bishops of Asia who in accordance with some ancient custom celebrated the passover with the Jews on the fourteenth of the month, wrote a synodical letter against Victor bishop of Rome in which he says that he follows the authority of the apostle John and of the ancients. From this we make the following brief quotations, “We therefore celebrate the day according to usage, inviolably, neither adding anything to nor taking anything from it, for in Asia lie the remains of the greatest saints of those who shall rise again on the day of the Lord, when he shall come in majesty from heaven and shall quicken all the saints, I mean Philip one of the twelve apostles who sleeps at Hierapolis and his two daughters who were virgins until their death and another daughter of his who died at Ephesus full of the Holy Spirit. And John too, who lay on Our Lord’s breast and was his high priest carrying the golden frontlet on his forehead, both martyr and doctor, fell asleep at Ephesus and Polycarp bishop and martyr died at Smyrna. Thraseas of Eumenia also, bishop and martyr, rests in the same Smyrna. What need is there of mentioning Sagaris, bishop and martyr, who sleeps in Laodicea and the blessed Papyrus and Melito, eunuch in the Holy Spirit, who, ever serving the Lord, was laid to rest in Sardis and there awaits his resurrection at Christ’s advent. These all observed the day of the passover on the fourteenth of the month, in nowise departing from the evangelical tradition and following the ecclesiastical canon. I also, Polycrates, the least of all your servants, according to the doctrine of my relatives which I also have followed (for there were seven of my relatives bishops indeed and I the eighth) have always celebrated the passover when the Jewish people celebrated the putting away of the leaven. And so brethren being sixty-five years old in the Lord and instructed by many brethren from all parts of the world, and having searched all the Scriptures, I will not fear those who threaten us, for my predecessors said “It is fitting to obey God rather than men.” I quote this to show through a small example the genius and authority of the man. He flourished in the reign of the emperor Severus in the same period as Narcissus of Jerusalem.
Footnotes
372:2454Bishop about 196.
Chapter XLVI.
Heraclitus 2455 in the reign of Commodus and Severus wrote commentaries on the Acts and Epistles.
Footnotes
372:2455Flourished about 193.
Chapter XLVII.
Maximus, 2456 under the same emperors propounded in a remarkable volume the famous questions, What is the origin of evil? and Whether matter is made by God.
Footnotes
372:2456Bishop of Jerusalem 185.
Chapter XLVIII.
Candidus 2457 under the above mentioned emperors published most admirable treatises On the six days of creation.
Footnotes
372:2457Flourished about 196.
Chapter XLIX.
Appion 2458 under the emperor Severus likewise wrote treatises On the six days of creation.
Footnotes
373:2458Flourished about 196.
Chapter L.
Sextus 2459 in the reign of the emperor Severus wrote a book On the resurrection.
Footnotes
373:2459Flourished about 196.
Chapter LI.
Arabianus 2460 under the same emperor published certain small works relating to christian doctrine.
Footnotes
373:2460Flourished about 196.
Chapter LII.
Judas, 2461 discussed at length the seventy weeks mentioned in Daniel and wrote a Chronography of former times which he brought up to the tenth year of Severus. He is convicted of error in respect of this work in that he prophesied that the advent of Anti-Christ would be about his period, but this was because the greatness of the persecutions seemed to forebode the end of the world.
Footnotes
373:2461202.
Chapter LIII.
Tertullian 2462 the presbyter, now regarded as chief of the Latin writers after Victor and Apollonius, was from the city of Carthage in the province of Africa, and was the son of a proconsul or Centurion, a man of keen and vigorous character, he flourished chiefly in the reign of the emperor Severus and Antoninus Caracalla and wrote many volumes which we pass by because they are well known to most. I myself have seen a certain Paul an old man of Concordia, a town of Italy, who, while he himself was a very young man had been secretary to the blessed Cyprian who was already advanced in age. He said that he himself had seen how Cyprian was accustomed never to pass a day without reading Tertullian, and that he frequently said to him, “Give me the master,” meaning by this, Tertullian. He was presbyter of the church until middle life, afterwards driven by the envy and abuse of the clergy of the Roman church, he lapsed to the doctrine of Montanus, and mentions the new prophecy in many of his books.
He composed, moreover, directly against the church, volumes: On modesty, On persecution, On fasts, On monogamy, six books On ecstasy, and a seventh which he wrote Against Apollonius. He is said to have lived to a decrepit old age, and to have composed many small works, which are not extant.
Footnotes
373:2462Born about 160, christian 195, apology 198, died about 245.
Chapter LIV.
Origen, 2463 surnamed Adamantius, a persecution having been raised against the Christians in the tenth year of Severus Pertinax, and his father Leonidas having received the crown of martyrdom for Christ, was left at the age of about seventeen, with his six brothers and widowed mother, in poverty, for their property had been confiscated because of confessing Christ. When only eighteen years old, he undertook the work of instructing the Catechetes in the scattered churches of Alexandria. Afterwards appointed by Demetrius, bishop of this city, successor to the presbyter Clement, he flourished many years. When he had already reached middle life, on account of the churches of Achaia, which were torn with many heresies, he was journeying to Athens, by way of Palestine, under the authority of an ecclesiastical letter, and having been ordained presbyter by Theoctistus and Alexander, bishops of Cæsarea and Jerusalem, he offended Demetrius, who was so wildly enraged at him that he wrote everywhere to injure his reputation. It is known that before he went to Cæsarea, he had been at Rome, under bishop Zephyrinus. Immediately on his return to Alexandria he made Heraclas the presbyter, who continued to wear his philosopher’s garb, his assistant in the school for catechetes. Heraclas became bishop of the church of Alexandria, after Demetrius. How great the glory of Origen was, appears from the fact that Firmilianus, bishop of Cæsarea, with all the Cappadocian bishops, sought a visit from him, and entertained him for a long while. Sometime afterwards, going to Palestine to visit the holy places, he came to Cæsarea 2464 and was instructed at length by Origen in the Holy Scriptures. It appears also from the fact that he went to Antioch, on the request of Mammaea, mother of the Emperor Alexander, and a woman religiously disposed, and was there held in great honour, and sent letters to the Emperor Philip, who was the first among the Roman rulers, to become a christian, and to his mother, letters which are still extant. Who is there, who does not also know that he was so assiduous in the study of Holy Scriptures, that contrary to the spirit of his time, and of his people, he learned the Hebrew language, and taking the Septuagint translation, he gathered the other translations also in a single work, namely, that of Aquila, of Ponticus the Proselyte, and Theodotian the Ebonite, and Symmachus an adherent of the same sect who wrote commentaries also on the gospel according to Matthew, from which he tried to establish his doctrine. And besides these, a fifth, sixth, and seventh translation, which we also have from his library, he sought out with great diligence, and compared with other editions. And since I have given a list of his works, in the volumes of letters which I have written to Paula, in a letter which I wrote against the works of Varro, I pass this by now, not failing however, to make mention of his immortal genius, how that he understood dialectics, as well as geometry, arithmetic, music, grammar, and rhetoric, and taught all the schools of philosophers, in such wise that he had also diligent students in secular literature, and lectured to them daily, and the crowds which flocked to him were marvellous. These, he received in the hope that through the instrumentality of this secular literature, he might establish them in the faith of Christ.
It is unnecessary to speak of the cruelty of that persecution which was raised against the Christians and under Decius, who was mad against the religion of Philip, whom he had slain,—the persecution in which Fabianus, bishop of the Roman church, perished at Rome, and Alexander and Babylas, Pontifs of the churches of Jerusalem and Antioch, were imprisoned for their confession of Christ. If any one wishes to know what was done in regard to the position of Origen, he can clearly learn, first indeed from his own epistles, which after the persecution, were sent to different ones, and secondly, from the sixth book of the church history of Eusebius of Cæsarea, and from his six volumes in behalf of the same Origen.
He lived until the time of Gallus and Volusianus, that is, until his sixty-ninth year, and died at Tyre, in which city he also was buried.
Footnotes
373:2463Born at Alexandria 185, died at Tyre 253.
373:2464Cæsarea. Cæsarea in Palestine.
Chapter LV.
Ammonius, 2465 a talented man of great philosophical learning, was distinguished at Alexandria, at the same time. Among many and distinguished monuments of his genius, is the elaborate work which he composed On the harmony of Moses and Jesus, and the Gospel canons, which he worked out, and which Eusebius of Cæsarea, afterwards followed. Porphyry falsely accused him of having become a heathen again, after being a Christian, but it is certain that he continued a Christian until the very end of his life.
Footnotes
374:2465Flourished 220.
Chapter LVI.
Ambrosius, 2466 at first a Marcionite but afterwards set right by Origen, was deacon in the church, and gloriously distinguished as confessor of the Lord. To him, together with Protoctetus the presbyter, the book of Origen, On martyrdom was written. Aided 2467 by his industry, funds, and perseverance, Origen dictated a great number of volumes. He himself, as befits a man of noble nature, was of no mean literary talent, as his letters to Origen indicate. He died moreover, before the death of Origen, and is condemned by many, in that being a man of wealth, he did not at death, remember in his will, his old and needy friend.
Footnotes
374:2466Died about 250.
374:2467aideda T e Val. Her.; “and to him” A H 25 30; “and to this time” a 31.
Chapter LVII.
Trypho, 2468 pupil of Origen, to whom some of his extant letters are addressed, was very learned in the Scriptures, and this many of his works show here and there, but especially the book which he composed On the red heifer 2469 in Deuteronomy, and On the halves, which with the pigeon and the turtledoves were offered by Abraham as recorded in Genesis. 2470
Footnotes
374:2468Flourished about 240.
374:2469red heifer Numb. 19. 2. (?) or Deut. Ch. 21.
374:2470Genesis 15. 9–10.
Chapter LVIII.
Minucius 2471 Felix, a distinguished advocate of Rome, wrote a dialogue representing a discussion between a Christian and a Gentile, which is entitled Octavius, and still another work passes current in his name, On fate, or Against the mathematicians, but this although it is the work of a talented man, does not seem to me to correspond in style with the above mentioned work. Lactantius also mentions this Minucius in his works.
Footnotes
374:2471Flourished 196?
Chapter LIX.
Gaius, 2472 bishop of Rome, in the time of Zephyrinus, that is, in the reign of Antoninus, the son of Severus, delivered a very notable disputation Against Proculus, the follower of Montanus, convicting him of temerity in his defence of the new prophecy, and in the same volume also enumerating only thirteen epistles of Paul, says that the fourteenth, which is now called, To the Hebrews, is not by him, and is not considered among the Romans to the present day as being by the apostle Paul.
Footnotes
374:2472Died about 217.
Chapter LX.
Beryllus, 2473 bishop of Bostra in Arabia, after he had ruled the church gloriously 2474 for a little while, finally lapsed into the heresy which denies that Christ existed before the incarnation. Set right by Origen, he wrote various short works, especially letters, in which he thanks Origen. The letters of Origen to him, are also extant, and a dialogue between Origen and Beryllus as well, in which heresies are discussed. He was distinguished during the reign of Alexander, son of Mammaea, and Maximinus and Gordianus, who succeeded him in power.
Footnotes
375:2473Flourished about 230.
375:2474gloriously A 31 e a 10 21 Bamb. Norimb. Val.; omit T 25 30 H Her.
Chapter LXI.
Hippolytus, 2475 bishop of some church (the name of the city I have not been able to learn) wrote A reckoning of the Paschal feast and chronological tables which he worked out up to the first year of the Emperor Alexander. He also discussed the cycle of sixteen years, which the Greeks called ἐκκαιδεκαετηρίδα and gave the cue to Eusebius, who composed on the same Paschal feast a cycle of nineteen years, that is ἐννεακαιδεκαετηρίδα. He wrote some commentaries on the Scriptures, among which are the following: On the six days of creation, On Exodus, On the Song of Songs, On Genesis, On Zechariah, On the Psalms, On Isaiah, On Daniel, On the Apocalypse, On the Proverbs, On Ecclesiastes, On Saul, On the Pythonissa, On the Antichrist, On the resurrection, Against Marcion, On the Passover, Against all heresies, and an exhortation On the praise of our Lord and Saviour, in which he indicates that he is speaking in the church in the presence of Origen. Ambrosius, who we have said was converted by Origen from the heresy of Marcion, to the true faith, urged Origen to write, in emulation of Hyppolytus, commentaries on the Scriptures, offering him seven, and even more secretaries, and their expenses, and an equal number of copyists, and what is still more, with incredible zeal, daily exacting work from him, on which account Origen, in one of his epistles, calls him his “Taskmaster.”
Footnotes
375:2475Bishop 217–8, died 229–38.
Chapter LXII.
Alexander, 2476 bishop of Cappadocia, desiring to visit the Holy Land, came to Jerusalem, at the time when Narcissus, bishop of this city, already an old man, ruled the church. It was revealed to Narcissus and many of his clergy, that on the morning of the next day, a bishop would enter the city, who should be assistant on the sacerdotal throne. And so it came to pass, as it was predicted, and all the bishops of Palestine being gathered together, Narcissus himself being especially urgent, Alexander took with him the helm of the church of Jerusalem. At the end of one of his epistles, written to the Antinoites On the peace of the church, he says “Narcissus, who held the bishopric here before me, and now with me exercises his office by his prayers, being about a hundred and sixteen years old, salutes you, and with me begs you to become of one mind.” He wrote another also To the Antiocheans, by the hand of Clement, the presbyter of Alexandria, of whom we spoke above, another also To Origen, and In behalf of Origen against Demetrius, called forth by the fact that, according to the testimony of Demetrius, he had made Origen presbyter. There are other epistles of his to different persons. In the seventh persecution under Decius, at the time when Babylas of Antioch was put to death, brought to Cæsarea and shut up in prison, he received the crown of martyrdom for confessing Christ.
Footnotes
375:2476Bishop at Jerusalem 212, died 250.
Chapter LXIII.
Julius Africanus, 2477 whose five volumes On Chronology, are yet extant, in the reign of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, who succeeded Macrinus, received a commission to restore the city of Emmaus, which afterwards was called Nicopolis. There is an epistle of his to Origen, On the question of Susanna, where it is contended that this story is not contained in the Hebrew, and is not consistent with the Hebrew etymology in respect of the play on “prinos and prisai,” “schinos and schisai.” In reply to this, Origen wrote a learned epistle. There is extant another letter of his, To Aristides, in which he discusses at length the discrepancies, which appear in the genealogy of our Saviour, as recorded by Matthew and Luke.
Footnotes
375:2477…221.
Chapter LXIV.
Geminus, 2478 presbyter of the church at Antioch, composed a few monuments of his genius, flourishing in the time of the Emperor Alexander and Zebennus, bishop of his city, especially at the time at which Heraclas was ordained Pontiff of the church at Alexandria.
Footnotes
376:2478Presbyter at Antioch about 232.
Chapter LXV.
Theodorus, 2479 afterwards called Gregory, bishop of Neocæsarea in Pontus, while yet a very young man, in company with his brother Athenodorus, went from Cappadocia to Berytus, and thence to Cæsarea in Palestine, to study Greek and Latin literature. When Origen had seen the remarkable natural ability of these men, he urged them to study philosophy, in the teaching of which he gradually introduced the matter of faith in Christ, and made them also his followers. So, instructed by him for five years, they were sent back by him to their mother. Theodorus, on his departure, wrote a panegyric of thanks to Origen, and delivered it before a large assembly, Origen himself being present. This panegyric is extant at the present day.
He wrote also a short, but very valuable, paraphrase On Ecclesiastes, and current report speaks of other epistles of his, but more especially of the signs and wonders, which as bishop, he performed to the great glory of the churches.
Footnotes
376:2479Gregory of Neocesarea, born 210–15, bishop 240, died about 270.
Chapter LXVI.
Cornelius, 2480 bishop of Rome, to whom eight letters of Cyprian are extant, wrote a letter to Fabius, 2481 bishop of the church at Antioch, On the Roman, Italian, and African councils, and another On Novatian and those who had fallen from the faith, a third On the acts of the council, and a fourth very prolix one to the same Fabius, containing the causes of the Novatian heresy and an anathema of it. He ruled the church for two years under Gallus and Volusianus. He received the crown of martyrdom for Christ, and was succeeded by Lucius.
Footnotes
376:2480Bishop 251, died 252.
376:2481Fabius. Some mss. Fabianus.
Chapter LXVII.
Cyprian 2482 of Africa, at first was famous as a teacher of rhetoric, and afterwards on the persuasion of the presbyter Caecilius, from whom he received his surname, he became a Christian, and gave all his substance to the poor. Not long after he was inducted into the presbytery, and was also made bishop of Carthage. It is unnecessary to make a catalogue of the works of his genius, since they are more conspicuous than the sun.
He was put to death under the Emperors Valerian and Gallienus, in the eighth persecution, on the same day that Cornelius was put to death at Rome, but not in the same year.
Footnotes
376:2482Born about 200, bishop 248, died at Carthage 258.
Chapter LXVIII
Pontius, 2483 deacon of Cyprian, sharing his exile until the day of his death, left a notable volume On the life and death of Cyprian.
Footnotes
376:2483Died about 260.
Chapter LXIX.
Dionysius, 2484 bishop of Alexandria, as presbyter had charge of the catechetical school under Heraclas, and was the most distinguished pupil of Origen. Consenting to the doctrine of Cyprian and the African synod, on the rebaptizing 2485 of heretics, he sent many letters to different people, which are yet extant; He wrote one to Fabius, bishop of the church at Antioch, On penitence, another To the Romans, by the hand of Hippolytus, two letters To Xystus, who had succeeded Stephen, two also To Philemon and Dionysius, presbyters of the church at Rome, and another To the same Dionysius, afterwards bishop of Rome; and To Novatian, treating of their claim that Novatian had been ordained bishop of Rome, against his will. The beginning of this epistle is as follows: “Dionysius to Novatian, his brother greeting. If you have been ordained unwillingly, as you say, you will prove it, when you shall willingly retire.”
There is another epistle of his also To Dionysius and Didymus, and many Festal epistles on the passover, written in a declamatory style, also one to the church of Alexandria On exile, one To Hierax, 2486 bishop in Egypt, and yet others On mortality, On the Sabbath, andOn the gymnasium, also one To Hermammon and others On the persecution of Decius, and two books Against Nepos the bishop, who asserted in his writings a thousand years reign in the body. Among other things he diligently discussed the Apocalypse of John, and wrote Against Sabellius and To Ammon, bishop of Bernice, and To Telesphorus, also To Euphranor, also four books To Dionysius, bishop of Rome, to the Laodiceans On penitence, to Origen On martyrdom, to the Armenians On penitence, 2487 also On the order of transgression, to Timothy On nature, to Euphranor On temptation, many letters also To Basilides, in one of which he asserts that he also began to write commentaries on Ecclesiastes. The notable epistle which he wrote against Paul of Samosata, a few days before his death is also current. He died in the twelfth year of Gallienus.
Footnotes
376:2484Presbyter 232, exiled 250 and 257, died 265.
376:2485rebaptizing a e Val. Her.; baptizing A? H T 25 30 31.
376:2486Hieraxe Euseb. Val. Her. Heraclas A H T 25 30 31.
377:2487penitence A T 25 30 a Her.; penitence likewise Canon on penitence H 31 e 10 21 Val.
Chapter LXX.
Novatianus, 2488 presbyter of Rome, attempted to usurp the sacerdotal chair occupied by Cornelius, and established the dogma of the Novatians, or as they are called in Greek, the Cathari, by refusing to receive penitent apostates. Novatus, author of this doctrine, was a presbyter of Cyprian. He wrote, On the passover, On the Sabbath, On circumcision, On the priesthood, On prayer, 2489 On the food of the Jews, On zeal, On Attalus, and many others, especially, a great volume On the Trinity, a sort of epitome of the work of Tertullian, which many mistakenly ascribe to Cyprian.
Footnotes
377:2488Flourished about 250 sq.
377:2489PrayerA H 25 30 31 21; Ordination e T Her.
Chapter LXXI.
Malchion, 2490 the highly gifted presbyter of the church at Antioch, who had most successfully taught rhetoric in the same city, held a discussion with Paul of Samosata, who as bishop of the church at Antioch, had introduced the doctrine of Artemon, and this was taken down by short hand writers. This dialogue is still extant, and yet another extended epistle written by him, in behalf of the council, is addressed to Dionysius and Maximus, bishops of Rome and Alexandria. He flourished under Claudius and Aurelianus.
Footnotes
377:2490Flourished 272.
Chapter LXXII.
Archelaus, 2491 bishop of Mesopotamia, composed in the Syriac language, a book of the discussion which he held with Manichaeus, when he came from Persia. This book, which is translated into Greek, is possessed by many.
He flourished under the Emperor Probus, who succeeded Aurelianus and Tacitus.
Footnotes
377:2491Flourished about 278.
Chapter LXXIII.
Anatolius 2492 of Alexandria, bishop of Laodicea in Syria, who flourished under the emperors Probus and Carus, was a man of wonderful learning in arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, grammar, rhetoric, and dialectic. We can get an idea of the greatness of his genius from the volume which he wrote On the passover and his ten books On the institutes of arithmetic.
Footnotes
377:2492Born about 230, bishop 270, died about 283.
Chapter LXXIV.
Victorinus, 2493 bishop of Pettau, was not equally familiar with Latin and Greek. On this account his works though noble in thought, are inferior in style. They are the following: Commentaries On Genesis, On Exodus, On Leviticus, On Isaiah, On Ezekiel, On Habakkuk, On Ecclesiastes, On the Song of Songs, On the Apocalypse of John, Against all heresies and many others. At the last he received the crown of martyrdom.
Footnotes
377:2493Bishop of Pettau 303, died 304.
Chapter LXXV.
Pamphilus 2494 the presbyter, patron of Eusebius bishop of Cæsarea, was so inflamed with love of sacred literature, that he transcribed the greater part of the works of Origen with his own hand and these are still preserved in the library at Cæsarea. I have twenty-five volumes 2495 of Commentaries of Origen, written in his hand, On the twelve prophets which I hug and guard with such joy, that I deem myself to have the wealth of Croesus. And if it is such joy to have one epistle of a martyr how much more to have so many thousand lines which seem to me to be traced in his blood. He wrote an Apology for Origen before Eusebius had written his and was put to death at Cæsarea in Palestine in the persecution of Maximinus.
Footnotes
377:2494Died 309.
377:2495volumes A H 31 a e 10 21 Val.; omit T 25 30 Her.
Chapter LXXVI.
Pierius, 2496 presbyter of the church at Alexandria in the reign of Carus and Diocletian, at the time when Theonas ruled as bishop in the same church, taught the people with great success and attained such elegance of language and published so many treatises on all sorts of subjects (which are still extant) that he was called Origen Junior. He was remarkable for his self-discipline, devoted to voluntary poverty, and thoroughly acquainted with the dialectic art. After the persecution, he passed the rest of his life at Rome. There is extant a long treatise of his On the prophet Hosea which from internal evidence appears to have been delivered on the vigil of Passover.
Footnotes
377:2496Flourished before 299.
Chapter LXXVII.
Lucianus, 2497 a man of great talent, presbyter of the church at Antioch, was so diligent in the study of the Scriptures, that even now certain copies of the Scriptures bear the name of Lucian. Works of his, On faith, and short Epistles to various people are extant. He was put to death at Nicomedia for his confession of Christ in the persecution of Maximinus, and was buried at Helenopolis in Bithynia.
Footnotes
378:2497Died 312.
Chapter LXXVIII.
Phileas 2498 a resident of that Egyptian city which is called Thmuis, of noble family, and no small wealth, having become bishop, composed a finely written work in praise of martyrs and arguing against the judge who tried to compel him to offer sacrifices, was beheaded for Christ during the same persecution in which Lucianus was put to death at Nicomedia.
Footnotes
378:2498Died after 306.
Chapter LXXIX.
Arnobius 2499 was a most successful teacher of rhetoric at Sicca in Africa during the reign of Diocletian, and wrote volumes Against the nations which may be found everywhere.
Footnotes
378:2499Flourished 295.
Chapter LXXX.
Firmianus, 2500 known also as Lactantius, a disciple of Arnobius, during the reign of Diocletian summoned to Nicomedia with Flavius the Grammarian whose poem On medicine is still extant, taught rhetoric there and on account of his lack of pupils (since it was a Greek city) he betook himself to writing. We have a Banquet of his which he wrote as a young man in Africa and an Itinerary of a journey from Africa to Nicomedia written in hexameters, and another book which is called The Grammarian and a most beautiful one On the wrath of God, and Divine institutes against the nations, seven books, and an Epitome of the same work in one volume, without a title, 2501 also two books To Asclepiades, one book On persecution, four books of Epistles to Probus, two books of Epistles to Severus, two books of Epistles to his pupil Demetrius 2502 and one book to the same On the work of God or the creation of man. In his extreme old age he was tutor to Crispus Cæsar a son of Constantine in Gaul, the same one who was afterwards put to death by his father.
Footnotes
378:2500Died 325.
378:2501without a title “that is a compendium of the last three books only” as Cave explains it. Ffoulkes in Smith and W. But no.
378:2502two books…Severus…Demetrius e a H 10 21 Val.; omit T 25 30 31 Her.
Chapter LXXXI.
Eusebius 2503 bishop of Cæsarea in Palestine was diligent in the study of Divine Scriptures and with Pamphilus the martyr a most diligent investigator of the Holy Bible. He published a great number of volumes among which are the following: Demonstrations of the Gospel twenty books, Preparations for the Gospel fifteen books, Theophany 2504 five books, Church history ten books, Chronicle of Universal history and an Epitome of this last. Also On discrepancies between the Gospels, On Isaiah, ten books, also Against Porphyry, who was writing at that same time in Sicily as some think, twenty-five books, also one book of Topics, six books of Apology for Origen, three books On the life of Pamphilus, other brief works On the martyrs, exceedingly learned Commentaries on one hundred and fifty Psalms, and many others. He flourished chiefly in the reigns of Constantine the Great and Constantius. His surname Pamphilus arose from his friendship for Pamphilus the martyr.
Footnotes
378:2503Born 267, bishop about 315, died about 338.
378:2504Theophany T 31 Val. Her.; omit A H 25 30 a? e.
Chapter LXXXII.
Reticius 2505 bishop of Autun, among the Aedui, had a great reputation in Gaul in the reign of Constantine. I have read his commentaries On the Song of Songs and another great volume Against Novatian but besides these, I have found no works of his.
Footnotes
378:2505Bishop 313, died 334.
Chapter LXXXIII.
Methodius, 2506 bishop of Olympus in Lycia and afterwards of Tyre, composed books Against Porphyry written in polished and logical style also a Banquet of the ten virgins, an excellent work On the resurrection, against Origen and On the Pythonissa and On free will, also against Origen. He also wrote commentaries On Genesis and On the Song of Songs and many others which are widely read. At the end of the recent persecution or, as others affirm, in the reign of Decius and Valerianus, he was crowned with martyrdom at Chalcis in Greece.
Footnotes
378:2506Died 311 or 312.
Chapter LXXXIV.
Juvencus, 2507 a Spaniard of noble family and presbyter, translating the four gospels almost verbally in hexameter verses, composed four books. He wrote some other things in the same metre relating to the order of the sacraments. He flourished in the reign of Constantinus.
Footnotes
379:2507Flourished 330.
Chapter LXXXV.
Eustathius, 2508 a Pamphilian from Side, bishop 2509 first of Berœa in Syria and then of Antioch, ruled the church and, composing many things against the doctrine of the Arians, was driven into exile under the emperor Constantius 2510 into Trajanopolis in Thrace where he is until this day. Works of his are extant On the soul, On ventriloquism Against Origen and Letters too numerous to mention.
Footnotes
379:2508Died 337, (or according to others 370–82.) Jerome in this chapter seems, unless the usual modern view is confused, to have mixed up Eustathius of Antioch with Eusebius of Sebaste.
379:2509BishopA H T 25 30 Her; omit 31 32 a e Val.
379:2510Constantius this is supposed to be an evident slip for Constantinus (Compare Venables in Smith and Wace Dict. v. 2, p. 383) but if there is confusion with Eustathius of Sebaste as suggested above possibly the latter’s deposition by Constantius is referred to. But the difficulty remains almost as great.
Chapter LXXXVI.
Marcellus, 2511 bishop of Ancyra, flourished in the reign of Constantinus and Constantius and wrote many volumes of various Propositions and especially against the Arians. Works of Asterius and Apollinarius against him are current, which accuse him of Sabellianism. Hilary too, in the seventh book of his work Against the Arians, mentions him as a heretic, but he defends himself against the charge through the fact that Julius and Athanasius bishops of Rome and Alexandria communed with him.
Footnotes
379:2511Died 372, or 374 (Ffoulkes.)
Chapter LXXXVII.
Athanasius 2512 bishop of Alexandria, hard pressed by the wiles of the Arians, fled to Constans emperor of Gaul. Returning thence with letters and, after the death of the emperor, again taking refuge in flight, he kept in hiding until the accession of Jovian, when he returned to the church and died in the reign of Valens. Various works by him are in circulation; two books Against the nations, one Against Valens and Ursacius, On virginity, very many On the persecutions of the Arians, also On the titles of the Psalms and Life of Anthony the monk, also Festal epistles and other works too numerous to mention.
Footnotes
379:2512Born about 296, died 373.
Chapter LXXXVIII.
Anthony 2513 the monk, whose life Athanasius bishop of Alexandria wrote a long work upon, sent seven letters in Coptic to various monasteries, letters truly apostolic in idea and language, and which have been translated into Greek. The chief of these is To the Arsenoites. He flourished during the reign of Constantinus and his sons.
Footnotes
379:2513Born 251, died 356.
Chapter LXXXIX.
Basil 2514 bishop of Ancyra, [a doctor of] 2515 medicine, wrote a book Against Marcellus and on virginity and some other things—and in the reign of Constantius was, with Eustathius of Sebaste, primate of Macedonia.
Footnotes
379:2514Bishop of Ancyra 336–344, 353–60, 361–3.
379:2515A doctor of So T? and some editions. Most mss. omit (gnarus) but it needs to be supplied in translation.
Chapter XC.
Theodorus, 2516 bishop of Heraclea in Thrace, published in the reign of the emperor Constantius commentaries On Matthew and John, On the Epistles and On the Psalter. These are written in a polished and clear style and show an excellent historical sense.
Footnotes
379:2516Bishop 335, died 355?
Chapter XCI.
Eusebius 2517 of Emesa, who had fine rhetorical talent, composed innumerable works suited to win popular applause and writing historically he is most diligently read by those who practise public speaking. Among these the chief are, Against Jews, Gentiles and Novatians and Homilies on the Gospels, brief but numerous. He flourished in the reign of the emperor Constantius in whose reign he died, and was buried at Antioch.
Footnotes
379:2517Died before 359.
Chapter XCII.
Triphylius, 2518 bishop of Ledra or Leucotheon, 2519 in Cyprus, was the most eloquent man of his age, and was distinguished during the reign of Constantius. I have read his Commentary on the Song of Songs. He is said to have written many other works, none of which have come to our hand.
Footnotes
379:2518Bishop 344, died about 370.
379:2519Leucotheon = Leuteon.
Chapter XCIII.
Donatus, 2520 from whom the Donatians arose in Africa in the reigns of the emperors Constantinus and Constantius, asserted that the scriptures were given up to the heathen by the orthodox during the persecution, and deceived almost all Africa, and especially Numidia by his persuasiveness. Many of his works, which relate to his heresy, are extant, including On the Holy Spirit, a work which is Arian in doctrine.
Footnotes
380:2520Bishop 313, —355.
Chapter XCIV.
Asterius, 2521 a philosopher of the Arian party, wrote, during the reign of Constantius, commentaries On the Epistle to the Romans, On the Gospels and On the Psalms, also many other works which are diligently read by those of his party.
Footnotes
380:2521Asterius of Cappadocia, died about 330.
Chapter XCV.
Lucifer, 2522 bishop of Cagliari, was sent by Liberius the bishop, with Pancratius and Hilary, clergy of the Roman church, to the emperor Constantius, as legates for the faith. When he would not condemn the Nicene faith as represented by Athanasius, sent again to Palestine, with wonderful constancy and willingness to meet martyrdom, he wrote a book against the emperor Constantius and sent it to be read by him, and not long after he returned to Cagliari in the reign of the emperor Julian and died in the reign of Valentinian.
Footnotes
380:2522Bishop 353, died 370.
Chapter XCVI.
Eusebius, 2523 a native of Sardinia, at first a lector at Rome and afterwards bishop of Vercelli, sent by the emperor Constantius to Scythopolis, and afterwards to Cappadocia, on account of his confession of the faith, returned to the church under the emperor Julian and published the Commentaries of Eusebius of Cæsarea on the Psalms, which he had translated from Greek into Latin, and died during the reign of Valentian and Valens.
Footnotes
380:2523Born about 315, Bishop about 340, exiled 355–62, died 371–5.
Chapter XCVII
Fortunatianus, 2524 an African by birth, bishop of Aquilia during the reign of Constantius, composed brief Commentaries on the gospels arranged by chapters, written in a rustic style, and is held in detestation because, when Liberius bishop of Rome was driven into exile for the faith, he was induced by the urgency of Fortunatianus to subscribe to heresy.
Footnotes
380:2524Flourished 343–355.
Chapter XCVIII.
Acacius, 2525 who, because he was blind in one eye, they nicknamed “the one-eyed,” bishop of the church of Cæsarea in Palestine, wrote seventeen volumes On Ecclesiastes and six of Miscellaneous questions, and many treatises besides on various subjects. He was so influential in the reign of the emperor Constantius that he made Felix bishop of Rome in the place of Liberius.
Footnotes
380:2525Bishop about 338, died 365–6.
Chapter XCIX.
Serapion, 2526 bishop of Thmuis, who on account of his cultivated genius was found worthy of the surname of Scholasticus, was the intimate friend of Anthony the monk, and published an excellent book Against the Manichaeans, also another On the titles of the Psalms, and valuable Epistles to different people. In the reign of the emperor Constantius he was renowned as a confessor.
Footnotes
380:2526Serapion the scholastic, died about 358.
Chapter C.
Hilary, 2527 a bishop of Poitiers in Aquitania, was a member of the party of Saturninus bishop of Arles. Banished into Phrygia by the Synod of Beziérs he composed twelve books Against the Arians and another book On Councils written to the Gallican bishops, and Commentaries on the Psalms that is on the first and second, from the fifty-first to the sixty-second, and from the one hundred and eighteenth to the end of the book. In this work he imitated Origen, but added also some original matter. There is a little book of his To Constantius which he presented to the emperor while he was living in Constantinople, and another On Constantius which he wrote after his death and a book Against Valens and Ursacius, containing a history of the Ariminian and Selucian Councils and To Sallust the prefect orAgainst Dioscurus, also a book of Hymns and mysteries, a commentary On Matthew and treatises On Job, which he translated freely from the Greek of Origen, and another elegant little work Against Auxentius andEpistles to different persons. They say he has written On the Song of Songs but this work is not known to us. He died at Poictiers during the reign of Valentinianus and Valens.
Footnotes
380:2527Bishop 350–5, exiled 356–60, died at Poitiers 367–8.
Chapter CI.
Victorinus, 2528 an African by birth, taught rhetoric at Rome under the emperor Constantius and in extreme old age, yielding himself to faith in Christ wrote books against Arius, written in dialectic style and very obscure language, books which can only be understood by the learned. He also wrote Commentaries on the Epistles.
Footnotes
381:2528Caius or Fabius Marius Victorinus, died about 370.
Chapter CII.
Titus 2529 bishop of Bostra, in the reign of the emperors Julian and Jovinian wrote vigorous works against the Manichaeans and some other things. He died under Valens.
Footnotes
381:2529Ordained 361, died 371.
Chapter CIII.
Damasus, 2530 bishop of Rome, had a fine talent for making verses and published many brief works in heroic metre. He died in the reign of the Emperor Theodosius at the age of almost eighty.
Footnotes
381:2530Pope Damasus, died 380.
Chapter CIV.
Apollinarus, 2531 bishop of Laodicea, in Syria, the son of a presbyter, applied himself in his youth to the diligent study of grammar, and afterwards, writing innumerable volumes on the Holy Scriptures, died in the reign of the Emperor Theodosius. There are extant thirty books by him Against Porphyry, which are generally considered as among the best of his works. 2532
Footnotes
381:2531Apollinaris the younger, Bishop 362, died about 390.
381:2532Works“generally recognized as authentic” Matougues.
Chapter CV.
Gregory, 2533 bishop of Elvira, 2534 in Baetica, writing even to extreme old age, composed various treatises in mediocre language, and an elegant work On Faith. He is said to be still living.
Footnotes
381:2533Gregory Baeticus Bishop of Elvira 359–392.
381:2534Elvira, Eliberi or Grenada.
Chapter CVI.
Pacianus, 2535 bishop of Barcelona, in the Pyrenees Mountains, a man of chaste eloquence, and as distinguished by his life as by his speech, wrote various short works, among which are The Deer, 2536 and Against the Novatians, and died in the reign of Emperor Theodosian, in extreme old age.
Footnotes
381:2535Bishop about 360, died about 390.
381:2536Deer,This title has given rise to a good deal of conjecture. Fabricius’s conjecture that it referred to certain games held on the Kalends of January is doubted by Vallarsi, but appears to have been really acute, from the fact that two mss. read “The deer [Cervulus] on the Kalends of January and against other pagan games.”
Chapter CVII.
Photinus, 2537 of Gallograecia, a disciple of Marcellus, and ordained bishop of Sirmium, attempted to introduce the Ebionite heresy, and afterwards having been expelled from the church by the Emperor Valentinianus, wrote many volumes, among which the most distinguished are Against the nations, and To Valentinianus.
Footnotes
381:2537Bishop about 347, deposed 351, died about 376.
Chapter CVIII.
Phoebadius, 2538 bishop of Agen, in Gaul, published a book Against the Arians. There are said to be other works by him, which I have not yet read. He is still living, infirm with age.
Footnotes
381:2538Bishop 358, died about 392.
Chapter CIX.
Didymus, 2539 of Alexandria, becoming blind while very young, and therefore ignorant of the rudiments of learning, displayed such a miracle of intelligence as to learn perfectly dialectics and even geometry, sciences which especially require sight. He wrote many admirable works: Commentaries on all the Psalms, Commentaries on the Gospels of Matthew and John, On the doctrines, also two books Against the Arians, and one book On the Holy Spirit, which I translated in Latin, eighteen volumes On Isaiah, three books of commentaries On Hosea, addressed to me, and five books On Zechariah, written at my request, also commentaries On Job, and many other things, to give an account of which would be a work of itself. 2540 He is still living, and has already passed his eighty-third year.
Footnotes
381:2539Born about 311, flourished about 315, died 396.
381:2540itself“The titles of which are well known.” Matougues.
Chapter CX.
Optatus 2541 the African, bishop of Milevis, 2542 during the reign of the Emperors Valentinianus and Valens, wrote in behalf of the Catholic party six books against the calumny of the Donatian party, in which he asserts that the crime of the Donatists is falsely charged upon the catholic party.
Footnotes
381:2541Flourished about 370.
381:2542Milevis or Mileum = Milah “a town of Numidia 25 miles north-west of Cirta.” Phillott.
Chapter CXI.
Acilius Severus 2543 of Spain, of the family of that Severus to whom Lactantius’ two books of Epistles are addressed, composed a volume of mingled poetry and prose which is a sort of guide book to his whole life. This he called Calamity or Trial. 2544 He died in the reign of Valentinianus.
Footnotes
382:2543Died before 376. Fabricius and Migne read Aquilus, Honorius has Achilius but the mss. read as above. This is the only source of information and the work is lost.
382:2544Trial“Vicissitudes or proofs.” Matougues.
Chapter CXII.
Cyril, 2545 bishop of Jerusalem often expelled by the church, and at last received, held the episcopate for eight consecutive years, in the reign of Theodosius. Certain Catachetical lectures of his, composed while he was a young man, are extant.
Footnotes
382:2545Cyril of Jerusalem, born about 315, Bishop 350–7, 359–60, 362–7, 378 to his death in 386.
Chapter CXIII.
Euzoius, 2546 as a young man, together with Gregory, bishop of Nazianzan, was educated by Thespesius the rhetorician at Cæsarea, and afterwards when bishop of the same city, with great pains attempted to restore the library, collected by Origen and Pamphilus, which had already suffered injury. At last, in the reign of the Emperor Theodosian, he was expelled from the church. Many and various treatises of his are in circulation, and one may easily become acquainted with them.
Footnotes
382:2546Deposed about 379.
Chapter CXIV.
Epiphanius, 2547 bishop of Salamina in Cyprus, wrote books Against all heresies and many others which are eagerly read by the learned, on account of their subject matter, and also by the plain people, on account of their language. He is still living, and in his extreme old age composes various brief works.
Footnotes
382:2547Born about 310, bishop about 368–9, died 403.
Chapter CXV.
Ephraim, 2548 deacon of the church at Edessa, composed many works in the Syriac language, and became so distinguished that his writings are repeated publicly in some churches, after the reading of the Scriptures.
I once read in Greek a volume by him On the Holy Spirit, which some one had translated from the Syriac, and recognized even in translation, the incisive power of lofty genius. He died in the reign of Valens.
Footnotes
382:2548Ephrem of Nisibis = Ephrem Syrus died 378.
Chapter CXVI.
Basil, 2549 bishop of Cæsarea in Cappadocia, the city formerly called Mazaca, composed admirable carefully written books Against Eunomius, a volume On the Holy Spirit, and nine homilies On the six days of creation, also a work On asceticism and short treatises on various subjects. He died in the reign of Gratianus.
Footnotes
382:2549Basil the Great, born 329, bishop 370 died 379.
Chapter CXVII.
Gregory, 2550 bishop of Nazianzen, a most eloquent man, and my instructor in the Scriptures, composed works, amounting in all to thirty thousand lines, among which are On the death of his brother Cæsarius, On charity, In praise of the Maccabees, In praise of Cyprian, In praise of Athanasius, In praise of Maximus the philosopher after he had returned from exile. This latter however, some superscribe with the pseudonym of Herona, since there is another work by Gregory, upbraiding this same Maximus, as if one might not praise and upbraid the same person at one time or another as the occasion may demand. Other works of his are a book in hexameter, containing, A discussion between virginity and marriage, two books Against Eunomius, one book On the Holy Spirit, and one Against the Emperor Julian. He was a follower of Polemon in his style of speaking. Having ordained his successor in the bishopric, during his own life time, he retired to the country where he lived the life of a monk and died, three years or more ago, in the reign of Theodosius.
Footnotes
382:2550Gregory Nazianzan born about 325, Bishop 373, died 389.
Chapter CXVIII.
Lucius, 2551 bishop of the Arian party after Athanasius, held the bishopric of the church at Alexandria, until the time of the Emperor Theodosius, by whom he was deposed. Certain festal epistles of his, On the passover are extant, and a few short works of Miscellaneous propositions.
Footnotes
382:2551Lucius bishop of Samosata, at Alexandria 373, deposed 378.
Chapter CXIX.
Diodorus, 2552 bishop of Tarsus enjoyed a great reputation while he was still presbyter of Antioch. Commentaries of his On the epistles are extant, as well as many other works in the manner of Eusebius the great of Emesa, whose meaning he has followed, but whose eloquence he could not imitate on account of his ignorance of secular literature.
Footnotes
382:2552Died before 394.
Chapter CXX.
Eunomius, 2553 bishop of Cyzicus and member of the Arian party, fell into such open blasphemy in his heresy, as to proclaim publicly what the others concealed. He is said to be still living in Cappadocia, and to write much against the church. Replies to him have been made by Apollinarius, Didymus, Basil of Cæsarea, Gregory Nazianzen, and Gregory of Nyssa.
Footnotes
383:2553Bishop 360, died before 396.
Chapter CXXI.
Priscillianus, 2554 bishop of Abila, belonged to the party of Hydatius and Ithacius, and was put to death at Trèves by the tyrant Maximus. He published many short writings, some of which have reached us. He is still accused by some, of being tainted with Gnosticism, that is, with the heresy of Basilides or Mark, of whom Irenæus writes, while his defenders maintain that he was not at all of this way of thinking.
Footnotes
383:2554Flourished 379, condemned 380, died 385.
Chapter CXXII.
Latronianus, 2555 of Spain, a man of great learning, and in the matter of versification worthy to be compared with the poets of ancient time, was also put to death at Trèves with Priscillianus, Felicissimus, Julianus, and Euchrotia, coöriginators with him of schism. Various fruits of his genius written in different metres are extant.
Footnotes
383:2555Died 385.
Chapter CXXIII.
Tiberianus, 2556 the Baetican, in answer to an insinuation that he shared the heresy of Priscillian, wrote an apology in pompous and mongrel language. But after the death of his friends, overcome by the tediousness of exile, he changed his mind, as it is written in Holy Scripture “the dog returned to his vomit,” and married a nun, a virgin dedicated to Christ.
Footnotes
383:2556End of 4th Century.
Chapter CXXIV.
Ambrose 2557 a bishop of Milan, at the present time is still writing. I withhold my judgment of him, because he is still alive, fearing either to praise or blame lest in the one event, I should be blamed for adulation, and in the other for speaking the truth.
Footnotes
383:2557Born about 340, baptized 374, died 397.
Chapter CXXV.
Evagrius, 2558 bishop of Antioch, a man of remarkably keen mind, while he was yet presbyter read me various treatises on various topics, which he had not yet published. He translated also the Life of the blessed Anthony from the Greek of Athanasius into our language.
Footnotes
383:2558Bishop of Antioch, 388, died 393.
Chapter CXXVI.
Ambrose 2559 of Alexandria, pupil of Didymus, wrote a long work On doctrines against Apollinaris, and as some one has lately informed me, Commentaries on Job. He is still living.
Footnotes
383:2559Died after 392.
Chapter CXXVII.
Maximus 2560 the philosopher, born at Alexandria, ordained bishop at Constantinople and deposed, wrote a remarkable work On faith against the Arians and gave it to the Emperor Gratianus, at Milan.
Footnotes
383:2560A Cynic. Bishop 379.
Chapter CXXVIII.
Gregory 2561 bishop of Nyssa, the brother of Basil of Cæsarea, a few years since read to Gregory Nazianzan and myself a work against Eunomius. He is said to have also written many other works, and to be still writing.
Footnotes
383:2561Born 339–2, bishop 372, deposed 376, restored 378, died after 394.
Chapter CXXIX.
John, 2562 presbyter of the church at Antioch, a follower of Eusebius of Emesa and Diodorus, is said to have composed many books, but of these I have only read his On the priesthood.
Footnotes
383:2562John Chrysostom born at Antioch about 347, at Constantinople 398, deposed 403, died 407.
Chapter CXXX.
Gelasius, 2563 bishop of Cæsarea in Palestine after Euzoius, is said to write more or less in carefully polished style, but not to publish his works.
Footnotes
383:2563Bishop 379, died 394–5.
Chapter CXXXI.
Theotimus, 2564 bishop of Tomi, in Scythia, has published brief and epigrammatical treatises, in the form of dialogues, and in olden style. I hear that he is now writing other works.
Footnotes
383:2564Bishop of Tomes? 392–403.
Chapter CXXXII.
Dexter, 2565 son of Pacianus whom I mentioned above, distinguished in his generation and devoted to the Christian faith, has, I am told, written a Universal History, which I have not yet read.
Footnotes
384:2565Flavius Lucius Dexter flourished 395.
Chapter CXXXIII.
Amphilochius, 2566 bishop of Iconium, recently read to me a book On the Holy Spirit, arguing that He is God, that He is to be worshipped, and that He is omnipotent.
Footnotes
384:2566Amphilochius of Cappadocia, bishop 375, died about 400.
Chapter CXXXIV.
Sophronius, 2567 a man of superlative learning, wrote while yet a lad, In praise of Bethlehem and recently a notable volume, On the overthrow of Serapis, and also to Eustachius, On virginity, and a Life of Hilarion the monk. He rendered short works of mine into Greek in a very finished style, the Psalter also, and the Prophets, which I translated from Hebrew into Latin.
Footnotes
384:2567Flourished 392. Author also of Greek translation of Jerome’s Illustrious Men?
Chapter CXXXV.
I, Jerome, 2568 son of Eusebius, of the city of Strido, which is on the border of Dalmatia and Pannonia and was overthrown by the Goths, up to the present year, that is, the fourteenth of the Emperor Theodosius, have written the following: Life of Paul the monk, one book of Letters to different persons, an Exhortation to Heliodorus, Controversy of Luciferianus and Orthodoxus, Chronicle of universal history, 28 homilies of Origen on Jeremiah and Ezekiel, which I translated from Greek into Latin, On the Seraphim, On Osanna, On the prudent and the prodigal sons, On three questions of the ancient law, Homilies on the Song of Songs two, Against Helvidius, On the perpetual virginity of Mary, To Eustochius, On maintaining virginity, one book of Epistles to Marcella, a consolatory letter to Paula On the death of a daughter, three books of Commentaries on the epistle of Paul to the Galatians, likewise three books of Commentaries on the epistle to the Ephesians, On the epistle to Titus one book, On the epistle to Philemon one, Commentaries on Ecclesiastes, one book of Hebrew questions on Genesis, one book On places in Judea, one book of Hebrew names, Didymus on the Holy Spirit, which I translated into Latin one book, 39 homilies on Luke 2569 On Psalms 10 to 16, seven books, On the captive Monk, The Life of the blessed Hilarion. I translated the New Testament from the Greek, and the Old Testament from the Hebrew, 2570 and how many Letters I have written To Paula and Eustochius I do not know, for I write daily. I wrote moreover, two books of Explanations on Micah, one book On Nahum, two books On Habakkuk, one On Zephaniah, one On Haggai, and many others On the prophets, which are not yet finished, and which I am still at work upon. 2571
Footnotes
384:2568Born 331, died 420.
384:256939 homilies, T 25 30 Her.; 39 homilies of Origen A H 31 e a etc.
384:2570The Old Testament from the Hebrew A H 30 31 a e; omit T 25 Her.
384:2571There are many brief additions to the chapter on Jerome himself, the most common one (B C D I S V W X Y Z 1 2 4 5 6 7 9 11 12 14 15 17 19 20 21 26 27 28 33 42 m o p r t u v y z) being “Two books Against Jovinian and an Apology addressed to Pammachus.” Some add also “and an Epitaphium.” A and k give a long additional account of Jerome.
III. Gennadius.
List of the Authors whom Gennadius added, after the Death of the Blessed Jerome. 2572
1. James; surnamed the Wise.
2. Julius, bishop of Rome.
3. Paulonas the presbyter.
4. Vitellius the African.
5. Macrobius the presbyter.
6. Heliodorus the presbyter.
7. Pachomius the presbyter-monk.
8. Theodorus, his successor.
9. Oresiesis the monk.
10. Macarius the monk.
11. Evagrius the monk.
12. Theodorus the presbyter.
13. Prudentius.
14. Audentius the bishop.
15. Commodianus.
16. Faustinus the presbyter.
17. Rufinus the presbyter.
18. Tichonius the African.
19. Severus the presbyter.
20. Antiochus the bishop.
21. Severianus the bishop.
22. Nicaeas the bishop.
23. Olympius the bishop.
24. Bachiarius.
25. Sabbatius the bishop.
26. Isaac.
27. Ursinus.
28. Another Macarius.
29. Heliodorus the presbyter.
30. John, bishop of Constantinople.
31. John, another bishop.
32. Paulus the bishop.
33. Helvidius.
34. Theophilus the bishop.
35. Eusebius the bishop.
36. Vigilantius the presbyter.
37. Simplicianus the bishop.
38. Vigilius the bishop.
39. Augustine the bishop.
40. Orosius the presbyter.
41. Maximus the bishop.
42. Petronius the bishop.
43. Pelagius the heresiarch.
44. Innocentius the bishop.
45. Caelestius, follower of Pelagius.
46. Julianus the bishop.
47. Lucianus the presbyter.
48. Avitus the presbyter.
49. Paulinus the bishop.
50. Eutropius the presbyter.
51. Another Evagrius.
52. Vigilius the deacon.
53. Atticus the holy bishop.
54. Nestorius the heresiarch.
55. Caelestinus the bishop.
56. Theodorus the bishop.
57. Fastidius the bishop.
58. Cyrillus the bishop.
59. Timotheus the bishop.
60. Leporius the presbyter.
61. Victorinus the rhetorician.
62. Cassianus the deacon.
63. Philippus the presbyter.
64. Eucherius the bishop.
65. Vincentius the Gaul.
66. Syagrius.
67. Isaac the presbyter.
68. Salvianus the presbyter.
69. Paulinus the bishop.
70. Hilarius the bishop.
71. Leo the bishop.
72. Mochimus the presbyter.
73. Timotheus the bishop.
74. Asclepius the bishop.
75. Peter the presbyter.
76. Paul the presbyter.
77. Pastor the bishop.
78. Victor the bishop.
79. Voconius the bishop.
80. Musaeus the presbyter.
81. Vincentius the presbyter.
82. Cyrus the monk.
83. Samuel the presbyter.
84. Claudianus the presbyter.
85. Prosper.
86. Faustus the bishop.
87. Servus Dei the bishop.
88. Victorius.
89. Theodoritus the bishop.
90. Gennadius the bishop.
91. Theodulus the presbyter.
92. John the presbyter.
93. Sidonius the bishop.
94. Gelasius the bishop.
95. Honoratus the bishop.
96. Cerealis the bishop.
97. Eugenius the bishop.
98. Pomerius the bishop.
99. Gennadius.
Footnotes
385:2572List…Jerome. This is in a few mss. only.
Chapter I.
James, 2573 surnamed the Wise, was bishop of Nisibis the famous city of the Persians and one of the confessors under Maximinus the persecutor. He was also one of those who, in the Nicean council, by their opposition overthrew the Arian perversity of the Homoousia. That the blessed Jerome mentions this man in his Chronicle as a man of great virtues and yet does not place him in his catalogue of writers, will be easily explained if we note that of the three or four Syrians whom he mentions he says that he read them translated into the Greek. From this it is evident that, at that period, he did not know the Syriac language or literature and therefore he did not know a writer who had not yet been translated into another language. All his writings are contained in twenty-six books namely On faith, Against all heresies, On charity towards all, On fasting, On prayer, On particular affection towards our neighbor, On the resurrection, On the life after death, On humility, On penitence, 2574 On satisfaction, On virginity, On the worth 2575 of the soul, On circumcision, On the blessed grapes, On the saying in Isaiah, “the grape cluster shall not be destroyed,” That Christ is the son of God and consubstantial with the Father, On chastity, Against the Nations, On the construction of the tabernacle, On the conversation of the nations, On the Persian kingdom, On the persecution of the Christians. He composed also a Chronicle of little interest indeed to the Greeks, but of great reliability in that it is constructed only on the authority of the Divine Scriptures. It shuts the mouths of those who, on some daring guess, idly philosophize concerning the advent of Antichrist, or of our Lord. This man died in the time of Constantius and according to the direction of his father Constantine was buried within the walls of Nisibis, for the protection evidently of the city, and it turned out as Constantine had expected. For many years after, Julian having entered Nisibis and grudging either the glory of him who was buried there or the faith of Constantine, whose family he persecuted on account of this envy, ordered the remains of the saint to be carried out of the city, and a few months later, as a matter of public policy, the Emperor Jovian who succeeded Julian, gave over to the barbarians the city which, with the adjoining territory, is subject unto the Persian rule until this day.
Footnotes
386:2573Became bishop before 325, died after 350.
386:2574On penitence. A few mss. read “patience” for “penitence” but the only one which the translator has been able to find which gives both is one at Wolfenbüttel dated 1460, nor is it in the earliest editions (e.g.) Nürn. Koburger 1495, Paris 1512). But the later editions (Fabricius, Herding) have both.
386:2575worth, mss. generally; feeling, editions generally.
Chapter II.
Julius, 2576 bishop of Rome, wrote to one Dionysius a single epistle On the incarnation of Our Lord, which at that time was regarded as useful against those who asserted that, as by incarnation there were two persons in Christ, so also there were two natures, but now this too is regarded as injurious for it nourishes the Eutychian and Timothean heresies.
Footnotes
386:2576Bishop (Pope) 337, died 352.
Chapter III.
Paulonas, 2577 the Presbyter, disciple of the blessed deacon Ephraim a man of very energetic character and learned in the holy scriptures was distinguished among the doctors of the church while his master was still living and especially as an extemporaneous orator. After the death of his master, overcome by love of reputation, separating himself from the church, he wrote many things opposed to the faith. The blessed Ephraim when on the point of death is reported to have said to him as he stood by his side—See to it, Paulonas that you do not yield yourself to your own ideas, but when you shall think that you understand God wholly, believe that you have not known,—for he felt beforehand from the studies or the words of Paulonus, that he was investigating new things, and was stretching out his mind to the illimitable, whence also he frequently called him the new Bardesanes.
Footnotes
386:2577Flourished 370.
Chapter IV.
Vitellius 2578 the African, defending the Donatist schism wrote Why the servants of God are hated by the world, in which, except in speaking of us as persecutors, he published excellent doctrine. He wrote also Against the nations and against us as traditors of the Holy Scriptures in times of persecution, and wrote much On ecclesiastical procedure. He was distinguished during the reign of Constans son of the emperor Constantinus.
Footnotes
386:2578Fourth century.
Chapter V.
Macrobius 2579 the Presbyter was likewise as I learned from the writings of Optatus, afterwards secretly bishop of the Donatians in Rome. He wrote, having been up to this time a presbyter in the church of God, a work To confessors and virgins, a work of ethics indeed, but of very necessary doctrine as well and fortified with sentiments well fitted for the preservation of chastity. He was distinguished first in our party in Africa and afterwards in his own, that is among the Donatians or Montanists at Rome.
Footnotes
386:2579Bishop about 370.
Chapter VI.
Heliodorus 2580 the Presbyter wrote a book entitled An introductory treatise on the nature of things, in which he showed that the beginning of things was one, that nothing was coaeval with God, that God was not the creator of evil, but in such wise the creator of all good, that matter, which is used for 2581 evil, was created by God after evil was discovered, and that nothing material whatever can be regarded as established in any other way than by God, and that there was no other creator than God, who, when by His foreknowledge He knew that nature was to be changed, 2582 warned of punishment.
Footnotes
387:2580About 360.
387:2581Used for T 35 31 a e 21; inclined to 30? ? Fabr. Her.
387:2582changed A T 25 30 31 a e 21 10 Bamb. Bern. Gemblac. Sigberg. Guelfenb.; given over to death Fabr. Her. etc.
Chapter VII.
Pachomius 2583 the monk, a man endowed with apostolic grace both in teaching and in performing miracles, and founder of the Egyptian monasteries, wrote an Order of discipline suited to both classes of monks, which he received by angelic dictation. He wrote letters also to the associated bishops of his district, in an alphabet concealed by mystic sacraments so as to surpass customary human knowledge and only manifest to those of special grace or desert, that is To the Abbot Cornelius one, To the Abbot Syrus one, and one To the heads of all monasteries exhorting that, gathered together to one very ancient monastery which is called in the Egyptian language Bau, they should celebrate the day of the Passover together as by everlasting law. He urged likewise in another letter that on the day of remission, which is celebrated in the month of August, the chief bishops should be gathered together to one place, and wrote one other letter to the brethren who had been sent to work outside the monasteries.
Footnotes
387:2583Born about 292, died 348.
Chapter VIII.
Theodorus, 2584 successor to the grace and the headship of the above mentioned Abbot Pachomius, addressed to other monasteries letters written in the language of Holy Scripture, in which nevertheless he frequently mentions his master and teacher Pachomius and sets forth his doctrine and life as examples. This he had been taught he said by an Angel that he himself might teach again. He likewise exhorts them to remain by the purpose of their heart and desire, and to restore to harmony and unity those who, a dissension having arisen after the death of the Abbot, had broken the unity by separating themselves from the community. Three hortatory epistles of his are extant.
Footnotes
387:2584Born about 314, died 367.
Chapter IX.
Oresiesis 2585 the monk, the colleague of both Pachomius and Theodorus, a man learned to perfection in Scripture, 2586 composed a book seasoned with divine salt and formed of the essentials of all monastic discipline and to speak moderately, in which almost the whole Old and New Testament is found set forth in compact dissertations—all, at least, which relates to the special needs of monks. This he gave to his brethren almost on the very day of his death leaving, as it were, a legacy.
Footnotes
387:2585Died about 380.
387:2586Scripture 25 30 a e 10: Holy Scriptures A T 31 21.
Chapter X.
Macarius, 2587 the Egyptian monk, distinguished for his miracles and virtues, wrote one letter which was addressed to the younger men of his profession. In this he taught them that he could serve God perfectly who, knowing the condition of his creation, should devote himself to all labours, and by wrestling against every thing which is agreeable in this life, and at the same time imploring the aid of God would attain also to natural purity and obtain continence, as a well merited gift of nature.
Footnotes
387:2587Born about 300, died 390 (391).
Chapter XI.
Evagrius 2588 the monk, the intimate disciple of the above mentioned Macarius, educated in 2589 sacred and profane literature and distinguished, whom the book which is called the Lives of the fathers mentions as a most continent and erudite man, wrote many things of use to monks among which are these: Suggestions against the eight principal sins. He was first to mention or among the first at least to teach these setting against them eight books taken from the testimony of the Holy Scriptures only, after the example of our Lord, who always met his tempter with quotations from Scripture, so that every suggestion, whether of the devil or of depraved nature had a testimony against it. This work I have, under instructions, translated into Latin translating with the same simplicity which I found in the Greek. He composed also a book of One hundred sentiments for those living simply as anchorites, arranged by chapters, and one of Fifty sentiments for the erudite and studious, which I first translated into Latin. The former one, translated before, I restored, partly by retranslating and partly by emendation, so as to represent the true meaning of the author, because I saw that the translation was vitiated and confused by time. He composed also a doctrine of the common-life suited to Cenobites and Synodites, 2590 and to the virgin consecrated to God, a little book suitable to her religion and sex. He published also a few collections of opinions very obscure and, as he himself says of them, only to be understood by the hearts of monks, and these likewise I published in Latin. He lived to old age, mighty in signs and miracles.
Footnotes
387:2588Born 345, died 399.
387:2589educated in T 31 e Her.; omit A 25 30 a.
388:2590Synodites a kind of monks.
Chapter XII.
Theodorus, 2591 presbyter of the church at Antioch, a cautious investigator and clever of tongue, wrote against the Apollinarians and Anomians On the incarnation of the Lord, fifteen books containing as many as fifteen thousand verses, in which he showed by the clearest reasoning and by the testimony of Scripture that just as the Lord Jesus had a plenitude of deity, so he had a plenitude of humanity. He taught also that man consists only of two substances, soul and body and that sense and spirit are not different substances, but inherent inborn faculties of the soul through which it is inspired and has rationality and through which it makes the body capable of feeling. Moreover the fourteenth book of this work treats wholly of the uncreated and alone incorporeal and ruling nature of the holy Trinity and of the rationality of animals which he explains in a devotional spirit, on the authority of Holy Scriptures. In the fifteenth volume he confirms and fortifies the whole body of his work by citing the traditions of the fathers.
Footnotes
388:2591Theodore of Mopsuesta (?), born at Antioch (?) about 350, died 428.
Chapter XIII.
Prudentius, 2592 a man well versed in secular literature, composed a Trocheum 2593 of selected persons from the whole Old and New Testament. He wrote a commentary also, after the fashion of the Greeks, On the six days of creation from creation of the world until the creation of the first man and his fall. He wrote also short books which are entitled in the Greek, Apotheosis, Psychomachia and Hamartigenia, that is On divinity, On spiritual conflict, On the origin of sin. He wrote also In praise of martyrs, an invitation to martyrdom in one book citing several as examples and another of Hymns, but specially directed Against Symmachus 2594 who defended idolatry, from which we learn that Palatinus was a soldier.
Footnotes
388:2592Born at Saragossa 348, was at Rome in 405, died in Spain 408?
388:2593Trocheum. There is much controversy over the word, some maintaining that it should be Dittochaeon= “the double food or double testament” (Lock in Smith and Wace) or Diptychon. It is a description of a series of pictures from the Bible. The mss. read Trocheum a.e.; Troceum T 25; Trocetum 30; Trocleum A; Tropeum 31. A recent monograph on the subject has not yet come to hand.
388:2594Symmachus. Two works are here confused, the work against Symmachus, and the Cathemerinon hymns, in the preface to which the quotation occurs.
Chapter XIV.
Audentius, 2595 bishop of Spain, wrote a book against the Manicheans, Sabellians and Arians and very particularly against the Photinians who are now called Bonosiacians. This book he entitled On faith against heretics, and in it he showed the Son to have been coeternal with the Father and that He did not receive the beginning of his deity from God the Father, at the time when conceived by the act of God, he was born of the Virgin Mary his mother in true humanity.
Footnotes
388:2595Bishop of Toledo about 390. (Chevalier) or in the reign of Constantius (Ceillier), 370 (Hoefer).
Chapter XV.
Commodianus, 2596 while he was engaged in secular literature read also our writings and, finding opportunity, accepted the faith. Having become a Christian thus and wishing to offer the fruit of his studies to Christ the author of his salvation, he wrote, in barely tolerable semi-versified language, Against the pagans, and because he was very little acquainted with our literature he was better able to overthrow their [doctrine] than to establish ours. Whence also, contending against them concerning the divine counterpromises, he discoursed in a sufficiently wretched and so to speak, gross fashion, to their stupefaction and our despair. Following Tertullian, Lactantius and Papias as authorities he adopted and inculcated in his students good ethical principles and especially a voluntary love of poverty.
Footnotes
388:2596Flourished about 270. There is wide variety of opinion respecting this date, some placing as early as 250 and some nearly one hundred years later.
Chapter XVI.
Faustinus 2597 the presbyter wrote to Queen Flaccilla seven books Against the Arians and Macedonians, arguing and convicting them by the testimonies of the very Scriptures which they used, in perverted meaning, for blasphemy. He wrote also a book which, together with a certain presbyter named Marcellinus, he addressed to the emperors Valentinianus, Theodosius and Arcadius, in defence of their fellow Christians. From this it appears that he acquiesced in the Luciferian schism, in that in this same book he blames Hilary of Poitiers and Damasus, bishop of Rome, for giving ill-advised counsel to the church, advising that the apostate 2598 bishops should be received into communion for the sake of restoring the peace. For it was as displeasing to the Luciferians to receive the bishops who in the Ariminian council had communed with Arius, as it was to the Novatians to receive the penitent apostates.
Footnotes
389:2597Flourished about 384.
389:2598Apostate = prevaricatores.
Chapter XVII.
Rufinus, 2599 presbyter of the church at Aquileia, was not the least among the doctors of the church and had a fine talent for elegant translation from Greek into Latin. In this way he opened to the Latin speaking church the greater part of the Greek literature; translating the works of Basil of Cæsarea in Cappadocia, Gregory Nazianzan, that most eloquent man, the Recognitions of Clement of Rome, the Church history of Eusebius of Cæsarea in Palestine, the Sentences of Xystus, 2600 the Sentences of Evagrius and the work of Pamphilus Martyr Against the mathematicians. Whatever among all these which are read by the Latins have prefatory matter, have been translated by Rufinus, but those which are without Prologue have been translated by some one else who did not choose to write a prologue. Not all of Origen, however, is his work, for Jerome translated some which are identified by his prologue. On his own account, the same Rufinus, ever through the grace of God published an Exposition of the Apostles’ creed so excellent that other expositions are regarded as of no account in comparison. He also wrote in a threefold sense, that is, the historical, moral and mystical sense, on Jacob’s blessing on the patriarchs. He wrote also many epistles exhorting to fear of God, among which those which he addressed to Proba are preëminent. He added also a tenth and eleventh book to the ecclesiastical history which we have said was written by Eusebius and translated by him. Moreover he responded to a detractor of his works, in two volumes, arguing and proving that he exercised his talent with the aid of the Lord and in the sight of God, for the good of the church, while he, on the other hand, incited by jealousy had taken to polemics.
Footnotes
389:2599Born 345, at Jerusalem about 390, died 410.
389:2600XystusT 25 30 e; Sextus A 31 a Xystus of Rome T Her.
Chapter XVIII.
Tichonius, 2601 an African by nationality was, it is said, sufficiently learned in sacred literature, not wholly unacquainted with secular literature and zealous in ecclesiastical affairs. He wrote books On internal war and Expositions of various causes in which for the defence of his friends, he cites the ancient councils and from all of which 2602 he is recognized to have been a Donatist. He composed also eight Rules for investigating and ascertaining the meaning of the Scriptures, compressing them into one volume. He also expounded the Apocalypse of John entire, regarding nothing in it in a carnal sense, but all in a spiritual sense. In this exposition he maintained the angelical nature 2603 to be corporeal, moreover he doubts that there will be a reign of the righteous on earth for a thousand years after the resurrection, or that there will be two resurrections of the dead in the flesh, one of the righteous and the other of the unrighteous, but maintains that there will be one simultaneous resurrection of all, at which shall arise even the aborted and the deformed lest any living human being, however deformed, should be lost. He makes such distinction to be sure, between the two resurrections as to make the first, which he calls the apocalypse of the righteous, only to take place in the growth of the church where, justified by faith, they are raised from the dead bodies of their sins through baptism to the service of eternal life, but the second, the general resurrection of all men in the flesh. This man flourished at the same period with the above mentioned Rufinus during the reign of Theodosius and his sons.
Footnotes
389:2601399.
389:2602from all of which A 25 30 31 a; from which e T Her.
389:2603angelical nature etc., “that the human body is an abode of angels” (angelicam stationem corpus esse) Phillott, in Smith and Wace.
Chapter XIX.
Severus 2604 the presbyter, surnamed Sulpitius, of the province of Aquitania, a man distinguished by his birth, by his excellent literary work, by his devotion to poverty and by his humility, beloved also of the sainted men Martin bishop of Tours and Paulinus Nolanus, wrote small books which are far from despicable. He wrote to his sister many Letters exhorting to love of God and contempt of the world. These are well known. He wrote two to the above mentioned Paulinus Nolanus and others to others, but because, in some, family matters are included, they have not been collected for publication. He composed also a Chronicle, and wrote also to the profit of many, a Life of the holy Martin, monk and bishop, a man famous for signs and wonders and virtues. 2605 He also wrote a Conference between Postumianus and Gallus, in which he himself acted as mediator and judge of the debate. The subject matter was the manner of life of the oriental monks and of St. Martin—a sort of dialogue in two divisions. In the first of these he mentions a decree of the bishops at the synod of Alexandria in his own time to the effect that Origen is to be read, though cautiously, by those who are wise, for the good that is in him, and is to be rejected by the less able on account of the evil. In his old age, he was led astray by the Pelagians, and recognizing the guilt of much speaking, kept silent until his death, in order that by penitent silence he might atone for the sin which he had contracted by speaking.
Footnotes
389:2604Sulpicius Severus born after 353, died about 410.
390:2605Virtues or miracles.
Chapter XX.
Antiochus 2606 the bishop, wrote one long 2607 volume Against avarice and he composed a homily, full of 2608 godly penitence and humility On the healing of the blind man whose sight was restored by the Saviour. He died during the reign of the emperor Arcadius.
Footnotes
390:2606Bishop of Ptolemais (Acre) about 400, died about 408.
390:2607long. a 25 30 31; great A T e.
390:2608full of A 25 30 31 a e; on T 21 Her.
Chapter XXI.
Severianus, 2609 bishop of the church of Gabala, was learned in the Holy Scriptures and a wonderful preacher of homilies. On this account he was frequently summoned by the bishop John and the emperor Arcadius to preach a sermon at Constantinople. I have read his Exposition of the epistle to the Galatians and a most attractive little work On baptism and the feast of Epiphany. He died in the reign of Theodosius, his son by baptism.
Footnotes
390:2609Severianus of Emesa. Bishop 400–3, died after 408.
Chapter XXII.
Niceas, 2610 2611 bishop of the city of Romatia, composed, in simple and clear language, six books of Instruction for neophites. The first of these contains, How candidates who seek to obtain grace of baptism ought to act, the second, On the errors of relationship, in which he relates that not far from his own time a certain Melodius, father of a family, on account of his liberality and Garadius 2612 a peasant, on account of his bravery, were placed, by the heathen, among the gods. A third book On faith in one sovereign, a fourth Against genealogy, 2613 a fifth On the creed, a sixth On the sacrifice of the paschal lamb. He addressed a work also To the fallen virgin, an incentive to amendment for all who have fallen.
Footnotes
390:2610Nicetas Bishop of “Remessianen” or Romaciana or Remetiana in Dacia before 392, died after 414.
390:2611T and 31 read Niceta or Nicetas, but other mss. Niceas and so Fabricius and Her.
390:2612Garadius A T 31 a e; Gadarius 25 30 Her.
390:2613Genealogy T 25 30 21; genethlogiam 31 a e.
Chapter XXIII.
Olympius 2614 the bishop, a Spaniard by nationality, wrote a book of faith against those who blame nature and not the will, showing that evil was introduced into nature not by creation but by disobedience.
Footnotes
390:2614Bishop of Barcelona about 316.
Chapter XXIV.
Bachiarius, 2615 a Christian philosopher, prompt and ready and minded to devote his time to God, chose travel as a means of preserving the integrity of his purpose. He is said to have published acceptable small works but I have only read one of them, a work On faith, in which he justified himself to the chief priest of the city, defending himself against those who complained and misrepresented his travel, and asserting that he undertook his travel not through fear of men but for the sake of God, that going forth from his land and kindred he might become a co-heir with Abraham the patriarch.
Footnotes
390:2615A Spanish bishop. Flourished about 400.
Chapter XXV.
Sabbatius, 2616 bishop of the Gallican province, at the request of a certain virgin, chaste and devoted to Christ, Secunda by name, composed a book On faith against Marcion and Valentinus his teacher, also against Eunomius and his Master Aëtius, showing, both by reason and by testimony of the Scriptures, that the origin of the deity is one, that the Author of his eternity and the Creator of the earth out of nothing, are one and the same, and likewise concerning Christ, that he did not appear as man in a phantasm but had real flesh through which eating, drinking, weary and weeping, suffering, dying, rising again he was demonstrated to be man indeed. For Marcion and Valentinus had been opposed to these opinions asserting that the origin of Deity is twofold and that Christ came in a phantasm. To Aëtius indeed and Eunomius his disciple, he showed that the Father and Son are not of two natures and equal in divinity but of one essence and the one from the other, that is the Son from the Father, the one coeternal with the other, which belief Aëtius and Eunomius opposed.
Footnotes
390:2616St. Servais, Bishop of Tongres 338, died at Maestricht 384. The patron saint of Maestricht. Supposed by some to be the same as Phebadius (Faegadius, Phaebadius, Segatius, Sabadius Phitadius (called in Gascony Fiari)? bishop of Agen. Flourished 440 (Cave).
Chapter XXVI.
Isaac 2617 wrote On the Holy Trinity and a book On the incarnation of the Lord, writing in a very obscure style of argument and involved language, maintaining that three persons exist in one Deity, in such wise that any thing may be peculiar to each which another does not have, that is to say, that the Father has this peculiarity that He, himself without source, is the source of others, that the Son has this peculiarity, that, begotten, He is not posterior to the begetter, that the Holy Spirit has this peculiarity, that He is neither made nor begotten but nevertheless is from another. Of the incarnation of the Lord indeed, he writes that the person of the Son of God is believed to be one, while yet there are two natures existing in him.
Footnotes
391:2617Converted Jew, flourished about 385.
Chapter XXVII.
Ursinus 2618 the monk wrote against those who say that heretics should be rebaptized, teaching 2619 that it is not legitimate nor honouring God, that those should be rebaptized who have been baptized either in the name of Christ alone or in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, though the formula has been used in a vitiated sense. He considers that after the simple confession of the Holy Trinity and of Christ, the imposition of the hands of the catholic priest is sufficient for salvation.
Footnotes
391:2618Flourished above 440.
391:2619Omit “teaching” e T 31.
Chapter XXVIII.
Macarius 2620 another monk, wrote at Rome books Against the mathematicians, in which labour he sought the comfort of oriental writings.
Footnotes
391:2620Flourished fifth century.
Chapter XXIX.
Heliodorus, 2621 presbyter of Antioch, published an excellent volume gathered from Holy Scriptures On Virginity.
Footnotes
391:2621Flourished about 440.
Chapter XXX.
[John 2622 2623 bishop of Constantinople, a man of marvelous knowledge and in sanctity of life, in every respect worthy of imitation, wrote many and very useful works for all who are hastening to divine things. Among them are the following On compunction of soul one book, That no one is injured except by himself, an excellent volume In praise of the blessed Paul the apostle, On the excesses and ill reputation of Eutropius a prætorian prefect and many others, as I have said, which may be found by the industrious.]
Footnotes
391:2622John Chrysostom born at Antioch about 347, bishop of Constantinople 398, deposed 403, died 407.
391:2623This whole paragraph is omitted by most mss., though T and 21 have it.
Chapter XXXI.
Another John, 2624 2625 bishop of Jerusalem, wrote a book against those who disparaged his studies, in which he shows that he follows the genius of Origen not his creed.
Footnotes
391:2624Bishop 386, died 417.
391:2625JohnA 25 30 31 a e; another John [T ?] 21.
Chapter XXXII.
Paul the bishop wrote a short work On penitence in which he lays down this law for penitents; that they ought to repent for their sins in such manner that they be not beyond measure overwhelmed with despairing sadness.
Chapter XXXIII.
Helvidius, 2626 a disciple of Auxentius and imitator of Symmachus, wrote, indeed, with zeal for religion but not according to knowledge, a book, polished neither in language nor in reasoning, a work in which he so attempted to twist the meaning of the Holy Scriptures to his own perversity, as to venture to assert on their testimony that Joseph and Mary, after the nativity of our Lord, had children who were called brothers of the Lord. In reply to his perverseness Jerome, published a book against him, well filled with scripture proofs. 2627
Footnotes
391:2626Fourth century.
392:2627In reply…proofs A T 25 30 21; omit e 31 a.
Chapter XXXIV.
Theophilus, 2628 bishop of the church 2629 of Alexandria, wrote one great volume Against Origen in which he condemns pretty nearly all his sayings and himself likewise, at the same time saying that he was not original in his views but derived them from the ancient fathers especially from Heraclas, that he was deposed from 2630 the office of presbyter driven from the church and compelled to fly from the city. He also wrote Against the Anthropomorphites, heretics who say that God has the human form and members, confuting in a long discussion and arguing by testimonies of Divine Scripture and convincing. He shows that, according to the belief of the Fathers, God is to be thought of as incorporal, not formed with any suggestion of members at all, and therefore there is nothing like Him among created things in substance, nor has the incorruptibility nor unchangeableness nor incorporeality of his nature been given to any one but that all intellectual natures are corporeal, all corruptible, all mutable, that He alone should not be subject to corruptibility or changeableness, who alone has immortality and life. Likewise the return of the paschal feast which the great council at Nicea had found would take place after ninety years at the same time, the same month and day adding some observations on the festival and explanations he gave to the emperor Theodosius. I have read also three books On faith, which bear his name but, as their language is not like his, I do not very much think they are by him.
Footnotes
392:2628Bishop 385, died 412.
392:2629ChurchT 21; city A 25 30 31 a.
392:2630deposed 25 31 a e?; elect A 30; stripped of T.
Chapter XXXV.
Eusebius 2631 wrote On the mystery of our Lord’s cross and the faithfulness of the apostles, and especially of Peter, gained by virtue of the cross.
Footnotes
392:2631Bishop of Milan 451, died 462.
Chapter XXXVI.
Vigilantius, 2632 a citizen of Gaul, had the church of Barcelona. He wrote also with some zeal for religion but, overcome by the desire for human praise and presuming above his strength, being a man of polished language but not practised in the meaning of Scriptures, he expounded the vision of Daniel in a perverted sense and said other frivolous things which are necessarily mentioned in a catalogue of heretics. [To him also the blessed Jerome the presbyter responded.] 2633
Footnotes
392:2632At Jerusalem 394, heretic about 404.
392:2633to him…responded A Her.; omit T 25 30 31 a e.
Chapter XXXVII.
Simplicianus, 2634 the bishop, exhorted Augustine then presbyter, in many letters, that he should exercise his genius and take time for exposition of the Scriptures that, as it were, a new Ambrosius, the task master of Origen might appear. Wherefore also he sent to him many examinations of scriptures. There is also an epistle of his of Questions in which he teaches by asking questions as if wishing to learn.
Footnotes
392:2634Bishop of Milan 397, died 400.
Chapter XXXVIII.
Vigilius 2635 the bishop wrote to one Simplicianus a small book In praise of martyrs and an epistle containing the acts of the martyrs in his time among the barbarians.
Footnotes
392:2635Bishop of Trent 388, died 405.
Chapter XXXIX.
Augustine, 2636 of Africa, bishop of Hipporegensis, a man renowned throughout the world for learning both sacred and secular, unblemished in the faith, pure in life, wrote works so many that they cannot all be gathered. For who is there that can boast himself of having all his works, or who reads with such diligence as to read all he has written? 2637 As an old man even, he published fifteen books On the Trinity which he had begun as a young man. In which, as scripture says, brought into the chamber of the king and adorned with the manifold garment of the wisdom of God, he exhibited a church not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing. In his work On the incarnation of the Lord also he manifested a peculiar piety. On the resurrection of the dead he wrote with equal sincerity, and left it to the less able to raise doubts respecting abortions. 2638 2639
Footnotes
392:2636Born at Tagaste 354, baptized at Milan 387, bishop of Hippo 395, died 430.
392:2637all he has written e T A 30 31 a Her.; 25 Fabr. add “wherefore on account of his much speaking Solomon’s saying came true that ‘In the multitude of words there wanteth not sin.’” This expression in the editions has been the ground of much comment on Gennadius’ Semi-pelagian bias, but it almost certainly does not represent the original form of the text.
392:2638Abortions “That abortions…shall rise again I make bold neither to affirm nor to deny” Augustine De civ. Dei. 22, 13.
392:2639T 31 end thus; A omits and left…abortions but adds a few lines of other matter; e adds differing matter; a adds remained a catholic; 30 adds remained a catholic and died in the same city—the city which is still called Hypporegensis; while 25 adds a vast amount.
Chapter XL.
Orosius, 2640 a Spanish presbyter, a man most eloquent and learned in history, wrote eight books against those enemies of the Christians who say that the decay of the Roman State was caused by the Christian religion. In these rehearsing the calamities and miseries and disturbances of wars, of pretty much the whole world from the creation 2641 he shows that the Roman Empire owed to the Christian religion its undeserved continuance and the state of peace which it enjoyed for the worship of God.
In the first book he described the world situated within the ever flowing stream of Oceanus and intersected by the Tanais, giving the situations of places, the names, number and customs of nations, the characteristics of various regions, the wars begun and the formation of empires sealed with the blood of kinsmen.
This is the Orosius who, sent by Augustine to Hieronymus to teach the nature of the soul, returning, was the first to bring to the West relics of the blessed Stephen the first martyr then recently found. He flourished almost 2642 at the end of the reign of the emperor Honorius.
Footnotes
393:2640Paulus Orosius of Tarragon, the historian, flourished about 413 or 417. His history was begun after 416 and finished in 417.
393:2641from the creation (“from the whole period of the earth”) A 25 30 31 a e; omit T 21 Her.
393:2642almost25 30 31 a e; omit T A Her.
Chapter XLI.
Maximus, 2643 bishop of the church at Turin, a man fairly industrious in the study of the Holy Scripture, and good at teaching the people extemporaneously, composed treatises In praise of the apostles and John the Baptist, and a Homily on all the martyrs. Moreover he wrote many acute comments on passages from the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles. He wrote also two treatises, On the life 2644 of Saint Eusebius, bishop of Vercelli, and confessor, and On Saint Cyprian, and published a monograph On the grace of baptism. I have read his On avarice, On hospitality, On the eclipse of the moon, On almsgiving, On the saying in Isaiah, Your winedealers mix wine with water, On Our Lord’s Passion, A general treatise On fasting by the servants of God, On the quadragesimal fast in particular, and That there should be no jesting on fast day, On Judas, the betrayer, On Our Lord’s cross, On His sepulchre, On His resurrection, On the accusation and trial of Our Lord before Pontius Pilate, On the Kalends of January, a homily On the day of Our Lord’s Nativity, also homilies On Epiphany, On the Passover, On Pentecost, many also, On having no fear of carnal Foes, On giving thanks after meat, On the repentance of the Ninivites, and other homilies of his, published 2645 on various occasions, whose names I do not remember. He died in the reign of Honorius and Theodosius the younger.
Footnotes
393:2643Maximus of Vercelli, bishop of Turin about 415, died 466–470.
393:2644omit life A 30 a.
393:2645published T 30 21 Her.; delivered A 25 31 a e.
Chapter XLII.
Petronius, 2646 bishop of Bologna in Italy 2647 a man of holy life and from his youth practised in monastic studies, is reputed to have written the Lives of the Fathers, to wit of the Egyptian monks, a work which the monks accept as the mirror and pattern of their profession. I have read a treatise which bears his name On the ordination of bishops, a work full of good reasoning and notable for its humility, but whose polished style shows it not to have been his, but perhaps, as some say, the work of his father Petronius, 2648 a man of great eloquence and learned in secular literature. This I think is to be accepted, for the author of the work describes himself as a prætorian prefect. He died in the reign of Theodosius and Valentinianus.
Footnotes
393:2646Bishop of Bologna 430, died before 350.
393:2647in Italy A 30 31 a e; omit T 25 21 Her.
393:2648Petronius A 25 30 31; omit T a?
Chapter XLIII.
Pelagius 2649 the heresiarch, before he was proclaimed a heretic wrote works of practical value for students: three books On belief in the Trinity, and one book of Selections from Holy Scriptures bearing on the Christian life. This latter was preceded by tables of contents, after the model of Saint Cyprian the martyr. After he was proclaimed heretic, however, he wrote works bearing on his heresy.
Footnotes
393:2649At Rome about 400, at Carthage 411, heretic 417.
Chapter XLIV.
Innocentius, 2650 bishop of Rome, wrote the decree which the Western churches passed against the Pelagians and which his successor, Pope Zosimus, afterwards widely promulgated.
Footnotes
393:2650Bishop or “Pope” 402, died 417.
Chapter XLV.
Caelestius, 2651 before he joined Pelagius, while yet a very young man, wrote to his parents three epistles On monastic life, written as short books, and containing moral maxims suited to every one who is seeking God, containing no trace of the fault which afterwards appeared but wholly devoted to the encouragement of virtue.
Footnotes
393:2651Heretic 412–417.
Chapter XLVI.
Julianus 2652 the bishop, a man of vigorous character, learned in the Divine Scriptures, and proficient both in Greek and Latin, was, before he disclosed his participation in the ungodliness of Pelagius, distinguished among the doctors of the church. But afterwards, trying to defend the Pelagian heresy, he wrote four books, Against Augustine, the opponent of Pelagius, and then again, eight books more. There is also a book containing a discussion, where each defends his side.
This Julianus, in time of famine and want, attracting many through the alms which he gave, and the glamour of virtue, which they cast around him, associated them with him in his heresy. He died during the reign of Valentinianus, the son of Constantius.
Footnotes
394:2652Bishop of Eclanum about 416.
Chapter XLVII.
Lucianus 2653 the presbyter, a holy man to whom, at the time when Honorius and Theodosius were Emperors, God revealed the place of the sepulchre and the remains of Saint Stephen the Protomartyr, wrote out that revelation in Greek, addressing it to all the churches.
Footnotes
394:2653Lucianus of Caphargamala, flourished 415.
Chapter XLVIII.
Avitus 2654 the presbyter, a Spaniard by race, translated the above mentioned work of the presbyter Lucianus into Latin, and sent it with his letter annexed, by the hand of Orosius the presbyter, to the Western churches.
Footnotes
394:2654Avitus of Braga, died 440.
Chapter XLIX.
Paulinus, 2655 bishop of Nola in Campania, composed many brief works in verse, also a consolatory work to Celsus On the death of a christian and baptized child, a sort of epitaph, well fortified with christian hope, also many Letters to Severus, and A panegric in prose written before he became bishop, On victory over tyrants which was addressed to Theodosius and maintained that victory lay rather in faith and prayer, than in arms. He wrote also a Sacramentary and Hymnal.
He also addressed many letters to his sister, On contempt of the world, and published treatises of different sorts, on various occasions. 2656
The most notable of all his minor works are the works On repentance, and A general panegyric of all the martyrs. He lived in the reign of Honorius and Valentinianus, and was distinguished, not only for erudition 2657 and holiness of life, but also for his ability to cast out demons.
Footnotes
394:2655Pontius Meropius (Anicius?) Paulinus, Born at Bordeaux 353 (354?), pupil of Ausonius, baptized before 389, bishop before 410, died 431.
394:2656on various occasions is omitted by T 31 e.
394:2657erudition A T 31 a e 21; observation 25 30 Her.
Chapter L.
Eutropius, 2658 the presbyter, wrote to two sisters, handmaids of Christ, who had been disinherited by their parents on account of their devotion to chastity and their love for religion, two Consolatory letters in the form of small books, written in polished and clear language and fortified not only by argument, but also by testimonies from the Scriptures.
Footnotes
394:2658Pupil of Augustine about 430.
Chapter LI.
Another Evagrius 2659 wrote a Discussion between Simon the Jew and Theophilus the Christian, a work which is very well known.
Footnotes
394:2659Pupil of St. Martin of Tours 405.
Chapter LII.
Vigilius 2660 the deacon. composed out of the traditions of the fathers a Rule for monks, which is accustomed to be read in the monastery for the profit of the assembled monks. It is written in condensed and clear language and covers the whole range of monastic duties.
Footnotes
394:2660Flourished about 430.
Chapter LIII.
Atticus 2661 bishop of Constantinople, wrote to the princess daughters 2662 of the Emperor Arcadius, On faith and virginity, a most excellent work, in which he attacks by anticipation the Nestorian doctrine.
Footnotes
394:2661Bishop of Constantinople 406, died 425.
394:2662Daughters Pulcheria and her sisters.
Chapter LIV.
Nestorius 2663 2664 the heresiarch, was regarded, while presbyter of the church at Antioch, as a remarkable extemporaneous teacher, 2665 and composed a great many treatises on various Questions, into which already at that time 2666 he infused that subtle evil, which afterwards became the poison of acknowledged impiety, veiled meanwhile by moral exhortation. But afterwards, when commended by his eloquence and abstemiousness he had been made pontiff of the church at Constantinople, showing openly what he had for a long while concealed, he became a declared enemy of the church, and wrote a book On the incarnation of the Lord, formed of sixty-two passages from Divine Scripture, used in a perverted meaning. What he maintained in this book may be found in the catalogue of heretics.
Footnotes
394:2663Bishop of Constantinople 428, deposed 431, died in the Thebaid about 439.
394:2664Nestorius 25 30 Her; Nestor A T 31 a e 21.
394:2665teacher A T 30 31 a e; omit 25 Her.
395:2666at that time A T a e; omit 25 30 31.
Chapter LV.
Caelestinus, 2667 bishop of Rome, addressed a volume to the churches of the East and West, giving an account of the decree of the synod against the above mentioned Nestorius and maintaining that while there are two complete natures in Christ, the person of the Son of God is to be regarded as single. The above mentioned Nestorius was shown to be opposed to this view. Xystus likewise, the successor of Caelestinus, wrote on the same subject and to the same Nestorius and the Eastern bishops, giving the views of the Western bishops against his error.
Footnotes
395:2667Bishop (Pope) of Rome 422, died 432.
Chapter LVI.
Theodotus, 2668 2669 bishop of Ancyra in Galatia, while at 2670 Ephesus, wrote against Nestorius a work of defence and refutation, 2671 written, to be sure, in dialectic style, but interwoven with passages from the Holy Scriptures. His method was to make statements and then quote proof texts from the Scriptures.
Footnotes
395:2668Theodotus Bishop of Ancyra 431–8.
395:2669Theodotus T ? a e; Theodorus a 25 30 31 Fabr. Her.
395:2670while at T 31 e 21; while formerly at 25 30 a A?
395:2671and refutation A 25 30 a; omit T 31 e 21.
Chapter LVII.
Fastidius, 2672 bishop in Britain, wrote to one Fatalis, a book On the Christian life, and another On preserving the estate of virginity, 2673 a work full of sound doctrine, and doing honour to God.
Footnotes
395:2672Flourished 420.
395:2673virginity T 31 e 21; widowhood A 25 30 a Fabr. Her.
Chapter LVIII.
Cyril, 2674 bishop of the church at Alexandria, published various treatises on various Questions, and also composed many homilies, which are recommended for preaching by the Greek bishops. Other books of his are; On the downfall of the synagogue, On faith against the heretics, and a work directed especially against Nestorius and entitled, A Refutation, in which all the secrets of Nestorius are exposed and his published opinions are refuted.
Footnotes
395:2674Born about 376, bishop of Alexandria 412, died 444.
Chapter LIX.
Timotheus, 2675 the bishop composed a book On the nativity of Our Lord according to the flesh, which is supposed to have been written at Epiphany.
Footnotes
395:2675From position evidently flourished before 450.
Chapter LX.
Leporius, 2676 formerly monk afterwards presbyter, relying on purity, 2677 through his own free will and unaided effort, instead of depending on the help of God, began to follow the Pelagian doctrine. But having been admonished by the Gallican doctors, and corrected by Augustine in Africa, he wrote a book containing his retraction, in which he both acknowledges his error and returns thanks for his correction. At the same time in correction of his false view of the incarnation of Christ, he presented the Catholic view, acknowledging the single person of the Son of God, and the two natures existing in Christ in his substance. 2678
Footnotes
395:2676Flourished 418–430.
395:2677purityT 31 a e 21; purity of life A 25 30.
395:2678in his substance A T 30 31 a e 21; omit 25 Her.
Chapter LXI.
Victorinus, 2679 a rhetorician of Marseilles, wrote to his son Etherius, a commentary On Genesis, commenting, that is, from the beginning of the book to the death of the patriarch Abraham, and published four 2680 books in verse, words which have a savour of piety indeed, but, in that he was a man busied with secular literature and quite untrained in the Divine Scriptures, they are of slight weight, so far as ideas are concerned.
He died in the reign of Theodosius and Valentinianus.
Footnotes
395:2679Claudius Marius Victor (Victorius or Victorinus) of Marseilles died 445.
395:2680fourA T 31 a e; three 25 30.
Chapter LXII.
Cassianus, 2681 Scythian by race, ordained deacon by bishop John the Great, at Constantinople, and a presbyter at Marseilles, founded two monasteries, that is to say one for men and one for women, which are still standing. He wrote from experience, and in forcible language, or to speak more clearly, with meaning back of his words, and action back of his talk. He covered the whole field of practical directions, for monks of all sorts, in the following works: On dress, also On the canon of prayers, and the Usage in the saying of Psalms, (for these in the Egyptian monasteries, are said day and night), three books. One of Institutes, eight books On the origin, nature and remedies for the eight principal sins, a book on each sin. He also compiled Conferences with the Egyptian fathers, as follows: On the aim of a monk and his creed, On discretion, On three vocations to the service of God, On the warfare of the flesh against the spirit and the spirit against the flesh, On the nature of all sins, On the slaughter of the saints, On fickleness of mind, On principalities, On the nature of prayer, On the duration of prayer, On perfection, On chastity, On the protection of God, On the knowledge of spiritual things, On the Divine graces, On friendship, On whether to define or not to define, On three ancient kinds of monks and a fourth recently arisen, On the object of cenobites and hermits, On true satisfaction in repentance, On the remission of the Quinquagesimal fast, On nocturnal illusions, On the saying of the apostles, “For the good which I would do, I do not, but the evil which I would not, that I do,” On mortification, and finally at the request of Leo the archdeacon, afterwards bishop of Rome, he wrote seven books against Nestorius, On the incarnation of the Lord, and writing this, made an end, both of writing and living, at Marseilles, in the reign of Theodosius and Valentinianus.
Footnotes
395:2681Johannes Cassianus died 450.
Chapter LXIII.
Philip, 2682 the presbyter Jerome’s best pupil, published a Commentary on Job, written in an unaffected style. I have read his Familiar letters, exceedingly witty, exhorting the endurance of poverty and sufferings. He died in the reign of Martianus and Avitus.
Footnotes
396:2682Died about 455.
Chapter LXIV.
Eucherius, 2683 bishop of the church at Lyons, wrote to his relative Valerianus, On contempt for the world and worldly philosophy, a single letter, written in a style which shows sound learning and reasoning. He wrote also to his sons, Salonius and Veranius, afterward bishops, a discussion On certain obscure passages of Holy Scriptures, and besides, revising and condensing certain works of Saint Cassianus, he compressed them into one volume, and wrote other works suited to ecclesiastical or monastic pursuits. He died in the reign of Valentinianus and Martianus.
Footnotes
396:2683Bishop about 435, died 450.
Chapter LXV.
Vincentius, 2684 the Gaul, presbyter in the Monastery on the Island of Lerins, a man learned in the Holy Scriptures and very well informed in matters of ecclesiastical doctrine, composed a powerful disputation, written in tolerably finished and clear language, which, suppressing his name, he entitled Peregrinus against heretics. The greater part of the second book of this work having been stolen, he composed a brief reproduction of the substance of the original work, and published in one [book]. He died in the reign of Theodosius and Valentinianus.
Footnotes
396:2684Presbyter 434, died before 450.
Chapter LXVI.
Syagrius 2685 wrote On faith, against the presumptuous words, which heretics assume for the purpose of destroying or superseding the names of the Holy Trinity, for they say that the Father ought not to be called Father, lest the name, Son should harmonize with that of Father, but that he should be called the Unbegotten or the Imperishable and the Absolute, in order that whatever may be distinct from Him in person, may also be separate in nature, showing that the Father, who is unchangeable in nature may be called the Unbegotten, though the Scripture may not call Him so, that the person of the Son is begotten from Him, not made, and that the person of the Holy Spirit proceeds from Him not begotten, and not made. Under the name of this Syagrius I found seven books, entitled On Faith and the rules of Faith, but as they did not agree in style, I did not believe they were written by him.
Footnotes
396:2685Syagrius of Lyons, died 486.
Chapter LXVII.
Isaac, 2686 presbyter of the church at Antioch, whose many works cover a long period, wrote in Syriac especially against the Nestorians and Eutychians. He lamented the downfall of Antioch in an elegiac poem, taking up the same strain that Ephraim, the deacon, sounded on the downfall of Nicomedia. He died during the reign of Leo and Majorianus.
Footnotes
396:2686Isaac of Amida (Diarbekir) presbyter died about 460.
Chapter LXVIII.
Salvianus, 2687 presbyter of Marseilles, well informed both in secular and in sacred literature, and to speak without invidiousness, a master among bishops, wrote many things in a scholastic and clear style, of which I have read the following: four books On the Excellence of virginity, to Marcellus the presbyter, three books Against avarice, five books On the present judgment, 2688 and one book On punishment according to desert, addressed to Salonius the bishop, also one book of Commentary on the latter part of the book of Ecclesiastes, addressed to Claudius bishop of Vienne, one book of Epistles. 2689 He also composed one book in verse after the Greek fashion, a sort of Hexaemeron, covering the period from the beginning of Genesis to the creation of man, also many Homilies delivered to the bishops, and I am sure I do not know how many On the sacraments. He is still living at a good old age.
Footnotes
397:2687Born about 390, Presbyter about 428, died about 484.
397:2688present judgment more generally known as Divine Providence (De gubernatione Dei.)
397:2689one book of epistles a 25 30; omit A T 31 e 21.
Chapter LXIX.
Paulinus 2690 composed treatises On the beginning of the Quadragesimal, of which I have read two, On the Passover Sabbath, On obedience, On penitence, On neophytes.
Footnotes
397:2690From position evidently flourished about 450.
Chapter LXX.
Hilary, 2691 bishop of the church at Arles, a man learned in Holy Scriptures, was devoted to poverty, and earnestly anxious to live in narrow circumstances, not only in religiousness of mind, but also in labour of body. To secure this estate of poverty, this man of noble race and very differently brought up, engaged in farming, though it was beyond his strength, and yet did not neglect spiritual matters. He was an acceptable teacher also, and without regard to persons administered correction to all. 2692 He published some few things, brief, but showing immortal genius, and indicating an erudite mind, as well as capacity for vigorous speech; among these that work which is of so great practical value to many, his Life of Saint Honoratus, his predecessor. He died during the reign of Valentinianus and Martianus.
Footnotes
397:2691Born about 401, bishop 429, died 449.
397:2692correction to all; Her. adds work of preaching but has the support of no good mss.
Chapter LXXI.
Leo, 2693 bishop 2694 of Rome, wrote a letter to Flavianus, bishop of the church at Constantinople, against Eutyches the presbyter, who at that time, on account of his ambition for the episcopate was trying to introduce novelties into the church. In this he advises Flavianus, if Eutyches confesses his error and promises amendment, to receive him, but if he should persist in the course he had entered on, that he should be condemned together with his heresy. He likewise teaches in this epistle and confirms by divine testimony that as the Lord Jesus Christ is to be considered the true son of the Divine Father, so likewise he is to be considered true man with human nature, that is, that he derived a body of flesh from the flesh of the virgin and not as Eutyches asserted, that he showed a body from heaven. 2695 He died in the reign of Leo and Majorianus.
Footnotes
397:2693Leo the Great, Bishop (Pope) 440, died 461.
397:2694bishop: A 30 31 e have pontiff.
397:2695T and 21 add after heaven “and he addressed another letter on this same subject to the Emperor Leo in whose reign also he died.”
Chapter LXXII.
Mochimus, 2696 the Mesopotamian, a presbyter at Antioch, wrote an excellent book Against Eutyches, and is said to be writing others, which I have not yet read.
Footnotes
397:2696Presbyter 457.
Chapter LXXIII.
Timotheus, 2697 2698 when Proterius 2699 had been put to death by the Alexandrians, in response to popular clamour, willingly or unwillingly allowed himself to be made bishop by a single bishop in the place of him who had been put to death. And lest he, having been illegally appointed, should be deservedly deposed at the will of the people who had hated Proterius, he pronounced all the bishops of his vicinity to be Nestorians, and boldly presuming to wash out the stain on his conscience by hardihood, wrote a very persuasive book to the Emperor Leo, which he attempted to fortify by testimonies of the Fathers, used in a perverted sense, so far as to show, for the sake of deceiving the emperor and establishing his heresy, that Leo of Rome, pontiff of the city, and the synod of Chalcedon, and all the Western bishops were fundamentally Nestorians. But by the grace of God, the enemy of the church was refuted and overthrown at the Council of Chalcedon. He is said to be living in exile, still an heresiarch, and it is most likely so. This book of his for learning’s sake, I translated by request of the brethren into Latin and prefixed a caveat. 2700
Footnotes
397:2697Bishop of Alexandria 380, died 385.
397:2698Timotheus 31 e add Bishop of Alexandria.
397:2699Proterius; 25 30 Fabr. Her. add the bishop.
398:2700This book…caveat A T 25 30 31 a e 21 Fabr.; omit Migne. Her.
Chapter LXXIV.
Asclepius, 2701 the African, bishop of a large see 2702 within the borders of Bagais, wrote against the Arians, and is said to be now writing against the Donatists. He is famous for his extemporaneous teaching.
Footnotes
398:2701Bishop of Bagais (Vagen) about 485.
398:2702large see A T 25 30 31 a? e earliest eds.; small village. Fabr. Migne. Her.
Chapter LXXV.
Peter, 2703 presbyter of the church at Edessa, a famous preacher, wrote Treatises on various subjects, and Hymns after the manner of Saint Ephrem, the deacon.
Footnotes
398:2703Flourished 450.
Chapter LXXVI.
Paul 2704 the presbyter, a Pannonian by nationality, as I learned from his own mouth, wrote On preserving virginity, and contempt for the world, and the Ordering of life or the correction of morals, written in a mediocre style, but flavoured with divine salt. The two books were addressed to a certain noble virgin devoted to Christ, Constantia by name, and in them he mentions Jovinian the heretic and preacher of voluptuousness and lusts, who was so far removed from leading a continent and chaste life, that he belched forth his life in the midst of luxurious banquets. 2705
Footnotes
398:2704Flourished 430?
398:2705T adds several lines.
Chapter LXXVII.
Pastor 2706 the bishop composed a short work, written in the form of a creed, and containing pretty much the whole round of Ecclesiastical doctrine in sentences. In this, among other heresies which he anathematizes without giving the names of their authors, he condemns the Priscillians and their author.
Footnotes
398:2706Bishop in Spain? about 400.
Chapter LXXVIII.
Victor, 2707 bishop of Cartenna in Mauritania, wrote one long book against the Arians, which he sent to king Genseric by his followers, as I learned from the preface to the work, 2708 and a work On the repentance of the publican, 2709 in which he drew up a rule of life for the penitent, according to the authority of Scriptures. He also wrote a consolatory work to one Basilius, On the death of a son, filled with resurrection hope and good counsel. He also composed many Homilies, which have been arranged as continuous works and are as I know, made use of by brethren anxious for their own salvation.
Footnotes
398:2707Victor of Cartenna (Tenez Afr.) bishop about 450.
398:2708which he sent…work A T 30 31 e 21 Fabr.; omit 25 a Her.
398:2709publican Fabr. Migne, Her.: On public penance, A T 30 31 a? e?: omit publican 25 Bamb Bern. the oldest editions.
Chapter LXXIX.
Voconius, 2710 bishop of Castellanum in Mauritania, wrote Against the enemies of the church, Jews, Arians, and other heretics. He composed also an excellent work On the Sacraments. 2711
Footnotes
398:2710Bishop of Castellan in Mauritania about 450.
398:2711Sacraments or of Sacraments i.e. a Sacrementary.
Chapter LXXX.
Musaeus, 2712 presbyter of the church at Marseilles, a man learned in Divine Scriptures and most accurate in their interpretation, as well as master of an excellent scholastic style, on the request of Saint Venerius the bishop, selected from Holy Scriptures passages suited to the various feast days of the year, also passages from the Psalms for responses suited to the season, and the passages for reading. The readers in the church found this work of the greatest value, in that it saved them trouble and anxiety in the selection of passages, and was useful for the instruction of the people as well as for the dignity of the service. He also addressed to Saint Eustathius 2713 the bishop, successor to the above mentioned man of God, an excellent and sizable volume, a Sacramentary, 2714 divided into various sections, according to the various offices and seasons, Readings and Psalms, both for reading and chanting, but also filled throughout with petitions to the Lord, 2715 and thanksgiving for his benefits. By this work we know him to have been a man of strong intelligence and chaste eloquence. He is said to have also delivered homilies, which are, as I know, valued by pious men, but which I have not read. He died in the reign of Leo and Majorianus.
Footnotes
398:2712Died before 461.
398:2713Eustathius 31 e; Eustasius A T a. ed. 1512; Eusebius 25, 30; Eustachius Fabr. Migne, Her.
398:2714Sacramentary or On the Sacraments.
398:2715the Lord T 25 30 31 a e God Fabr. Her.
Chapter LXXXI.
Vincentius 2716 the presbyter, a native of Gaul, practised in Divine Scripture and possessed of a style polished by speaking and by wide reading, wrote a Commentary On the Psalms. A part of this work, he read in my hearing, to a man of God, at Cannatae, promising at the same time, that if the Lord should spare his life and strength, he would treat the whole Psalter in the same way.
Footnotes
398:2716Apparently about 450.
Chapter LXXXII.
Cyrus, 2717 an Alexandrian by race, and a physician by profession, at first a philosopher then a monk, an expert speaker, at first wrote elegantly and powerfully against Nestorius, but afterwards, since he began to inveigh against him too intemperately 2718 and dealt in syllogism rather than Scripture, he began to foster the Timothean doctrine. Finally he declined to accept the decree of the council of Chalcedon, and did not think the doctrine that after the incarnation the Son of God comprehended two natures, was to be acquiesced in.
Footnotes
399:2717Flourished 460.
399:2718since he began to inveigh against him too intemperately Norimb. and the eds., but the other mss. read “nevertheless” inveigh or “inveighs less” or “more” and “is found” for “inveigh.” T 21 25 a Wolfenb. agree in reading in illo minus invenitur instead of in illum nimius inventur. Norimb has same with nimius instead of minus. The reading of T 21 25 a Wolfenb. thus reinforced and in view of the fact of the easy confusion of minus and nimius in transcribing, is the most probable reading, but it is hard to decide and harder still to make sense of it.
Chapter LXXXIII.
Samuel, 2719 presbyter of the church at Edessa, is said to have written many things in Syriac against the enemies of the church, especially against the Nestorians, the Eutychians and the Timotheans, new heresies all, but differing from one another. On this account he frequently speaks of the triple beast, while he briefly refutes by the opinion of the church, and the authority of Holy Scriptures, showing to the Nestorians, that the Son was God in man, not simply man born of a Virgin, to the Eutychians, that he had true human flesh, taken on by God, and not merely a body made of thick air, or shown from Heaven; to the Timotheans, that the Word was made flesh in such wise, that the Word remains Word in substance, and, human nature remaining human nature, one person of the Son of God is produced by union, not by mingling. He is said to be still living at Constantinople, for at the beginning of the reign of Anthemius, I knew his writings, and knew that he was in the land of the living.
Footnotes
399:2719Presbyter 467.
Chapter LXXXIV.
Claudianus, 2720 presbyter of the church at Vienne, a master speaker, and shrewd in argument, composed three books, On the condition and substance of the soul, in which he discusses how far anything is incorporeal excepting God.
[He wrote also some other things, among which are, A Hymn on Our Lord’s Passion, which begins “Pange lingua gloriosi.” He was moreover brother of Mamertus, bishop of Vienne.] 2721 (See note.)
Footnotes
399:2720Claudianus Ecdicius Mamertius died 473–4.
399:2721wrote…Vienne is said to be in a certain manuscript of the Monastery of “St. Michaelis de Tumba” but is omitted by A T 25 30 31 a e 21 Bamb. Bern. etc etc. and certainly does not belong in text. It is left in brackets above because given in the editions.
Chapter LXXXV.
Prosper 2722 of Aquitania, a man scholastic in style and vigorous in statement, is said to have composed many works, of which I have read a Chronicle, which bears his name, and which extends from the creation of the first man, according to Divine Scripture, until the death of the Emperor Valentinianus and the taking of Rome by Genseric king of the Vandals. I regard as his also an anonymous book against certain works of Cassianus, which the church of God finds salutary, but which he brands as injurious, and in fact, some of the opinions of Cassian and Prosper on the grace of God and on free will are at variance with one another. Epistles of Pope Leo against Eutyches, On the true incarnation of Christ, sent to various persons, are also thought 2723 to have been dictated by him.
Footnotes
399:2722Born 403, wrote chronicle 445? died 463.
399:2723thought A 25 30 31 a e 21; said T Fabr. Her.
Chapter LXXXVI.
Faustus, 2724 first abbot of the monastery at Lerins, and then made bishop 2725 of Riez in Gaul, a man studious of the Divine Scriptures, taking his text from the historic creed of the church, composed a book On the Holy Spirit, in which he shows from the belief of the fathers, that the Holy Spirit is consubstantial and coeternal with the Father and the Son, the fulness of the Trinity and therefore God. 2726 He published also an excellent work, On the grace of God, through which we are saved, 2727 in which he teaches that the grace of God always invites, precedes and helps our will, and whatever gain that freedom of will may attain for its pious effect, is not its own desert, but the gift of grace. I have read also a little book of his Against the Arians and Macedonians, in which he posits a coëssential Trinity, and another against those who say that there is anything incorporeal in created things, in which he maintains from the testimony of Scriptures, and by quotations from the fathers, that nothing is to be regarded as incorporeal but God. There is also a letter of his, written in the form of a little book, and addressed to a certain deacon, named Graecus, who, leaving the Catholic faith, had gone over to the Nestorian impiety.
In this epistle he admonishes him to believe that the holy Virgin Mary did not bring forth a mere human being, who afterwards should receive divinity, but true God in true man. There are still other works by him, but as I have not read, I do not care to mention them. This excellent doctor is enthusiastically believed in and admired. He wrote afterwards also to Felix, the Prætonian prefect, and a man of Patrician rank, son of Magnus the consul, a very pious letter, exhorting to the fear of God, a work well fitted to induce one to repent with his whole heart.
Footnotes
399:2724Abbot of Lerins 433–4, bishop of Riez 462, exiled 477–84, died 490.
399:2725Made bishop A T 31 e 21; bishop a 25 30.
399:2726and therefore God T 25 31 a e 21 [31 A?;] obtaining Fabr. Her.; Bamb and ed. 1512 read and therefore but join to next sentence.
399:2727savedA T 25; add and the free will of the human mind in which we are saved 30 31 a e.
Chapter LXXXVII.
Servus Dei 2728 the bishop, wrote against those who say that Christ while living in this world did not see the Father with his eyes of flesh—But after his resurrection from the dead and his ascension into heaven when he had been translated into the glory of God the Father as in reward so to speak to him for his abnegation and a compensation for his martyrdom. In this work he showed both from his own argument and from the testimony of Sacred Scriptures that the Lord Jesus from his conception by the Holy Spirit and his birth of the Virgin through which true God in true man himself also man made God was born, always beheld with his eyes of flesh both the Father and the Holy Spirit through the special and complete union of God and man.
Footnotes
400:2728Bishop of “Tiburcisen” about 406–11.
Chapter LXXXVIII.
Victorius 2729 the Aquitanian, a careful 2730 reckoner, on invitation of St. Hilary bishop of Rome, composed a Paschal cycle with the most careful investigation following his four predecessors, that is Hippolytus, Eusebius, Theophilus and Prosper, and extended the series of years to the year five hundred and thirty-two, reckoning in such wise that in the year 533 the paschal festival should take place again on the same month and day and the same moon as on that first year when the Passion and resurrection of our Lord took place.
Footnotes
400:2729Wrote 457. 30 a read Victorinus.
400:2730careful T 25 30 31 a Fabr.; most diligent A Norimb?; Bern Norimb. et alt add of the Scriptures: of measures Her.
Chapter LXXXIX.
Theodoretus 2731 2732 bishop of Cyrus (for the city founded by Cyrus king of the Persians preserves until the present day in Syria the name of its founder) is said to have written many works. Such as have come to my knowledge are the following: On the incarnation of the Lord, Against Eutyches the presbyter and Dioscorus bishop of Alexandria who deny that Christ had human flesh; strong works by which he confirmed through reason and the testimony of Scripture that He had real flesh from the maternal substance which he derived from His Virgin mother just as he had true deity which he received at birth by eternal generation from God the Father. There are ten books of the ecclesiastical history which he wrote in imitation of Eusebius of Cæsarea beginning where Eusebius ends and extending to his own time, that is from the Vicennalia of Constantine until the accession of the elder Leo in whose reign he died.
Footnotes
400:2731Theodoret born about 393, bishop of Cyrrhaus 423, wrote 450, died 457.
400:2732Theodoretus A a e; Theodoritus 31; Theodorus T 25 30.
Chapter XC.
Gennadius 2733 a Patriarch 2734 of the church of Constantinople, a man brilliant in speech and of strong genius, was so richly equipped by his reading of the ancients that he was able to expound the prophet Daniel entire commenting on every word.
He composed also many Homilies. He died while the elder Leo was Emperor.
Footnotes
400:2733Bishop (or “Pontiff”) 458, died 471.
400:2734Patriarch (Pontiff) A T 30 31 e 21; bishop 25 a Fabr. Her.
Chapter XCI.
Theodulus, 2735 2736 a presbyter in Coelesyria is said to have written many works, but the only one which has come to my hand, is the one which he composed On the harmony of divine Scripture, that is, the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, against the ancient heretics who on account of discrepancies in the injunctions of the ritual, say that the God of the Old Testament is different from the God of the New. In this work he shows it to have been by the dispensation of one and the same God, the author of both Scriptures, that one law should be given by Moses to those of old in a ritual of sacrifices and in judicial laws, and another to us through the presence of Christ in the holy mysteries and future promises, that they should not be considered different, but as dictated by one spirit and one author, since these things which if observed only according to the letter, would slay, if observed according to the spirit, would give life to the mind. This writer died three years since 2737 in the reign of Zeno.
Footnotes
400:2735Died 492 (C)—rather before 491.
400:2736Theodulus A T 31 a e; Theodorus 25 30 21.
401:2737three years since A T 30? 31 21; omit 25 a.
Chapter XCII.
[Sidonius 2738 bishop of the Arverni wrote several acceptable works and being a man sound in doctrine as well as thoroughly imbued with divine and human learning and a man of commanding genius wrote a considerable volume of letters to different persons written in various metres or in prose and this showed his ability in literature. Strong in Christian vigour even in the midst of that barbaric ferocity which at that time oppressed the Gauls he was regarded as a catholic father and a distinguished doctor. He flourished during the tempest which marked the rule of Leo and Zenos.] 2739
Footnotes
401:2738Caius Sollius Apollinaris Sidonius born about 430, bishop 472, died about 488.
401:2739This chapter is in Norimb. and three only of the mss. seen by the translator N. British Museum Harl. 3155, xv cent.; 43 Wolfenbüttel 838 xv cent.; k Paris B. N. Lat. 896. It is omitted by A T 25 30 31 a e 21 etc. etc. etc. and really has no place in the text, but as it was early introduced and is in the editions (not however the earliest ones) it is given here.
Chapter XCIII.
John 2740 of Antioch first grammarian, and then Presbyter, wrote against those who assert that Christ is to be adored in one substance only and do not admit that two natures are to be recognized in Christ. He taught according to the Scriptural account that in Him God and man exist in one person, and not the flesh and the Word in one nature.
He likewise attacked certain sentiments of Cyril, bishop of Alexandria, unwisely 2741 delivered by Cyril against Nestorius, which now are an encouragement and give strength to the Timotheans. 2742 He is said to be still living and preaching.
Footnotes
401:2740Flourished 477–495.
401:2741unwisely T 25 30 31 e; unwisely saying A? a?
401:2742Timotheans A T 25 30 31 a e 21 etc; add which is absurd Fabr. Migne, Her.
Chapter XCIV.
[Gelasius, 2743 2744 bishop of Rome wrote Against Eutyches and Nestorius a great and notable volume, also Treatises on various parts of the scripture and the sacraments written in a polished style. He also wrote Epistles against Peter and Acacius which are still preserved in the catholic church. He wrote also Hymns after the fashion of bishop Ambrosius. He died during the reign of the emperor Anastasius.
Footnotes
401:2743Bishop 492, died 496.
401:2744From this point to the end is bracketed, as a large part of the mss. end with John of Antioch. Of our mss. Gelasius and Gennadius are contained in 25 30 e², Honoratus to Pomerius in A 30 31 e² 40.
Chapter XCV.
Honoratus, 2745 bishop of Constantina in Africa wrote a letter to one Arcadius who on account of his confession of the catholic faith had been exiled to Africa by King Genseric. 2746 This letter was an exhortation to endure hardness for Christ and fortified by modern examples and scripture illustrations showing that perseverance in the confession of the faith not only purges past sins but also procures the blessing of martyrdom.
Footnotes
401:2745Bishop of Constantina (Cirta) 437.
401:2746exiled by King Genseric; omit e² 30 31 40.
Chapter XCVI.
Cerealis 2747 the bishop, an African by birth, was asked by Maximus bishop of the Arians whether he could establish the catholic faith by a few testimonies of Divine Scripture and without any controversial assertions. This he did in the name of the Lord, truth itself helping him, not with a few testimonies as Maximus had derisively asked, but proving by copious proof texts from both Old and New Testaments and published in a little book.
Footnotes
401:2747Bishop of “Castelli Ripensis” in Africa 484.
Chapter XCVII.
Eugenius, 2748 bishop of Carthage in Africa and public confessor, commanded by Huneric 2749 King of the Vandals to write an exposition of the catholic faith and especially to discuss the meaning of the word Homoousian, with the consent of all the bishops and confessors of Mauritania in Africa and Sardinia and Corsica, who had remained in the catholic faith, composed a book of faith, fortified not only by quotations from the Holy Scriptures but by testimonies of the Fathers, and sent it by his companions in confession. But now, exiled as a reward for his faithful tongue, like an anxious shepherd over his sheep he has left behind works urging them to remember the faith and the one sacred baptism to be preserved at all hazards. He also wrote out the Discussions which he held through messengers with the leaders of the Arians and sent them to be given to Huneric by his major domo. Likewise also he presented to the same, petitions for the peace of the Christians which were of the nature of an Apology, and he is said to be still living for the strengthening of the church.
Footnotes
401:2748Bishop 479, died 505.
401:2749Huneric A; omit e² 30 31 40.
Chapter XCVIII.
Pomerius 2750 the Mauritanian was ordained presbyter in Gaul. He composed a dialectical treatise in eight books On the nature of the soul and its properties, also one On the resurrection and its particular bearing for the faithful in this life and in general for all men, written in clear language and style, in the form of a dialogue between Julian the bishop, and Verus the presbyter. The first book contains discourses on what the soul is and in what sense it is thought to be created in the image of God, the second, whether the soul should be thought of as corporeal or incorporeal, the third, how the soul of the first man 2751 was made, fourth, whether the soul which is put in the body at birth is newly created and without sin, or produced from the substance of the first man like a shoot from a root it brings also with it the original sin of the first man, fifth, a review of the fourth book of the discussion, 2752 and an inquiry as to what is the capability of the soul, that is its possibilities, and that it gains its capability from a single and pure will, the sixth, whence arises the conflict between flesh and the spirit, spoken of by the apostle, seventh, on the difference between the flesh and the spirit in respect of life, of death and of resurrection, the eighth, answers to questions concerning the things which it is predicted will happen at the end of the world, to such questions, that is, as are usually propounded concerning the resurrection. I remember to have once read a hortatory work of his, addressed to some one named Principius, On contempt of the world, and of transitory things, and another entitled, On vices and virtues. He is said to have written yet other works, which have not come to my knowledge, and to be still writing. He is still living, and his life is worthy of Christian profession, and his rank in the church.
Footnotes
402:2750Died 498.
402:2751the first man A; the first man’s soul e² 30 31 40.
402:2752discussion 30 40 e²; discussion and definition A 31.
Chapter XCIX.
I Gennadius, 2753 a presbyter of Marseilles, have written eight books Against all heresies, five 2754 books Against Nestorius, ten 2755 books Against Eutyches, three books Against Pelagius, also treatises On the Millennium and On the Apocalypse of Saint John, also an epistle On my creed, sent to the blessed Gelasius, bishop of Rome.]
Footnotes
402:2753Died 496.
402:2754fivee 25 30; six Fabr. Her.
402:2755tene 25 30; six Norimb Her.; eleven Guelefenb.
Life and Works of Rufinus
with
Jerome’s Apology Against Rufinus.
Translated with Prolegomena and Notes,
by
The Hon. and rev. William Henry Fremantle, M.A.
Canon of Canterbury, Fellow and Tutor of Baliol College, Oxford.
Prolegomena
on the
Life and Works of Rufinus.
————————————
Note.—The References (where a simple number is given) are to the pages in this Volume.
Tyrannius Rufinus is chiefly known from his relation to Jerome, first as an intimate friend and afterwards as a bitter enemy. The immense influence of Jerome, through all the ages in which criticism was asleep, has unduly lowered his adversary. But he has some solid claims of his own on our recognition. His work on the Creed, besides its intrinsic merits, must always be an authority as a witness to the state of the creed as held in the Italian churches in the beginning of the 5th century, as also to the state of the Canon and the Apocrypha at that time. And it is to his translations that we are indebted for our knowledge of many of the works of Origen, including the greatest of them all, the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν. We are the more grateful for his services because they were so opportune. The works of Origen, which had been neglected in the West for a century and to such an extent that the Pope Anastasius says (433) that he neither knows who he was nor what he wrote, came suddenly into notice in the last quarter of a century before Alaric’s sack of Rome a.d. 385–410: and it was at this moment that Rufinus appeared, according to his friend Macarius’ dream (439) like a ship laden with the merchandize of the East, an Italian who had lived some 25 years in Greek lands, and sufficiently equipped for the work of a translator. Through his labours during the last 13 years of that eventful time a considerable part of the works of the great Alexandrian have floated down across the ocean of the Dark Ages, and, while lost in their native Greek, have in their Latin garb come to enrich the later civilization of the West.
a.d. 344–5: Rufinus was born at Concordia (Jer. Ep. v. 2. comp. with Ep. x. and De Vir. Ill. §53) between Aquileia and Altinum, a place of some importance, which was destroyed by the Huns in 452 but afterwards rebuilt. His birth was about the year 344 or 345, he being slightly older than Jerome. Nothing is known of his education or the events of his youth; but that he was early acquainted with Jerome and was interested in sacred literature is seen from the fact that in 368 when Jerome went with Bonosus to Gaul, Rufinus begged him to copy for him the works of Hilary on the Psalms and on the Councils of the Church (Jer. Ep. v. 2).
a.d. 372–3: His mother did not die till the year 397, as is seen from Jerome’s mention of her (Letter LXXXI, 1), and it would appear that both his parents were Christians. But he was not baptized till about his 28th year. He was at that time living at Aquileia, where he had embraced the monastic state, and was a member of the company of young ascetics to which Jerome and Bonosus belonged. The presence among them of Hylas (Jerome Letter III, 3) the freedman of Melania, the wealthy and ascetic Roman matron, shows that that relation had already begun which was afterwards of such importance in the life of Rufinus. It must have been just before the breaking up of that company that he was baptized, for Jerome, writing of him (Ep. iv. 2) in 374 from Antioch says “He has but lately been washed and is as white as snow.” He himself gives a full account of his baptism in his Apology (436).
a.d. 373: When this company of friends was scattered, Rufinus joined the noble Roman lady, Melania, in her pilgrimage to the East (Jer. Letter iv. 2). He visited the monasteries of Egypt, and apparently desired to remain there; but a persecution arose against the orthodox monks from Lucius the Arian bishop of Alexandria, seconded by the governor, both being prompted by the Arian Emperor Valens: the monasteries were in many cases broken up (Sozomen, vi, 19, Socrates iv, 21–3, Rufinus Eccl. Hist. ii, 3), and Rufinus himself for a while suffered imprisonment and was then banished from Egypt (430 Eccl. Hist. ii, 4). Rufinus probably on coming out of prison joined Melania who had then settled at Diocæsarea (Pallad. Hist. Laus. §117) on the coast of Palestine for the purpose of making a home for the Egyptian exiles on their way to their various destinations. He states in his Apology (466) that he was 6 years in Egypt, and that he returned there again, after an interval, for two years more. He was a pupil both of Didymus, then head of the catechetical school, who wrote for him a treatise on the death of infants (534), and of Theophilus, afterward Bishop of Alexandria (528), and that he saw many of the well-known hermits (466), such as Serapion and Macarius, whom he describes in his History of the Monks. Whether Melania returned with him to Egypt, or whether she went to Jerusalem, we do not know: it is also uncertain whether a journey which he made (Eccl. Hist. ii. 8) to Edessa was undertaken at this time. The date of the settlement of Melania on the Mount of Olives according to Jerome’s Chronicle is 379, or, according to our present reckoning of dates, 377. We may suppose that Rufinus joined her in 379. This was his home for eighteen years, till the year 397.
a.d. 386: Rufinus was ordained at Jerusalem, probably about the time when John, with whom he was closely connected, succeeded Cyril in the Bishopric. The great resources of Melania were added to his own which seem to have been not inconsiderable. He built habitations for monks on the Mount of Olives, and employed them in learned pursuits, and in copying manuscripts. On the arrival of Jerome at Bethlehem, the old friendship was renewed, though not apparently with all its former warmth. Jerome certainly at times visited Rufinus and once at least stayed with him (465), and he and his friends brought mss. to be copied by the monks of the Mount of Olives (465). He gave lectures on Christian writers and doctrine, of which a satirical account is given at a later period by Jerome 2756 in his letter to Rusticus (cxxv, §18). The nick-name Grunnius which he there gives him was probably caused by some trick of the voice. But we may gather from Jerome that he read the Greek church writers diligently and lectured upon them, a study which enabled him to do much good work at a later time. It is probable that he lectured in Greek, since he says in 397 that his Latin was weak through disuse (439). We may set against Jerome’s depreciatory description the account given by Palladius (Hist. Laus. §118). “Rufinus, who lived with Melania, was a man of congenial spirit, and of great nobility and strength of character. No man has ever been known of greater learning or of gentler disposition.” Palladius also speaks of the princely hospitality of Melania and Rufinus: “They received,” he says, “bishops and monks, virgins and matrons and helped them out of their own funds: They passed their life offending none and being helpers of the whole world.” It is said by Palladius that he had heard from Melania that she had been present at the death of Pambas in Egypt which took place in the year 385, and it is probable that Rufinus accompanied her on this occasion. He himself records 2757 a journey which he made to Edessa and Charrhoe, when he saw settlements of the monks like those which he had previously seen in Egypt. But the date of this journey does not appear. It may have been undertaken in order to visit some of the exiles from Egypt before his establishment on the Mt. of Olives. He records also the visits of the remarkable men who were entertained by him; Bacurius, who had been king of the Ubii, and afterwards count of the Domestics under Theodosius, and was governor or duke of Palestine when Rufinus settled there; and Ædesius the companion of Frumentius the Missionary to the tribes in the N. W. of India. But his chief interest and occupation throughout seems to have been with his monks at Mt. Olivet with perhaps some connection with the diocesan work of his friend John, the Bp. of Jerusalem. Palladius records that Rufinus and Melania were the means of restoring to the communion of the church 400 monks. What was this schism, which Palladius describes as being “on account of Paulinus”? It is probable that the words relate to the monks of Bethlehem whose alienation from the Church of Jerusalem had been due to the ordination of Paulinian, Jerome’s brother, by Epiphanius. We know that Rufinus before leaving Palestine was reconciled to Jerome (Jer. Rev. 3:26, 33); and we know also that Jerome’s book against John, Bishop of Jerusalem, which describes the schism was suddenly broken off; 2758 and that he remained from that time forward at one with his Bishop. We may be allowed to believe that the influence of Melania as well as Rufinus had been exerted for some time previously to bring about this happy result.
a.d. 382: Rufinus’ part in the controversy thus terminated is partly known and partly the subject of inference. The original source of discord is not known. It is possible that Rufinus, who had been mentioned by Jerome in his Chronicle (a.d. 378) as being, together with Florentius and Bonosus, a specially distinguished monk, did not find himself included in his friend’s Catalogue of Church writers (De Vir. III.) published at Bethlehem.
a.d. 392: When Aterbius began the Origenist troubles at Jerusalem, Rufinus, who treated him with merited scorn (Jer. Ap. iii, 33) probably felt some resentment at Jerome who, by “giving satisfaction” to the heresy hunter, had countenanced his proceedings. Rufinus appears as Bishop John’s adviser during the visit of Epiphanius (Jer. Letter li, 2, 6), as the chief of a chorus of presbyters who applauded their own bishop and derided Epiphanius as a “silly old man;” 2759 and as present when Epiphanius remonstrated with his brother-bishop. He is also mentioned by Epiphanius in his letter to John (Jer. Letter li. 6) as holding an important place in the Church, “May God free you and all about you, especially the presbyter Rufinus, from the heresy of Origen, and all others.” This sentence will suggest to all who are familiar with church-controversies a whole series of scenes in the schism which continued between Bethlehem and Jerusalem during the next five years. Jerome believed Rufinus to have injured him at every turn, to have procured the abstraction of a Manuscript of his from the house occupied by Fabiola on her visit to Bethlehem (Apol. iii, 4) perhaps to have been in league with Vigilantius (Comp. Jer. Ep. lxi, 3 with Apol. iii, 4, 19). But such insinuations have the appearance rather of the suspicions prompted by anger than of actual fact. In any case they were condoned when the two old companions who had been so long parted by ecclesiastical strife met together at the Church of the Resurrection at a solemn eucharistic feast, and joined hands in token of reconciliation, and when Jerome accompanied his friend some way on his journey before their final parting (Jer. Vol. iii, 24).
a.d. 397: He arrived in Italy, in company with Melania, early in the spring of 397. They were there received by Paulinus of Nola with great honour. 2760 Melania went on at once to Rome; but Rufinus stopped at the monastery of Pinetum near Terracina. His welcome by the Abbot Urseius and the philosopher Macarius, and their request to him to translate various Greek books, amongst others the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν of Origen, are described in his Prefaces to the Benedictions of the Patriarchs, the Apology of Pamphilus and the translations of Origen (417, 418, 420, 439). The preface to Origen’s chief work (427) had the worst and most lasting results. He says that, being aware of the odium attaching to the name of Origen, he had feared to translate the work: but that the example of Jerome (whom he does not name but whose great ability he extols) in translating Origen encourages him to follow in his steps. This Preface, with this translation of the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν, was published in Rome early in the year 398, Rufinus having moved there to stay with Melania.
a.d. 400–403: At Rome he lived in the circle of Melania, her son Publicola and his wife Albina, with their daughter the younger Melania and her husband Pinianus, to whom we may probably add the Pope Siricius, and certainly Apronianus, a young noble whom he speaks of as his son in the faith (435, 564). Jerome’s friend Eusebius of Cremona was also in Rome, and on friendly terms with him (445). But on the appearance of the work of Origen with Rufinus’ Preface, a great ferment arose leading to the violent controversy between Rufinus and Jerome which is described in the Preface to their Apologies (434, 482).
a.d. 398: Meanwhile, Rufinus had left Rome probably in 398, having obtained the usual Literæ Formatæ from the Pope Siricius, who died that year, to introduce him to other churches. 2761 We hear of him at Milan, where in the presence of the Bishop, Simplicianus, 2762 he met Eusebius of Cremona, and heard him read out a letter of Theophilus containing some passages from the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν, against which he vehemently protested (490).
a.d. 399–408: He then, having probably visited his native city of Concordia, where his mother, 2763 possibly his father also (430, 502) was still living, took up his abode at Aquileia. There he was welcomed by the bishop, Chromatius, by whom he had been baptized some 26 or 27 years before. Rufinus probably arrived at Aquileia in the beginning of 399, and remained there 9 or 10 years. It was during this period that all his principal works except the Commentary on the Benedictions of the patriarchs, the translation of the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν and Pamphilus’ Apology, and the book on adulterations of Origen were composed. It was soon after his settlement at Aquileia that he heard from Apronianus of the letter of Jerome to Pammachius and Oceanus 2764 expressing his anger against him for the mention he had made of Jerome in the Preface to the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν. The conciliatory letter to Rufinus which accompanied this and which was an answer to a friendly one from Rufinus 2765 was not sent on by Jerome’s friends (489); and Rufinus, thinking that his old friend had completely turned against him, composed his Apology (434–482) which drew forth Jerome’s reply (482–541). This controversy is placed in full before the reader of this volume in an English translation, with prefatory notes. It may therefore be treated very shortly here.
Rufinus’ Apology is an answer to Jerome’s letter to Pammachius and Oceanus. It is addressed to Apronianus of Rome. He makes a profession of his Christian standing and faith, especially on the points raised by the Origenistic controversy; he describes the circumstances which had led him to translate the books of Origen, and defends his method of translation, which, he says, has been misrepresented by men sent from the East to lay snares for him. His method, he declares, was the same which had been used by Jerome, who boasted that through him the Latins knew all that was good in Origen and nothing of the bad. Where he found passages in Origen’s writings, in flagrant contradiction to the orthodox opinion he had maintained elsewhere, he concluded that the passage had been falsified by heretics, and restored the more orthodox statement which he believed to have been originally there. He then turns round upon Jerome and points out that, in his Commentaries on the Ephesians, written some 10 years before, to which he specially referred in his Letter as showing his freedom from heresy, he had practically adopted the opinions now imputed to Origen as heretical, such as the fall of souls from a previous state into the prison house of earthly bodies, and the universal restoration of spiritual beings.
In the second book he clears himself from the imputation of following Origen and Plato in believing in the lawfulness of using occasional falsehood in the government and training of men. But he imputes to his adversary a systematic use of falsehood in reference to his reading heathen authors, while he professed in his letter to Eustochium (Jer. Ep. xxii) to have solemnly promised never even to possess them. He then takes a wider view of Jerome’s writings, showing how, in this Letter to Eustochium, his books against Jovinian, etc., he had by his satirical pictures held up to ridicule the various classes of Christians, clergy, monks, virgins: how he had praised Origen indiscriminately as a teacher second only to the Apostles: how he had defamed men like Ambrose, and therefore his present accusations were little worth: how he boasted of having taken as his teachers not only Origenists like Didymus or heretics like Apollinarius, but heathen like Porphyry, and had made his translation of the Old Testament under the influence of the Jew Baranina (whose name Rufinus perverts into Barabbas). He concludes by summarizing his accusations and calling upon the reader to choose between him and his opponent.
This Apology was only sent to a few friends of Rufinus (530); but portions of it became known to Jerome’s friends and his brother Paulinian (493) carried them to Bethlehem, together with Rufinus’ Apology addressed to Pope Anastasius. Jerome had also before him the letter of Anastasius to John Bishop of Jerusalem (509) showing his dislike of Rufinus’ proceedings. On these he grounds his own Apology, which was originally in two books and was addressed to Pammachius and Marcella a.d. 402.
In the first book he blames Rufinus’ breach of friendship after the reconciliation which had taken place at Jerusalem; he then shows that he was compelled to translate the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν in order to show what it really was. He declares that the Apology of Origen translated by Rufinus as the work of Pamphilus was really written by Eusebius; that Origen had been condemned by Theophilus and Anastasius, by East and West alike, and by the decree of the Emperors. He defends himself for having used heathen and heretical teachers, and help of a Jewish scholar in translating the Old Testament. As to his Commentaries on the Ephesians he declares that he merely put side by side the opinions of various commentators, indicating at times his knowledge that some were heretical: and as to his anti-Ciceronian dream, he ridicules the idea that a man can be bound by his night visions.
In the second book he criticizes Rufinus’ Apology addressed to Anastasius as to both its style and its matter, and blames him for his treatment of Epiphanius, and endeavours to implicate him in the imputation of heresy. He then defends his translation of the Old Testament, showing by copious quotations from the Prefaces to the Books that he had done nothing condemnatory of the Septuagint, whose version he had himself translated into Latin and constantly used in familiar expositions.
This Apology was brought to Rufinus at Aquileia by a merchant who was leaving again in two days (522). Chromatius no doubt urged him, as he urged Jerome (520) not to continue the controversy and he yielded. He wrote, however, a private letter to Jerome, which has been lost, sending him an accurate copy of his Apology, and while declining public controversy, yet declaring that he could have said even more than before, and divulged things which would have been worse to Jerome than death. Jerome in his answer written a.d. 403, which forms B. iii of his Apology, declares that the controversy is Rufinus’ fault, and defends his friends for their conduct towards him, even in holding back the conciliatory letter written in 399; but shows how a way might still be open for friendship. He touches again upon most of the points dwelt on in the previous books, defending himself and accusing Rufinus, and ends by declaring that his bitter reply was necessitated first by Rufinus’ threats, and secondly by his abhorrence of heresy, from all complicity with which he must at any price clear himself.
This book closed the controversy. Rufinus did not reply, Jerome did not relent. Nothing in Rufinus’ subsequent writings reflects on Jerome; but Jerome is never weary of expressing his hatred of Rufinus, speaking of him after his death as “the Scorpion” 2766 and writing malignant satirical descriptions of him like that in his letter to Rusticus. 2767
It may be observed, however, that notwithstanding the violent words used on both sides, it was possible for eminent churchmen to esteem and befriend both parties. Augustine, on receiving Jerome’s Apology, laments, in words which must have been felt by Jerome as a severe reproach, that two such men, so loved by the churches, should thus tear each other to pieces. Chromatius, while he kept up communications with Jerome, and supplied him with funds for his literary work, was also the friend and adviser of Rufinus.
Rufinus’ friends at Aquileia, like those at the Pinetum and at Rome, were anxious to gain from him a knowledge of the great church-writers of the East, and especially of Origen. No one at Aquileia seems to have known Greek. He makes excuses in his Prefaces (430, 563, 565, etc.) for the difficulty of the task and his own short-comings which seem to be partly conventional, partly genuine. But he did a work which he alone or almost alone at that period was qualified to do. His translations of Origen and Pamphilus were already known. We learn from Jerome (536) that Rufinus had translated parts of the LXX. He now translated Eusebius’ Church History, and added to it two books of his own; he translated the so-called Recognitions of Clement, which till then were almost unknown in Italy. He wrote a History of the Monks of the East, partly from personal knowledge, partly from what he had heard or read of them. And he translated the Commentaries of Origen upon the Heptateuch or 1st seven books of Scripture, except Numbers and Deuteronomy; and those on the Epistle to the Romans. He also wrote his exposition of the Creed (541–563), and probably some other works which have not come down to us.
a.d. 400–402: The first part of his stay at Aquileia was troubled by the controversy with Jerome. He also received from his friends at Rome the intelligence that his Preface and translation of the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν had been brought to the notice of the Pope Anastasius, by Pammachius and Marcella (430); and probably the letter of the Pope to Venerius Bishop of Milan, which is quoted in Anastasius’ letter to John of Jerusalem (433) was also brought to his knowledge.
a.d. 400: Though there is no reason to suppose, as has been often done, that the Pope passed sentence upon him, still less that he summoned him to Rome. Rufinus was so far affected by what he heard of the adverse feeling excited in the Pope’s mind toward him that he thought it desirable to write an explanation or apology (430–2) vindicating his action in the translation of Origen, and giving an exposition of his own belief on some of the principal points dealt with in the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν. From the letter of Anastasius to John of Jerusalem we gather that John had written to him in the interest of Rufinus, and had blamed Jerome’s friends at Rome, perhaps also Jerome himself, for the part they had taken in reference to him. It is a curious fact that this letter was known to Jerome but not to Rufinus during the controversy (509); but it can hardly be inferred with any certainty from this that John had changed sides and favoured Jerome at Rufinus’ expense.
a.d. 408: After 8 or 9 years at Aquileia Rufinus returned to Rome. His friend Chromatius of Aquileia had died in 405. Anastasius of Rome had also passed away (a.d. 402), and his successor Innocentius was without prejudice against Rufinus. Melania was either there or with Paulinus at Nola. Her son Publicola had died in 406, but his widow Albina was with her, and her granddaughter the younger Melania with her husband Pinianus. The siege of Rome by Alaric was impending, and the whole party were starting by way of Sicily and Africa, in both of which Melania had property, intending eventually to reach Palestine. He joined their “religious company” as he tells us in the Preface to Origen on Numbers (568) which, according to Palladius (Hist. Laus. 119) formed a vast caravan with slaves, virgins and eunuchs; and he was with them in Sicily when Alaric burned Rhegium (568) the flames of which they saw across the straits.
This translation of Numbers was his last work. He was at that time suffering in his eyes; and he died soon afterwards in Sicily, as we learn from Jerome’s malicious words “The Scorpion now lies underground between Enceladus and Porphyrion.” 2768 The undying hatred of Jerome towards him has unduly lowered him in the estimation of the Church. He was far below Jerome in literary ability, but in their great controversy he displayed more magnanimity than his rival, being willing to forego a public answer to his provoking apology. He was highly esteemed by the eminent churchmen of his time and the Bishops near whom he lived. Chromatius of Aquileia was his friend; for Petronius of Bologna he wrote his monastic history, for Gaudentius of Brixia he translated the Clementine Recognitions, for Laurentius (perhaps of his native Concordia) he composed his work on the Creed. Paulinus of Nola continued his friendship for him to the end. Above all Augustine speaks of him as the object of love and of honour; and, in his reply to Jerome 2769 who had sent him his Apology, says: “I grieved, when I had read your book, that such discord should have arisen between persons so dear and so intimate, bound to all the churches by a bond of affection and of renown.”
We may conclude this notice by two quotations from writers who lived shortly after the death of Rufinus; the first of which shows how unfairly the fame of Jerome has pressed on the memory of his antagonist, while the second may be taken as the verdict of unprejudiced history. Pope Gelasius, at a Council at Rome in 494, drew up a list of books to be received in the church, in which he says of Rufinus: “He was a religious man, and wrote many books of use to the Church, and many commentaries on the Scripture; but, since the most blessed Jerome infamed him on certain points, we take part with him (Jerome) in this and in all cases in which he has pronounced a condemnation.” (Migne’s Patrologia vol. lix. col. 175). On the other hand Gennadius, in his list of Ecclesiastical writers (c. 17) says: “Rufinus, the presbyter, of Aquileia, was not the least of the church-teachers, and showed an elegant genius in his translations from Greek into Latin;” and, after giving a list of his writings, he continues: “He also replied in two volumes to him who decried his works, showing convincingly that he had exercised his powers through the might which God had given him, and for the good of the church, and that it was through a spirit of rivalry that his adversary had employed his pen in defaming him.”
Footnotes
406:2756“He came in with a slow and stately step; he spoke with a broken utterance, sometimes with a kind of disjointed sobs rather than words. He had a pile of tomes upon the table; and then, with a frown and a contraction of the nostrils, and his forehead wrinkled up, he snapped his fingers to call the attention of his audience. What he said had no depth in it; but he criticized others, and pointed out their defects, as though he would exclude them from the Senate of Christian teachers. He was rich, and entertained freely, and many flocked round him in his public appearances. He was as luxurious as Nero at home, as stern as Cato abroad; as full of contradictions as the Chimæra.”
406:2757Hist. Eccl. ii. 8.
406:2758For the date of this work, see the Note prefixed to it in the translation of Jerome’s works, Vol. vi. of this series.
407:2759See Jerome’s expressions in his book “Against John of Jerusalem” c. 11, which evidently refer to Rufinus: “grinning like a dog and turning up his nose.”
407:2760Paulinus Ep. xxix, 12.
407:2761Jer. Ep. cxxvii, 9 Ap. iii. 21.
407:2762Successor of Ambrose, and Bishop a.d. 397–400. See the Letter of Anastasius to him. Jer. Ep. xcv.
407:2763She died soon after. See Jerome Ep. lxxxi, 1.
408:2764Jer. Ep. lxxxiv.
408:2765See Jer. Ep. lxxxi, 1.
409:2766Jer. Ep. cxxvii. 10.
409:2767Jer. Ep. cxxv.
409:2768Jer. Pref. to Comm. on Ezek. B. I.
410:2769Aug. Letter 73 (In Jerome’s Letters No. 110).
Works of Rufinus.
I. Original Works which still Survive.
1. A Commentary on the Benedictions of the 12 Patriarchs. This short work was composed at the monastery of Pinetum near Terracina during Lent in the year 398, at the request of Paulinus of Nola. Rufinus had stayed with Paulinus on his first arrival with Melania in Italy (Paulinus. Ep. xxix, 12.) and Paulinus wrote to him (417) after he had gone to Pinetum begging him to give an explanation of the blessing of Jacob in Judah. Rufinus, though not replying for a time, sent his exposition, and afterwards, on a second request from Paulinus, added the exposition of the rest of the blessings in the Patriarchs, like the son in the parable (as he explains in a graceful letter prefixed to the work) who said “I go not,” but afterwards repented and went.
The exposition is well written and clear; but it is not in itself of much value. The text on which he comments is very faulty: for instance, in the Blessing of Reuben, instead of the words “the excellency of dignity and the excellency of power,” it has “durus conversatione, et durus, temerarius.” When Rufinus adheres to the plain interpretation of the passage his comments are sensible and clear; but he soon passes to the mystic sense: Reuben is God’s first-born people, the Jews, and the couch which he defiles is the law of the Old Testament; and the moral interpretation is grounded on the supposed meaning of Reuben, “the Son who is seen,” that is the visible, carnal man, who breaks through the law. So, in Judah’s “binding his foal to the vine,” the explanation given as he says, by the Jews, that the vines will be so plentiful that they are used even for tying up the young colts, is dismissed. The foal is the Christian Church the offspring of Israel which is God’s ass, and is bound to Christ the true vine.
2. A dissertation on the adulteration of the works of Origen by heretics, subjoined to his translation of Pamphilus’ Apology for Origen. This will be found in the present volume pp. 421–427.
3. An apology addressed to the Pope Anastasius. See the introductory note prefixed to the translation of this work (429) now first translated into English.
4. The Apology for himself against the attacks of Jerome. See the introductory statement prefixed to the translation (434–5).
5. Ecclesiastical History in Two Books, being a continuation of the History of Eusebius translated by Rufinus into Latin. This work was composed at Aquileia at the request of the Bishop, Chromatius. The date is probably 401, since in the Preface Rufinus says that he had been requested to translate Eusebius at the time when Alaric was invading Italy. This must allude to the first of Alaric’s invasions, in 400, since the second invasion (402) would have been marked by some word such as “Iterum,” and at the 3d in 408 Chromatius had already died. The history does not attempt to give more than the chief events, and these are told with little sense of proportion, the Council of Ariminum occupying about 20 lines, while the story of the right arm of Arsenius which Athanasius was accused of cutting off takes up five times that space. Some documents of great importance, however, are given, such as the canons of Nicæa, and the Creed as it issued from the council. But there is much credulity, as shown in the account of the Discovery of the True Cross by Helena mother of Constantine, and the stories of the death of Arius and the attempted rebuilding of the Jewish Temple under Julian. Rufinus has none of the critical power needed for a true historian. We may add that all that is valuable in his history is incorporated into the works of Socrates (translated in Vol. iii. of this Series). See especially B. ii, c. 1.
6. The History of the Monks which is a description of the Egyptian Solitaries appears to have no mark of its date: But it was, no doubt, composed at Aquileia between 398 and 409, probably in the later part of that period. It was written in the name of Petronius Bishop of Bologna, and records his experiences, which he says he had been often requested by the monks of Mt. Olivet to commit to writing. It is full of strange stories like those in Jerome’s Lives of the Hermits Hilarion and Malchus. 2770 There is often a verbal resemblance between this book and the Lausiac History of Palladius; indeed, they at times record the same adventures (compare the story of the crocodiles, Ruf. Hist. Mon. xxxiii. 6 with Pall. Hist. Laus. cl., where even the same prayers and texts are put into the mouths of the two narrators.) But it is probable that in these cases Palladius is indebted to Rufinus.
7. The Exposition of the Creed is described in the note prefixed to the Translation (541).
8. The Prefaces to the Books of Origen, translated by Rufinus, and to the Apology of Pamphilus for Origen, together with the Book on the Adulteration of Origen’s Writings are given in this volume (420–427). That to the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν (427) is the document on which the great controversy between Jerome and Rufinus turns. That to Numbers gives personal details of importance, while the Peroration to the Ep. to the Romans exhibits the method used in translating. The Preface and Epilogue to the work of Pamphilus are of great importance in connexion with the controversy between Jerome and Rufinus.
Footnotes
411:2770See those Lives translated in Vol. vi of this Series.
II. Translations from Greek Writers.
1. The Rule of St. Basil, translated at Pinetum for the Abbat Urseius in 397 or 398. This was the first work written by Rufinus of which we have any knowledge.
2. The Apology of Pamphilus for Origen. This formed the 1st book of an Apology for Origen’s teaching in 6 books, which were composed by Eusebius and Pamphilus during the latter’s imprisonment at Cæsarea previous to his martyrdom. Eusebius speaks of this work in a general way (H. E. vi. 33) as written by himself and Pamphilus. The last book, however, was written by Eusebius alone after the death of Pamphilus. The part translated by Rufinus is only the 1st book, and this he believed to be by Pamphilus alone. Jerome in his Apology (487, 514) asserted that the whole was by Eusebius alone. But his bitter feeling led him astray in this. The Apology for Origen has perished with the exception of this 1st book which survives in Rufinus’ Translation. The Preface which he prefixed to the work, and the Epilogue which he subjoined to it under the name of “The book concerning the adulteration of the works of Origen” are given in our translation (420–427). This work was written at Pinetum near Terracina at the request of Macarius, to whom the Preface is addressed, in the end of 397 or the beginning of 398. For the questions relating to the authorship of the Apology the reader is referred to the Apologies of Jerome and Rufinus (esp. pp. 487, 514), to Lightfoot’s Article on Eusebius in the Dict. of Eccl. Biography, and the Prolegomena to the Translation of Eusebius in this Series, p. 36.
3. Origen’s Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν. This translation was also made at the request of Macarius, and was finished as the Preface to B. iii. shows in the Lent of 398. The questions raised by this Translation are discussed in the Introductions to the Works of Jerome (Vol. vi of this Series), and of Rufinus in this Volume; and the controversy itself is developed in their Apologies (434–540). The greater part of the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν is known to us only through this translation.
4. Origen’s Homilies. Those on the Books of Moses and of Joshua were translated at various times during the last 10 years of Rufinus’ life. He had intended, as he states in his Preface to the Book of Numbers, to translate all that had been written by Origen on the Pentateuch: he accomplished this as regards the first three books, and also as to the book of Joshua, at the request of Chromatius; the book of Numbers he only finished in Sicily, just before his death; and the Commentaries on Deuteronomy he did not live to translate. In these translations, as he tells us (567), he did not scruple to supply what he found to be omitted in the Greek, the Homilies being of a hortatory kind, whereas Rufinus’ object was an exposition of the text.
The Translation of the Homilies on Judges, though there is no Preface to it, is ascribed to Rufinus by Fontanini, who maintains that in this case, the name of Rufinus being discredited on account of Jerome’s diatribe against him, the editors have suppressed the Preface, while in some other cases they have substituted the name of Jerome for that of Rufinus.
The Translation of Origen’s Commentary 36th, 37th and 38th Psalms is unquestionably by Rufinus; it is dedicated to Apronianus, and may have been written in Rome (Fontanini col. 188, beginning of ch. viii). The Preface is given by us in this volume. Fontanini also gives to Rufinus a Translation of Origen’s Homilies on I Kings and on Canticles. The books on Joshua and Judges he translated as he found them (567), but in the next he adopted a different method.
The works of Origen on the Ep. to the Romans were very long, and Rufinus did not scruple to condense them (reducing the 25 books of Origen to 10), as he clearly states in his Peroration (567). This work he addressed to Heraclius, and it was composed during his stay at Aquileia.
Rufinus had hoped, as we learn from the same Peroration (567), to translate some at least of the Commentaries of Origen upon the other Epistles of St. Paul; but he first determined to finish those upon the Pentateuch, a task in which, as we have seen, he was overtaken by death.
5. The Translation of 10 Tracts of St. Basil and 8 of Gregory Nazianzen. These are to be found in the works of Basil and Gregory, but without Prefaces; they are, however, mentioned by Rufinus himself in his Eccl. Hist. ii. 9, and in a letter to Apronianus quoted by Fontanini Vit. Ruf. II., viii, I. col. 189.
6. The Sentences of Xystus, which have been variously attributed to a philosopher who flourished in the reign of Augustus, and is quoted by Seneca, and to Xystus, or Sixtus, Bp. of Rome, who suffered martyrdom in 258. They are called the Annulus (᾽εγχειρίδιον) as inseparable from the hand. Rufinus speaks of them in his Preface, translated in this volume, as being traditionally ascribed to the Bishop; he does not pledge himself to this opinion, but does not deny it; and recent research has shown that, though they may have a basis in heathen philosophy, they are in their present form the writings of a Christian. Jerome, however, scoffs at Rufinus again and again, as either through ignorance or heterodoxy ascribing to a Christian Bishop and martyr the work of a Pythagorean (See Jerome ad Ctesiphontem (Ep. cxxxiii. c. 3), Comm. on Ezek. B. vi. ch. 8, on Jerem. B. iv. ch. 22. The whole matter is fully discussed in Dict. of Christian Biog. Art. Xystus.)
7. The Sentences of Evagrius Ponticus (or Iberita or Galatus) in three treatises, (1) to Virgins, (2) To Monks, (3) On the Passionless State. These are described with bitter depreciation as heretical works by Jerome (Ad Ctes. Ep. 133 c. 3. Pref. to Anti-Pelagian Dialogue and to B. iv. of Comm. on Jerem.) but approved by Gennadius (c. 9.) who issued an amended version of Rufinus’ translation. Rufinus’ translation is said to be in the Vatican library by Fontanini (Vita Rufini Lib. II. c. iv. in Migne’s Patrologia Vol. 21 col. 205.)
8. The Recognitions of Clement supposed to have been written by Clement Bishop of Rome, but now known to be a work of 50 or 60 years later. The translation of it was asked for by Silvia sister of Rufinus the Prætorian Prefect, and was unsuccessfully attempted by Paulinus of Nola (see his letter to Rufinus in Fontanini as above, col. 208.) After the death of Silvia, Gaudentius Bp. of Brixia where she died as a saint, urged Rufinus to make the translation (Peror. to Ep. to Rom. 567) Preface of Rufinus.)
9. The translation of Eusebius’ Eccl. History in 9 books, a work much valued in Gaul, and often reprinted in later times. The Preface (Migne’s Rufinus col. 461) is addressed to Chromatius, and says that it was demanded by him at the time of Alaric’s invasion of Italy (a.d. 400) as an antidote to the unsettlement of men’s minds. Rufinus speaks humbly of himself as having little practice in Latin writing. He says that he has compressed the 10th book which contained little of real history, and added what remained of it to Book 9. See Prolegomena to Eusebius in this Series Vol. i. p. 54.
It is a curious and important fact that all the translations known to have been made by Rufinus have survived. This is due no doubt to their being the only translations extant in the Middle Ages of great writers like Origen and Basil, and to the impossibility of procuring others. The uncritical spirit of the time may have been favourable to them. Had they been recognized as the works of Rufinus, they might have been destroyed; but it was possible, even after the revival of learning, to attribute many of them to Jerome.
Gennadius mentions a series of Rufinus’ letters, which have not survived, amongst which were several of special importance addressed to Proba, a lady who is highly commended by Jerome in his letter to Demetrias. 2771 Jerome also mentions (537) some translations of Rufinus from Latin into Greek, but his allusion is somewhat vague; and some translations from the LXX (536). A translation of Josephus, and a Commentary on the first 75 Psalms, and on Hosea, Joel and Amos, a Life of St. Eugenia and a Book on the Faith have been attributed to Rufinus but are believed not to be his. These, with the exception of the translation of Josephus, are given by Vallarsi in his edition of Rufinus. Besides these, translations of Origen’s Seven Homilies on Matthew and one on John, and of his treatises on Mary Magdalen and on Christ’s Epiphany have at times been attributed to Rufinus.
We do not propose to go minutely into the Bibliography of Rufinus’ Works. Some of them were among the earliest printed books. The Editio Princeps of the Commentary on the Creed bears date Oxford, 1468 but is commonly believed to be really of 1478; that of the Ecclesiastical History, Paris, 1474; that of the History of the Monks, undated, is believed to be of 1471; that of the Commentaries of Origen is of 1503 (Aldus Minutius); that of the Sayings of Xystus, of 1507, and of the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν is of 1514 (Venice). They continued to be reprinted up to 1580; but, with the exception of the Sayings of Xystus, no further editions were published till the edition of Vallarsi (Verona, 1745), and the Life by Fontanini (Rome, 1742). Since that date, though various editions and translations of the Expositions of the Creed have appeared, no attempt has been made to give the whole of Rufinus’ writings. Migne (Patrologia, Vol. xxi., Paris, 1849) is contented to reprint Vallarsi without alteration.
No complete edition of Rufinus’ Works, therefore, exists. The volume of Migne’s Patrologia (21) contains the Life by Fontanini (Rome, 1742), the Notice by Schœnemann (Leipzig, 1792), and Vallarsi’s edition (Verona, 1745) of Rufinus’ chief works, viz. The Benedictions of the Patriarchs, the Commentary on the Creed, the Monastic History, the Ecclesiastical History, the Apology against Jerome, and the Apology addressed to Anastasius. Vallarsi had intended to edit the Translations from Greek writers, but did not accomplish this. The Prefaces to these translations, some of which are of great importance, have therefore to be sought by the student in the editions of the writers to whose works they are prefixed. They are collected and translated in this Volume for the first time.
We have in the present work not attempted to translate all the original works of Rufinus. We have omitted the Exposition of the Benedictions of the Twelve patriarchs, the Ecclesiastical History and the History of the Monks. The rest we have given. They include his Apologies, together with the Letter of Pope Anastasius about him to John of Jerusalem, the Prefaces to the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν and the Apology of Pamphilus, and the Epilogue to the latter work, called the Dissertation on the adulteration of the Works of Origen, together with the Prefaces which are still extant to his Translations of Origen’s Commentaries and his Peroration to Origen on Romans. We have also included his best known work, his Commentary on the Creed, a translation of which has kindly been placed at our service by Dr. Heurtley, Lady Margaret Professor of Theology at Oxford.
Footnotes
413:2771Letter cxxx, 7.
Writings of Rufinus.
————————————
Preface to the Commentary on the Benedictions of the Twelve Patriarchs.
———————
Rufinus had arrived with Melania, in Italy, in the spring of 397, after a stay in the East of some 25 years. They had visited Paulinus at Nola, and had been entertained by him with the highest honours. Melania probably remained in Campania, where she had property, engaged in family affairs; but Rufinus set out for Rome. He stopped, however, for some months at the monastery of Pinetum near Terracina, with his friend Urseius the Abbot.
His work on Jacob’s Benedictions on his sons in Gen. xlix was occasioned by the following letter from Paulinus, who alludes to it in writing to Sulpicius Severus (Ep. xxviii). “I have written a short note to the Presbyter Rufinus, the companion of the saintly Melania in her spiritual journey, a truly holy and truly learned man, and one united with me on this account in the closest affection.” The work itself, being an Exposition of Scripture, is not given, but only the Preface.
Paulinus to his brother Rufinus, all best wishes. 2772
1. Even a short letter from one so likeminded as yourself is a great refreshment, like the dew which revives a thirsty field when the rivers are low. But while I confess that I have been refreshed by this letter which, though short, is still from you, and is sent by the servant of our common children, yet I have been troubled at hearing that all at once through the disquiet of your anxiety and the uncertainty caused by delay, you have determined that you must go to Rome. May the Lord grant you to receive joy in the Lord from what we are doing: so that, as now we share in your anxiety, so we may rejoice in your joy, and that we may still have some beginnings of hope that we may enjoy your presence, when you begin to see clearly your way and the will of the Lord concerning you.
2. You are kind enough, with that affection which makes you love me as yourself, to desire that I should take up more seriously the study of Greek literature. I acknowledge the kindness which dictates this wish; but I am unable to give it effect, unless, through God’s blessing on my earnest desires, I should have the happiness of your company for a longer time. How can I gain any proficiency in a foreign tongue in the absence of him who might teach me what I do not know? I think that, in the matter of the translation of St. Clement, 2773 besides the other defects of my abilities, you noticed this especially as showing the weakness caused by my want of practice, that where I had been unable to understand the words or to express them accurately, I have translated them according to my idea of their drift, or, to speak more truly, set down what I thought ought to be there. All the more therefore do I need that, through God’s mercy, I may have your company in fuller measure; for that will be like wealth to the poor or like gathering the crumbs which fall from the rich man’s table with the eager appetite of the bondman’s heart.
3. At the moment when I was writing these words my eye fell upon a passage of Scripture, occurring in a portion which I had set down for reading, namely that in which Judah is blessed by Jacob; and I determined after a time to knock at the door of your mind, for which the Lord had given me this most timely occasion. I beg you, if you love me, or rather because you love me so greatly, to write and say how you understand this blessing of the Patriarchs; and, if there are some things in it which are worth knowing but hard to understand, impart to me also the knowledge of them; especially of that passage which says: “Binding his colt to the vine and his ass’s 2774 colt to the haircloth.” 2775 Tell me what is the colt and the ass’s colt, and why his colt is to be bound to the vine, but the ass’s colt to the hair cloth.
The answer of Rufinus forms the Preface to his Exposition of the Benedictions.
1. The more I excuse myself to you, and the more I assert that I am unable to respond to your inquiries, the more instant you become in your requests, and the harder become your demands: you treat me as you would an ox whose laziness you have discovered, and prick his flanks and back as he stops and turns back with goads of ever increasing sharpness. I must point out to you, therefore, that, even if I am able to bow my neck low so as just to drag the heavy yoke which you lay upon me, yet I have no chance of bursting at a rapid pace into the open and wide-spreading plains through a form of speech which flows at large and pours itself forth over far-extending space. Bear with me therefore if my resolution has been but tardily fulfilled, and if I come up only at a feeble pace to the point to which you call me.
2. You ask me how the passage in Genesis is to be understood in which Israel the father of the patriarchs is represented as predicting what he saw would happen to each of his sons, and says of Judah, amongst other things: “Binding his colt to the vine, and his ass’s colt to the tendril of the vine.” You write it “and his ass’s colt to the haircloth” (cilicium); but in the Greek it stands: καὶ τῇ ἕλικι τὸν πῶλον τῆς ὄνου αὐτοῦ. The Greeks call by the name ἕλικα(twist) not the sprigs of the vine (as our copies have it) but those sickle-like shoots 2776 by which it supports itself on branches of trees or poles or the supports of the kind which I think the farmers call goatikins; 2777 so that the vine is made safe by these clinging shoots from all danger of falling, and the tendril can either become loaded with grapes or grow out in unfettered length. I think therefore that this very word (helici), like some others, must have been set down a long time ago in the Latin versions, and that it was afterwards supposed by unintelligent copyists that by helici, hair-cloth (cilicium) must be meant.
3. It is easy in this way to emend the mistakes of the translation; but it is not so easy to find out the meaning of the expression itself unless we take into consideration the whole passage. But the treatment of this passage would be placed in a fuller and clearer light if we could go back to the beginning of the whole of these Benedictions. But this implies no small amount of leisure and of time; or, to speak in a more Christian sense, it demands a mind illuminated by the Holy Spirit. My talent is but slight, and there are many demands on my time; and my friends are urging me to comply with their requests about Origen. 2778 But, so far as these circumstances admit, and so great a matter can be treated with brevity, I will state at once what appears to me the true meaning of this passage, for the love with which you bid me trust you in everything, and without prejudice to the judgment of others, who may have something better to say about it.
Footnotes
417:2772Salutem, a word implying well-being generally as well as health.
417:2773That is, the Recognitions. See the Preface to Rufinus’ Translation in this volume, with the explanatory note prefixed to it.
418:2774Gen. xlix. ii
418:2775This is a mistaken reading (though said by Vallarsi to be accepted by both Ambrose and Augustin), Cilicium for ἕλικι. Rufinus adopts the latter. “Binding his ass’s colt to the tendril of the vine.”
418:2776The word in the text rucinnulos is unknown in Latin. The most likely conjecture as to the right reading is ruscarias quibus (that is ruscarias falculas—sickles for weeding out butcher’s broom, as mentioned by Cato and Varro).
418:2777Capreolos. Properly little goats, thus used for the props, the fork of which resembled the horns of the goat. The word is also used for the tendrils of the vine, and is by some derived from capio.
418:2778That is about the translation of the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν. See the Preface to this further on.
Preface to Book II.
Rufinus, as we see by his Preface to the former book, considered it unsatisfactory to expound the Blessing upon Judah apart from those on his brethren. Paulinus therefore, taking the occasion of their common friend Cerealis’ journey to Rome, sends the following letter to induce Rufinus to expound the remaining Benedictions.
Paulinus to his brother Rufinus, all good wishes.
1. Although our son Cerealis declared to me that it was uncertain whether, in returning as he now does to St. Peter, 2779 he would be able to visit you, yet it appears to me that it would be blamable in me and vexatious to you were I not to write to you by him in whom you have a part as well as I. It seems to me preferable to lose some letter paper by his not visiting you rather than to lose credit with you as I think I should do by his visiting you without it: and therefore I have entrusted this letter, I will not say to chance, but to faith: for I believe that the Lord will direct to you the way both of our son and of my letter; since to those who long for good all will turn to good; and indeed he longs for you as you ought to be longed for by one who understands the good he may gain from your society. I believe that this longing of his in a good matter will not be lost, according to his faith and piety: and therefore I have confidence that he will reach you and abide with you, and that I shall see the saving help of the Lord doubled towards you, since in him you will have the accession of a good son and pupil and assistant, and he will find in you a father and teacher of all good things given to him from the Lord, who will add to the efficacy and power of his prayers the strength of spiritual grace. As to myself, though I have the assurance that when you return to the East you will be unwilling to depart without visiting me, yet my sins make me fear that the daughter of Babylon, may turn you away from me. I pray therefore with earnest longings to the Lord that he would give me not according to my deserts but according to my desire and may direct your course to me in the way of peace; for such as do not walk in that way are reprobate and condemned and incapable of truly longing for your presence.
2. But now for the business part of my letter. I charge you, with the importunity, with which I am in the habit of knocking at your door even in the middle of the night, being driven by fear of a refusal to the modest attitude of a supplicant, to show me kindness once more, and to expound the Benedictions on the twelve Patriarchs. You have already made a beginning with the prophecy relating to Judah, and have given, according to the precept, a threefold interpretation of it. I now beg you to expound the prophecy as it relates to each of the sons of Judah: so that I may myself become possessed of the truth by your means, and may also gain through your help the favor and the praise which will accrue to me; for I shall thus be able to make answer to those who have thought well to consult me on the difficulties of this passage of Scripture not with foolish words drawn from my own understanding but with divine truth flowing from your inspiration.
————————————
Rufinus, though at this time busy with his larger works, the translations of Pamphilus’ defence of Origen, and Origen’s Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν, and, though about to set out for Rome, lost no time in composing the work which Paulinus demanded, and sent it him with the following letter.
Rufinus to His Brother Paulinus, the Man of God, with All Good Wishes.
1. Though our common son Cerealis did not visit me, he felt what pain he would cause me if he delayed my reception of your letter, and forwarded it to me. In reading it I felt, as usual, a continual increase in my yearning towards you: but I found towards its close a request from which I have frequently begged you to excuse me—I mean the request which you make that I should write something in answer to your questions as to the interpretation of passages of Scripture. I thought that I should lead you to desist from these questions by the writings I have once and again sent you, which have given evidence of my ignorance and of the roughness of my speech.
2. But since you still are not weary of commanding me, I have at once, to the best of my powers, added to what I had written at your desire on the Benediction of Judah the comments on the remaining eleven patriarchs. I acted like the man in the parable of the two sons. I thought that I should thus best fulfil the father’s will: and though when he ordered me to go into the vineyard I had said I will not go, yet after a while I went. If, as I grant, there is some rashness in the fact that with so little capacity we attempt such a great task, I would say, with submission to you, that this must be most justly imputed to you, since, through your excessive love for me you do not see that my measure of knowledge, as of other virtues, is but slight. I wrote this work in the days of Lent, while I was staying in the monastery of Pinetum, and I wrote it for you. But I found it impossible to conceal this poor work from the brethren who were there: and they, considering that a thing which had been honoured by your approval must be of great importance, extorted from me the permission to copy it for themselves. Thus, while you demand from me food for yourself you give refreshment to others also. Farewell, and be in peace, my most loving brother, most true worshipper of God, and an Israelite in whom there is no guile. I entreat you who are so full of the grace of God to hold me still in remembrance.
Footnotes
418:2779That is to Rome.
Translation of Pamphilus’ Defence of Origen.
Written at Pinetum a.d. 397.
While Rufinus was staying at Pinetum, a Christian named Macarius 2780 sought his advice and assistance. He was engaged in a controversy with the Mathematici, a class of men who had deserted the scientific studies from which they took their name, and had turned to astrology and a belief in Fatalism. Macarius, having heard of Origen’s greatness in the region of Christian speculation, earnestly desired some knowledge of his writings: but was unable to attain it through ignorance of Greek. He declared to Rufinus that he had had a dream in which he saw a ship laden with Eastern merchandize arriving in Italy, and that it was declared to him that this ship would contain the means of attaining the knowledge he desired. The coming of Rufinus seemed to him the fulfilment of his dream, and he earnestly besought him to impart to him some of the treasures of his Greek learning, and especially to translate for him Origen’s great speculative work, the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν, that is On First Principles. 2781 Rufinus hesitated, knowing that there was a strong prejudice against Origen, and that he was looked on, especially in the West, as a heretic, though his writings were little known there. He yielded, however, to the solicitations of Macarius: but to guard against the imputation of heresy, he undertook three preliminary works. First, he translated the Apology of the Martyr Pamphilus for Origen; secondly, he wrote a short treatise on the Adulteration by heretics of the works of Origen; and, thirdly, in translating the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν he prefixed to it an elaborate Preface in justification of his course in translating the work. All these documents became the subject of vehement controversy which found its expression in the letter of Jerome to his friends at Rome, and the Apologies of Rufinus and Jerome translated in this volume.
The Apology of Pamphilus for Origen forms the sixth book of a work undertaken by him in connexion with Eusebius of Cæsarea, the Church Historian. Pamphilus was a great collector of books, and a learned man, but Eusebius was the chief writer. Pamphilus was put to death in the last persecution, that under Galerius; and Eusebius having at a later time fallen under suspicion of Arianism, it was attempted by those who disliked Origen, to dissociate Pamphilus from all connexion with the work. There seems however no reason to doubt, notwithstanding Jerome’s violent protestations, that Pamphilus was associated with Eusebius throughout the work, and that he actually wrote the sixth book. The translation of this Apology was made first, and sent out with a Preface which runs as follows:
You have been moved by your desire to know the truth, Macarius, who are “a man greatly beloved,” 2782 to make a request of me, which will bring you the blessing attached to the knowledge of the truth; but it will win for me the greatest indignation on the part of those who consider themselves aggrieved whenever any one does not think evil of Origen. It is true that it is not my opinion about him that you have asked for, but that of the holy martyr Pamphilus; and you have requested to have the book which he is said to have written in his defence in Greek translated for you into Latin: nevertheless I do not doubt that there will be some who will think themselves aggrieved if I say anything in his defence even in the words of another man. I beg them to do nothing in the spirit of presumption and of prejudice; and, since we must all stand before the judgment seat of Christ, not to refuse to hear the truth spoken, lest haply they should do wrong through ignorance. Let them consider that to wound the consciences of their weaker brethren by false accusations is to sin against Christ; and therefore let them not lend their ears to the accusers, nor seek an account of another man’s faith from a third party, especially when an opportunity is given them for gaining personal and direct knowledge, and the substance and quality of each man’s faith is to be known by his own confession. For so the Scripture says: 2783 “With the heart man believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation”: and: 2784 “By his words shall each man be justified, and by his word shall he be condemned.” The opinions of Origen in the various parts of Scripture are clearly set forth in the present work: as to the cause of our finding certain places in which he contradicts himself, an explanation will be offered in the short document subjoined. 2785 But as for myself, I hold that which has been handed down to us from the holy fathers, namely, that the Holy Trinity is coeternal, and of a single nature, virtue and substance; that the Son of God in these last times has been made man, has suffered for our transgressions and rose again from the dead in the very flesh in which he suffered, and thereby imparted the hope of the resurrection to the whole race of mankind. When we speak of the resurrection of the flesh, we do so, not with any subterfuges, as is slanderously reported by certain persons; we believe that it is this very flesh in which we are now living which will rise again, not one kind of flesh instead of another, nor another body than the body of this flesh. When we speak of the body rising we do so in the words of the apostle; for he himself made use of this word: and when we speak of the flesh, our confession is that of the Creed. It is an absurd invention of maliciousness to think that the human body is different from the flesh. However, whether we speak of that which is to rise, according to the common faith, as the flesh, or, according to the Apostle, as the body, this we must believe, that according to the clear statement of the Apostle, that which shall rise shall rise in power and in glory; it will rise an incorruptible and a spiritual body: for “corruption cannot inherit incorruption.” We must maintain this preëminence of the body, or flesh, which is to be: but, with this proviso, we must hold that the resurrection of the flesh is perfect and entire; we must on the one hand maintain the identity of the flesh, while on the other we must not detract from the dignity and glory of the incorruptible and spiritual body. For so the Scripture speaks. This is what is preached by the reverend Bishop John at Jerusalem; this we with him both confess and hold. If any one either believes or teaches otherwise, or insinuates that we believe differently from the exposition of our faith, let him be anathema. Let this then be taken as a record of our belief by any who desire to know it. Whatever we read and whatever we do is in accordance with this account of our faith; we follow the words of the Apostle, 2786 “proving all things, holding fast that which is good, avoiding every form of evil.” 2787 “And as many as walk by this rule, peace be upon them and upon the Israel of God.”
Footnotes
420:2780See the account in Rufinus’ Apology I. 11.
420:2781The word may also mean On beginnings, or On Principalities and Powers: these ideas being connected together in the speculation of the Alexandrian theology.
420:2782Daniel x. 11, ix. 23. The name Macarius means Blessed.
420:2783Rom. x. 10
420:2784Matt. xii. 37
420:2785See the Epilogue, infra.
421:27861 Thess. 5:21, 22
421:2787Gal. vi. 16
Rufinus’s Epilogue to Pamphilus the Martyr’s Apology for Origen
otherwise
The Book Concerning the Adulteration of the Works of Origen.
————————————
Addressed to Macarius at Pinetum a.d. 397.
————————————
The next work was sent out at the same time with Pamphilus’ Apology. Rufinus believed that Origen’s works had been adulterated by heretics so as to turn his assertions into support of their own opinions. He therefore, in his translation of the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν, altered many things which had a heterodox meaning as found in the ordinary mss. of Origen, so as to make the work consistent with itself and with the orthodox views expressed in other parts of Origen’s writings. How far this process was legitimate or honest must be judged from a perusal of the controversy which followed; but it should be borne in mind, first, that the standard of literary exactness and conscientiousness was not the same in those days as in ours; secondly, that when everything depended on copyists there was room for infinite variations in the copies, whether through negligence, ignorance or fraud; thirdly, that the principles adopted by Rufinus were precisely those acknowledged by his great opponent Jerome, in his Treatise De Optimo Genere Interpretandi, and his Letter to Vigilantius (Letters lxvi and lxi).
My object in the translation from Greek into Latin of the holy martyr Pamphilus’ Apology for Origen, which I have given in the preceding volume according to my ability and the requirements of the matter, is this: I wish you to know through full information that the rule of faith which has been set forth above in his writings is that which we must embrace and hold; for it is clearly shown that the Catholic opinion is contained in them all. Nevertheless you have to allow that there are found in his books certain things not only different from this but in certain cases even repugnant to it; things which our canons of truth do not sanction, and which we can neither receive nor approve. As to the cause of this an opinion has reached me which has been widely entertained, and which I wish to be fully known by you and by those who desire to know what is true, since it is possible also that some who have before been actuated by the love of fault-finding may acquiesce in the truth and reason of the matter when they have it set before them; for some seem determined to believe anything in the world to be true rather than that which withdraws from them the occasions of fault-finding. It must, I think, be felt to be wholly impossible that a man so learned and so wise, a man whom even his accusers may well admit to have been neither foolish nor insane, should have written what is contrary and repugnant to himself and his own opinions. But even suppose that this could in some way have happened; suppose, as some perhaps have said, that in the decline of life he might have forgotten what he had written in his early days, and have made assertions at variance with his former opinions; how are we to deal with the fact that we sometimes find in the very same passages, and, as I may say, almost in successive sentences, clauses inserted expressive of contrary opinions? Can we believe that in the same work and in the same book, and even sometimes, as I have said, in the following paragraph, a man could have forgotten his own views? For example that, when he had said just before that no passage in all the Scripture could be found in which the Holy Spirit was spoken of as made or created, he could have immediately added that the Holy Spirit had been made along with the rest of the creatures? or again, that the same man who clearly states that the Father and the Son are of one substance, or as it is called in Greek Homoousion, could in the next sentence say that He was of another substance, and was a created being, when he had but a little before described him as born of the very nature of God the Father? Or again in the matter of the resurrection of the flesh, could he who so clearly declared that it was the nature of the flesh which ascended with the Word of God into heaven, and there appeared to the celestial Powers, presenting a new image of himself for them to worship, could he, I ask you, possibly turn round and say that this flesh was not to be saved? Such things could not happen even in the case of a man who had taken leave of his senses and was not sound in the brain. How, therefore, this came to pass, I will point out with all possible brevity. The heretics are capable of any violence, they have no remorse and no scruples: this we are forced to recognize by the audacities of which they have been frequently convicted. And, just as their father the devil has from the beginning made it his object to falsify the words of God and twist them from their true meaning, and subtilely to interpolate among them his own poisonous ideas, so he has left these successors of his the same art as their inheritance. Accordingly, when God had said to Adam, “You shall eat of all the trees of the garden;” he, when he wished to deceive Eve interpolated a single syllable, by which he reduced within the narrowest bounds God’s liberality in permitting all the fruits to be eaten. He said: “Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of any tree of the garden?” and thus by suggesting the complaint that God’s command was severe, he more easily persuaded her to transgress the precept. The heretics have followed the example of their father, the craft of their teacher. Whenever they found in any of the renowned writers of old days a discussion of those things which pertain to the glory of God so full and faithful that every believer could gain profit and instruction from it, they have not scrupled to infuse into their writings the poisonous taint of their own false doctrines; this they have done, either by inserting things which the writers had not said or by changing by interpolation what they had said, so that their own poisonous heresy might more easily be asserted and authorized by passing under the name of all the church writers of the greatest learning and renown; they meant it to appear that well-known and orthodox men had held as they did. We hold the clearest proofs of this in the case of the Greek writers and this adulteration of books is to be found in the case of many of the ancients; but it will suffice to adduce the testimony of a few, so that it may be more easily understood what has befallen the writings of Origen.
Clement, the disciple of the Apostles, who was bishop of the Roman church next to the Apostles, was a martyr, wrote the work which is called in the Greek ᾽Αναγνωρισμός, or in Latin, The Recognition. 2788 In these books he sets forth again and again in the name of the Apostle Peter a doctrine which appears to be truly apostolical: yet in certain passages the heresy of Eunomius is so brought in that you would imagine that you were listening to an argument of Eunomius himself, asserting that the Son of God was created out of no existing elements. Then again that other method of falsification is introduced, by which it is made to appear that the nature of the devil and of other demons has not resulted from the wickedness of their will and purpose, but from an exceptional and separate quality of their creation, although he in all other places had taught that every reasonable creature was endowed with the faculty of free will. There are also some other things inserted into his books which the church’s creed does not admit. I ask, then, what we are to think of these things? Are we to believe that an apostolic man, nay, almost an apostle (since he writes the things which the apostles speak), one to whom the apostle Paul bore his testimony in the words, “With Clement and others, my fellow labourers, whose names are in the book of life” was the writer of words which contradict the book of life? or are we to say, as we have said before, that perverse men, in order to gain authority for their own heresies by the use of the names of holy men, and so procure their readier acceptance, interpolated these things which it is impossible to believe that the true authors either thought or wrote?
Again, the other Clement, the presbyter of Alexandria, and the teacher of that church, in almost all his books describes the three Persons as having one and the same glory and eternity: and yet we sometimes find in his books passages in which he speaks of the Son as a creature of God. Is it credible that so great a man as he, so orthodox in all points, and so learned, either held opinions mutually contradictory, or left in writing views concerning God which it is an impiety, I will not say to believe, but even to listen to?
Once more, Dionysius the Bishop of Alexandria, was a most learned maintainer of the church’s faith, and in passages without end defended the unity and eternity of the Trinity, so earnestly that some persons of less insight imagine that he held the views of Sabellius; yet in the books which he wrote against the heresy of Sabellius, there are things inserted of such a character that the Arians endeavour to shield themselves under his authority, and on this account the holy Bishop Athanasius felt himself compelled to write an apology for his work, because he was assured that he could not have held strange opinions or have written things in which he contradicted himself, but felt sure that these things had been interpreted by ill disposed men.
This opinion we have been led to form by the force of the facts themselves, in the case of these very reverend men and doctors of the church; we have found it impossible, I say, to believe that those reverend men who again and again have supported the church’s belief should in particular points have held opinions contradictory to themselves. As to Origen, however, in whom, as I have said above, are to be found, as in those others, certain diversities of statement, it will not be sufficient to think precisely as we think or feel about those who enjoy an established reputation for orthodoxy; nor could a similar charge be met by a similar excuse, were it not that its validity is shown by words and writings of his own in which he makes this fact the subject of earnest complaint. What he had to suffer while still living in the flesh, while still having feeling and sight, from the corruption of his books and treatises, or from counterfeit versions of them, we may learn clearly from his own letter which he wrote to certain intimate friends at Alexandria; and by this you will see how it comes to pass that some things which are self-contradictory are found in his writings. 2789
“Some of those persons who take a pleasure in accusing their neighbours, bring against us and our teaching the charge of blasphemy, though from us they have never heard anything of the kind. Let them take heed to themselves how they refuse to mark that solemn injunction which says that 2790 ‘Revilers shall not inherit the kingdom of God,’ when they declare that I hold that the father of wickedness and perdition, and of those who are cast forth from the kingdom of God, that is the devil, is to be saved, a thing which no man can say even if he has taken leave of his senses and is manifestly insane. Yet it is no wonder, I think, if my teaching is falsified by my adversaries, and is corrupted and adulterated in the same manner as the epistle of Paul the Apostle. Certain men, as we know, compiled a false epistle under the name of Paul, so that they might trouble the Thessalonians as if the day of the Lord were nigh at hand, and thus beguile them. It is on account of that false epistle that he wrote these words in the second epistle to the Thessalonians: 2791 ‘We beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together unto him; to the end that ye be not quickly shaken from your mind, nor yet be troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter as sent from us, as that the day of the Lord is at hand. Let no man beguile you in any wise.’ It is something of the same kind, I perceive, which is happening to us also. A certain promoter of heresy, after a discussion which had been held between us in the presence of many persons, and notes of it had been taken, procured the document from those who had written out the notes, and added or struck out whatever he chose, and changed things as he thought right, and published it abroad as if it were my work, but pointing in triumphant scorn at the expressions which he had himself inserted. The brethren in Palestine, indignant at this, sent a man to me at Athens to obtain from me an authentic copy of the work. Up to that time I had never even read it over again or revised it: it had been so completely neglected and thrown aside that it could hardly be found. Nevertheless, I sent it: and,—God is witness that I am speaking the truth,—when I met the man himself who had adulterated the work, and took him to task for having done so, he answered, as if he were giving me satisfaction: “I did it because I wished to improve that treatise and to purge away its faults.” What kind of a purging was this that he applied to my dissertation? such a purging as Marcion or his successor Apelles after him gave to the Gospels and to the writings of the Apostle. They subverted the true text of Scripture; and this man similarly first took away the true statements which I had made, and then inserted what was false to furnish grounds for accusation against me. But, though those who have dared to do this are impious and heretical men, yet those who give credence to such accusations against us shall not escape the judgment of God. There are others also, not a few, who have done this through a wish to throw confusion into the churches. Lately, a certain heretic who had seen me at Ephesus and had refused to meet me, and had not opened his mouth in my presence, but for some reason or other had avoided doing so, afterwards composed a dissertation according to his own fancy, partly mine, partly his own, and sent it to his disciples in various places: I know that it reached those who were in Rome, and I doubt not that it reached others also. He was behaving in the same reckless way at Antioch also before I came there: and the dissertation which he brought with him came into the hands of many of our friends. But when I arrived, I took him to task in the presence of many persons, and, when he persisted, with a complete absence of shame, in the impudent defence of his forgery, I demanded that the book should be brought in amongst us, so that my mode of speech might be recognized by the brethren, who of course knew the points on which I am accustomed to insist and the method of teaching which I employ. He did not, however, venture to bring in the book, and his assertions were refuted by them all and he himself was convicted of forgery, and thus the brethren were taught a lesson not to give ear to such accusations. If then any one is willing to trust me at all—I speak as in the sight of God—let him believe what I say about the things which are falsely inserted in my letter. But if any man refuses to believe me, and chooses to speak evil of me, it is not to me that he does the injury: he will himself be arraigned as a false witness before God, since he is either bearing false witness against his neighbour, or giving credit to those who bear it.”
Such are the complaints which he made while still living, and while he was still able to detect the corruptions and falsifications which had been made in his books. There is another letter of his, in which I remember to have read a complaint of the falsifying of his writings; but I have not a copy of it at hand, otherwise I could add to those which I have quoted a second testimony in favour of his good faith and veracity direct from himself. But I think that I have said enough to satisfy those who listen to what is said, not in the interest of strife and detraction, but in that of a love of truth. I have shown and proved in the case of the saintly men of whom I have made mention, and of whose orthodoxy is no question, that, where the tenor of a book is presumably right, anything which is found in it contrary to the faith of the church is more properly believed to have been inserted by heretics than to have been written by the author: and I cannot think it an absurd demand that the same thing should be believed in the case of Origen, not only because the argument is similar but because of the witness given by himself in the complaints which I have brought out from his writings: otherwise we must believe that, like a silly or insane person, he has written in contradiction to himself.
As to the possibility that the heretics may have acted in the violent manner supposed, such wickedness may easily be believed of them. They have given a specimen of it, which makes it credible in the present case, in the fact that they have been unable to keep off their impious hands even from the sacred words of the Gospel. Any one who has a mind to see how they have acted in the case of the Acts of the Apostles or their Epistles, how they have befouled them and gnawed them away, how they have defiled them in every kind of way, sometimes adding words which expressed their impious doctrine, sometimes taking out the opposing truths, will understand it most fully if he will read the books of Tertullian written against Marcion. It is no great thing that they should have corrupted the writings of Origen when they have dared to corrupt the sayings of God our Saviour. It is true that some persons may withhold their assent from what I am saying on the ground of the difference of the heresies; since it was one kind of heresy the partisans of which corrupted the Gospels, but it is another which is aimed at in these passages which, as we assert, have been inserted in the works of Origen. Let those who have such doubts consider that, as in all the saints dwells the one spirit of God (for the Apostle says, 2792 “The spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets,” and again, 2793 “We all have been made to drink of that one spirit”); so also in all the heretics dwells the one spirit of the devil, who teaches them all and at all times the same or similar wickedness.
There may, however, be some to whom the instances we have given have less persuasive force because they have to do with Greek writers; and therefore, although it is a Greek writer for whom I am pleading, yet, since it is the Latin tongue which is, so to speak, entrusted with the argument, and they are Latin people before whom you have earnestly begged me to plead the cause of these men, and to show what wounds they suffer by the calumnious renderings of their works, it will be satisfactory to show that things of the same kind have happened to Latin as well as Greek writers, and that men approved for their saintly character have had a storm of calumny raised against them by the falsification of their works. I will recount things of still recent memory, so that nothing may be lacking to the manifest credibility of my contention, and its truth may lie open for all to see.
Hilary Bishop of Pictavium 2794 was a believer in the Catholic doctrine, and wrote a very complete work of instruction with the view of bringing back from their error those who had subscribed the faithless creed of Ariminum. 2795 This book fell into the hands of his adversaries and ill wishers, whether, as some said, by bribing his secretary, or by no matter what other cause. He knew nothing of this: but the book was so falsified by them, the saintly man being all the while entirely unconscious of it, that, when his enemies began to accuse him of heresy in the episcopal assembly, as holding what they knew they had corruptly inserted in his manuscript, he himself demanded the production of his book as evidence of his faith. It was brought from his house, and was found to be full of matter which he repudiated: but it caused him to be excommunicated and to be excluded from the meeting of the synod. In this case, however, though the crime was one of unexampled wickedness, the man who was the victim of it was alive, and present in the flesh; and the hostile faction could be convicted and brought to punishment, when their tricks became known and their machinations were exposed. A remedy was applied through statements, explanations, and similar things: for living men can take action on their own behalf, the dead can refute no accusations under which they labour.
Take another case. The whole collection of the letters of the martyr Cyprian is usually found in a single manuscript. Into this collection certain heretics who held a blasphemous doctrine about the Holy Spirit inserted a treatise of Tertullian on the Trinity, which was faultily expressed though he is himself an upholder of our faith: and from the copies thus made they wrote out a number of others; these they distributed through the whole of the vast city of Constantinople at a very low price: men were attracted by this cheapness and readily bought up the documents full of hidden snares of which they knew nothing; and thus the heretics found means of gaining credit for their impious doctrines through the authority of a great name. It happened, however, that, shortly after the publication, there were found there some of our catholic brothers who were able to expose this wicked fabrication, and recalled as many as they could reach from the entanglements of error. In this they partly succeeded. But there were a great many in those parts who remained convinced that the saintly martyr Cyprian held the belief which had been erroneously expressed by Tertullian.
I will add one other instance of the falsification of a document. It is one of recent memory, though it is an example of the primeval subtlety, and it surpasses all the stories of the ancients.
Bishop Damasus, at the time when a consultation was held in the matter of the reconciling of the followers of Apollinarius to the church, 2796 desired to have a document setting forth the faith of the church, which should be subscribed by those who wished to be reconciled. The compiling of this document he entrusted to a certain friend of his, a presbyter and a highly accomplished man, 2797 who usually acted for him in matters of this kind. When he came to compose the document, he found it necessary, in speaking of the Incarnation of our Lord, to apply to him the expression “Homo Dominicus.” The Apollinarists 2798 took offence at this expression, and began to impugn it as a novelty. The writer of the document thereupon undertook to defend himself, and to confute the objectors by the authority of ancient Catholic writers; and he happened to show to one of those who complained of the novelty of the expression a book of the bishop Athanasius in which the word which was under discussion occurred. The man to whom this evidence was offered appeared to be convinced, and asked that the manuscript should be lent to him so that he might convince the rest who from their ignorance were still maintaining their objections. When he had got the manuscript into his hands he devised a perfectly new method of falsification. He first erased the passage in which the expression occurred, and then wrote in again the same words which he had erased. He returned the paper, and it was accepted without question. The controversy about this expression again arose; the manuscript was brought forward: the expression in question was found in it, but in a position where there had been an erasure: and the man who had brought forward such a manuscript lost all authority, since the erasure seemed to be the proof of malpractice and falsification. However, in this case as in one which I mentioned before, it was a living man who was thus treated by a living man, and he at once did all in his power to lay bare the iniquitous fraud which had been committed, and to remove the stain of this nefarious act from the man who was innocent and had done no evil of the kind, and to attach it to the real author of the deed, so that it should completely overwhelm him with infamy.
Since, then, Origen in his letter complains with his own voice that he has suffered such things at the hands of the heretics who wished him ill, and similar things have happened in the case of many other orthodox men among both the dead and the living, and since in the cases adduced, men’s writings are proved to have been tampered with in a similar way: what determined obstinacy is this, which refuses to admit the same excuse when the case is the same, and, when the circumstances are parallel, assigns to one party the allowance due to respect, but to another infamy due to a criminal. The truth must be told, and must not lie hid at this point; for it is impossible for any man really to judge so unjustly as to form different opinions on cases which are similar. The fact is that the prompters of Origen’s accusers are men who make long controversial discourses in the churches, 2799 and even write books the whole matter of which is borrowed from him, and who wish to deter men of simple mind from reading him, for fear that their plagiarisms should become widely known, though, indeed, their appropriations would be no reproach to them if they were not ungrateful to their master.
For instance, one of these men, 2800 who thinks that a necessity is laid upon him, 2801 like that of preaching the Gospel, to speak evil of Origen among all nations and tongues, declared in a vast assembly of Christian hearers that he had read six thousand of his works. Surely, if his object in reading these were, as he is in the habit of asserting, only to acquaint himself with Origen’s faults, ten or twenty or at most thirty of these works would have sufficed for the purpose. But to read six thousand books is no longer wishing to know the man, but giving up almost one’s whole life to his teaching and researches. On what ground then can his words be worthy of credit when he blames men who have only read quite a few of these books while their rule of faith is kept sacred and their piety unimpaired.
What has been said may suffice to show what opinion we ought to form of the books of Origen. I think that every one who has at heart the interests of truth, not of controversy, may easily assent to the well-proved statements I have made. But if any man perseveres in his contentiousness, we have no such custom. 2802 It is a settled custom among us, when we read him, to hold fast that which is good, according to the apostolic injunction. If we find in these books anything discrepant to the Catholic faith, we suspect that it has been inserted by the heretics, and consider it as alien from his opinion as it is from our faith. If, however, this is a mistake of ours, we run, as I think, no danger from such an error; for we ourselves, through God’s help, continue unharmed by avoiding what we hold in suspicion and condemn: and further we shall not be accounted accusers of our brethren before God (you will remember that the accusing of the brethren is the special work of the devil, and that he received the name of devil 2803 from his being a slanderer). Moreover, we thus escape the sentence pronounced on evil speakers, which separates those who are such from the kingdom of God.
Footnotes
422:2788Rufinus was deceived as was the whole world until the revival of learning, in believing this fabrication to be the work of Clement. It is really a romance in the form of an autobiography of Clement, supposed to be addressed to James of Jerusalem; and was written probably in Asia Minor or Syria about a.d. 200. See Article “Clementine Literature” in Dict. of Ch. Biog.
423:2789The letter is headed “On the adulteration and corruption of his books; from the 4th book of the letters of Origen: a letter written to certain familiar friends at Alexandria.”
423:27901 Cor. vi. 10
424:27912 Thess. ii. 1-3
425:27921 Cor. xiv. 32
425:27931 Cor. xii. 13
425:2794Poictiers.
425:2795There seem to be no means of throwing light upon this story. Hilary was not at the council of Ariminum, but at that of Seleucia, held the same year (359). On his return to Gaul in 361 he endeavoured, in various meetings of bishops to reunite with the Homoousians those who had subscribed the creed of Ariminum. (See Art. on Hilary Pictav. in Dict. of Christ. Biography.) It may have been in one of these meetings that this scene occurred.
426:2796This was in 382, the year after the Council of Constantinople. Jerome had come from Constantinople to Rome with the Eastern Bishops Epiphanius of Salamis in Cyprus and Paulinus of Antioch. His position at Rome is described in the words of his letter (cxxiii) to Ageruchia, c. 10. “I was assisting Damasus in matters of ecclesiastical literature, and answering the questions discussed in the Councils of the East and the West.”
426:2797Jerome.
426:2798Apollinaris, in his reaction from Arianism, held that the Godhead supplied the place of the human soul in Christ. Hence their objection to this expression.
426:2799This is believed to refer to Epiphanius, whose anti-Origenistic sermon at Jerusalem in the year 394 greatly irritated the Bishops John and Rufinus. See Jerome Ep. li, and “Against John of Jerusalem,” c. 14.
426:2800Epiphanius.
426:28011 Cor. ix. 16
427:2802Adapted from 1 Cor. xi. 16
427:2803Διάβολος (diabolus) from διαβάλλω to slander.
Preface to the Translations of Origen’s Books Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν
————————————
Addressed to Macarius, at Pinetum, a.d. 397.
————————————
The Translation of the two first Books of the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν was issued soon after, or contemporaneously with the Apology of Pamphilus. The Preface to them was intended to remove prejudices by showing that Jerome (who though not named is clearly described) had been Rufinus’ precursor in translating Origen. The compliments paid to Jerome were no doubt sincere: but the use made of his previous action can hardly be justified. Rufinus knew well that Jerome’s view of Origen had to some extent altered, that a disagreeable controversy had sprung up at Jerusalem about him, in which he and Jerome had taken opposite sides: and that the animosity aroused by this had with the greatest difficulty been allayed, and a reconciliation effected at the moment when he had quitted Palestine. This Preface with the Translation of the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν was the most immediate cause of the violent controversy and the final estrangement between Rufinus and Jerome.
I am aware that a great many of our brethren were incited by their longing for Scriptural knowledge to demand from various men who were versed in Greek literature that they would give the works of Origen to men who used the Latin tongue, and thus make him a Roman. Among these was that brother and associate of mine to whom this request was made by bishop Damasus, and who when he translated the two homilies on the Song of Songs from Greek into Latin prefixed to the work a preface 2804 so full of beauty and so magnificent that he awoke in every one the desire of reading Origen and eagerly investigating his works. He said that to the soul of that great man the words might well be applied: 2805 “The King has brought me into his chamber”: and he declared that Origen in his other books had surpassed all other men, but in this had surpassed himself. What he promises in this Preface is, indeed, that he will give to Roman ears not only these books but many others of Origen. But I find that he is so enamoured of his own style that he pursues a still more ambitious object, namely, that he should be the creator of the book, not merely its translator. I am then following out a task begun by him and commended by his example; but it is out of my power to set forth the words of this great man with a force and an eloquence like his: and I have therefore to fear that it may happen through my fault that the man whom he justly commends as a teacher of the church both in knowledge and in wisdom second only to the Apostles may be thought to have a far lower rank through my poverty of language. When I reflected on this I was inclined to keep silence, and not to assent to the brethren who were constantly adjuring me to make the translation. But your influence is such, my most faithful brother Macarius, that even the consciousness of my unfitness is not sufficient to make me resist. I have therefore yielded to your importunity though it was against my resolution, so that I might no longer be exposed to the demands of a severe taskmaster; but I have done so on this condition and on this understanding, that in making the translation I should follow as far as possible the method of my predecessors, and especially of him of whom I have already made mention. He, after translating into Latin above seventy of the books of Origen which he called Homiletics, and also a certain number of the “Tomes,” proceeded to purge and pare away in his translation all the causes of stumbling which are to be found in the Greek works; and this he did in such a way that the Latin reader will find nothing in them which jars with our faith. In his steps, therefore, I follow, not, indeed, with the power of eloquence which is his, but, as far as may be, in his rules and method, that is, taking care not to promulgate those things which are found in the books of Origen to be discrepant and contradictory to one another. The cause of these variations I have set forth very fully for your information in the Apology which Pamphilus wrote for the books of Origen, to which I have appended a very short treatise 2806 showing by proofs which seem to me quite clear that his books have been in very many cases falsified by heretical and ill-disposed persons. This is especially the case with the books which you now require me to translate, namely, the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν, which may be rendered either Concerning First Principles or Concerning Principalities. These books are in truth, apart from these questions, exceedingly obscure and difficult; for in them he discusses matters over which the philosophers have spent their whole lives without any result. But our Christian thinker has done all that lay in his power to turn to purposes of sound religion the belief in a creator and the order of the created world which they had made subservient to their false religion. Wherever therefore I have found in his books anything contrary to the truth concerning the Trinity which he has in other places spoken of in a strictly orthodox sense, I have either omitted it as a foreign and not genuine expression or set it down in terms agreeing with the rule of faith which we find him constantly assenting to. There are things, no doubt, which he has developed in somewhat obscure language, wishing to pass rapidly over them, and as addressing those who have experience and knowledge of such matters; in these cases I have made the passage plain by adding words which I had read in other books of his where the matter was more fully treated. I have done this in the interest of clearness: but I have put in nothing of my own; I have only given him back his own words, though taken from other passages. I have explained this in the Preface, so that those who calumniate us should not think that they had found in this fresh material for their charges. But let them take heed what they are about in their perversity and contentiousness. As for me, I have not undertaken this laborious task (in which I trust that God will be my helper in answer to your prayers) for the sake of shutting the mouths of calumnious men, but with the view of supplying material for the increase of real knowledge to those who desired it. This only I require of every man who undertakes to copy out these books or to read them, in the sight of God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and adjure him by our faith in the coming kingdom, by the assurance of the resurrection of the dead, by the eternal fire which is prepared for the devil and his angels (even as he trusts that he shall not possess as his eternal inheritance that place where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth, and where their fire will not be quenched and their worm will not die) that he should neither add nor take away, that he should neither insert nor change, anything in that which is written but that he should compare his copy with that from which it is copied and correct it critically letter for letter, and that he should not keep by him a copy which has not received correction or criticism, lest, if his copy is not thus distinct, the difficulty of the meaning may beget a still greater obscurity in the mind of the readers.
Footnotes
427:2804Translated among Jerome’s works in this Series.
427:2805Cant. i. 4
428:2806See the Translation in this Volume.
Preface to Book III. of the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν
————————————
Rufinus had now come to Rome. The translation of B. III. and IV. had been made probably at Pinetum early in 398. He was already aware of the strong feelings aroused by his Translation of B. I. and II., and he complains that parts of his work were obtained by Jerome’s friends while still uncorrected, and used to his discredit (Apol. i, 18–21, ii, 44); but he continued the work, prefixing to it the following Preface as his justification.
Reader, remember me in your sacred moments of prayer, that I may be a worthy follower of the Spirit. It was you, Macarius, by whose instigation, I might say by whose compulsion, I translated the two first books of the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν. I did it during Lent; and at that time your near presence, my Christian brother, and your fuller leisure, forced me also into fuller diligence. But now that you are living at the opposite end of Rome from me, and my taskmaster pays his visits more seldom, I have taken longer in unfolding the sense of the two last books. You will remember that in my former preface I gave you warning that some people would be full of indignation when they found that I had no harm to say of Origen: and this, as I think you have found, has not been long in coming to pass. But if those demons who excite men’s tongues to evil speaking, have been already set on fire by that first part of the work, though in it the author had not yet fully laid bare their devices, what will be the effect of this second part, in which he is going to disclose all the secret labyrinths through which they creep into the hearts of men and deceive the hearts of the weak and the frail? You will see disorder springing up on all sides, and party spirit will be raised, and an outcry will spread all through the town, and Origen will be summoned to the bar and condemned for his attempt to dispel the darkness of ignorance by the light of the Gospel’s lamp. But all this will matter very little to those who are endeavouring to hold fast the sound form of the catholic faith while exercising their minds in the study of divine things.
I think it necessary, however, to remind you of the principle which I acted upon in reference to the former books, and which I have observed in the present case also, namely, not to set down in my translation things evidently contradictory to our belief and to the author’s opinions as elsewhere expressed, but to pass them over as not genuine but inserted by others. On the other hand I have not, either in the former books or in these, omitted the novel opinions which he has expressed about the formation of the reasonable creation, considering that it is not in such things that the faith mainly consists, but that what he is aiming at is merely knowledge and the exercise of the faculties, and that possibly there may be certain heresies which may have to be answered in this way. Only, in cases where he may have chosen to repeat in these later books what he had said before in the earlier, I have thought it expedient to cut out certain portions for the sake of brevity.
Those whose object in reading these books is to gain knowledge, not to disparage their author, would do well to seek the aid of men more skilled than themselves in interpreting them. For it is an absurd thing to get grammarians to explain to us the fictions of the poets’ writings and the laughable stories of the comedians, and yet to think that books which speak of God and the celestial powers, and the whole universe, and which discuss all the errors of pagan philosophy and of heretical pravity are things which any one can understand without a teacher to explain them. In this way it comes to pass that men prefer to remain in ignorance and to pronounce rash judgments on things which are difficult and obscure rather than to gain an understanding of them by diligent study.
Rufinus’ Apology in Defence of Himself.
————————————
Sent to Anastasius, Bishop of the City of Rome.
————————————
This document was called forth by accusations against Rufinus made, soon after his accession, to Anastasius, who held the Roman see from 498 to 503. The authority of the Roman Popes at this time was not what it afterwards became, and it is improbable that Anastasius should have summoned Rufinus, as some suppose him to have done, from Aquileia, where he was living on confidential terms with the Bishop Chromatius, to come to Rome to answer a formal accusation or to be judged by him. But since Rome was the centre of information, a Christian would not wish to be ill-thought of by its Bishop. Those who accused Rufinus were the friends of Jerome at Rome, especially the noble widow Marcella and the Senator Pammachius. They had endeavoured to gain some condemnation of Rufinus from Siricius before his death in November 398; but Siricius befriended Rufinus (“his simplicity was imposed on,” according to Jerome). 2807 On the election of Anastasius, however, in 399, they accused Rufinus of having, by his translation of Origen’s Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν introduced heresy into the Roman church. Jerome thus speaks of Marcella, Ep. cxxvii. 10. “She was the cause of the condemnation of the heretics: she brought witnesses who had been at a former time under their instruction, and thus imbued with error and heresy; she showed how many there were who had been deceived; she had the volumes of the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν brought in, and pointed out the alterations which the Scorpion 2808 had made in them: till at last letters were written, and that more than once, summoning the heretics to come and defend themselves, but they did not dare to come. So great was the force of conviction brought to bear on them that, to prevent their heresy being exposed in their presence, they chose to stay away and be condemned.” From the letter of Anastasius to John of Jerusalem about Rufinus we gather that, while he strongly disapproved the translation of Origen, he left Rufinus himself to his own conscience, and did not care to know what had become of him. The letter of Rufinus, though called an Apology, bears no trace of being an answer to a summons or judgment of the Pontiff, but merely a reply to statements which were likely to prejudice him in the Pontiff’s opinion. The year in which the Apology was written was 400 a.d.
1. It has been brought to my knowledge that certain persons, in the course of a controversy which they have been raising in your Holiness’ jurisdiction on matters of faith or on other points, have made mention of my name. I venture to believe that your Holiness, who have been trained from your infancy in the strict principles of the Church, has refused to listen to any calumnies which may have been directed against an absent person, and one who has been favourably known to you as united with you in the faith and love of God. Nevertheless, since I hear it reported that my reputation has been attacked, I have thought it right to make my position clear to your Holiness in writing. It was impossible for me to do this in person. I have just returned to my family 2809 after an absence of nearly 30 years; and it would have been harsh and almost inhuman to come away again so soon from those whom I had been so late in revisiting. The labour also of my long journey has left me too weak to begin the journey again. My object in this letter is not to remove some stain of suspicion from your mind, which I regard as a holy place, as a kind of divine sanctuary which does not admit any evil thing. Rather, I desire that the confession I am about to make to you may be like a stick placed in your hands to drive away any envious persons who may be barking like dogs against me.
2. My faith, indeed, was sufficiently proved when the heretics persecuted me. I was at that time sojourning in the church of Alexandria, and underwent imprisonment and exile which was then the penalty of faithfulness; yet for the sake of any who may wish to put my faith to the test, or to hear and learn what it is I will declare it. I believe that the Trinity is of one nature and godhead, of one and the same power and substance; so that between the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost there is no diversity at all, except that the one is the Father, the second the Son, and the third the Holy Ghost. There is a Trinity of real and living Persons, a unity of nature and substance.
3. I also confess that the Son of God has in these last days been born of the Virgin and the Holy Spirit: that he has taken upon him our natural human flesh and soul; that in this he suffered and was buried and rose again from the dead; that the flesh in which he rose was that same flesh which had been laid in the sepulchre; and that in this same flesh, together with the soul, he ascended into heaven after his resurrection: from whence we look for his coming to judge the quick and the dead.
4. But, further, as to the resurrection of our own flesh, I believe that it will be in its integrity and perfection; it will be this very flesh in which we now live. We do not hold, as is slanderously reported by some men, that another flesh will rise instead of this; but this very flesh, without the loss of a single member, without the cutting off of any single part of the body; none whatever of all its properties will be absent except its corruptibility. It is this which is promised by the holy Apostle concerning the body: It is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown in dishonour, it is raised in glory; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. This is the doctrine which has been handed down to me by those from whom I received holy baptism in the Church of Aquileia; and I think that it is the same which the Apostolic See has by long usage handed down and taught.
5. I affirm, moreover, a judgment to come, in which judgment every man is to receive the due meed of his bodily life, according to that which he has done, whether good or evil. And, if in the case of men the reward is to be according to their works, how much more will this be so in the case of the devil, who is the universal cause of sin? Of the devil himself our belief is that which is written in the Gospel, namely, that both he and all his angels, will receive as their portion the eternal fire, and with him those who do his works, that is, who become the accusers of their brethren. If then any one denies that the devil is to be subjected to the eternal fires, may he have his part with him in the eternal fire, so that he may know by experience the fact which he now denies.
6. I am next informed that some stir has been made on the question of the nature of the soul. Whether complaints on a matter of this kind ought to be entertained instead of being put aside, you must yourself decide. If, however, you desire to know my opinion on the subject, I will state it frankly. I have read a great many writers on this question, and I find that they express divers opinions. Some of those whom I have read hold that the soul is infused together with the material body through the channel 2810 of the human seed; and of this they give such proofs as they can. I think that this was the opinion of Tertullian or Lactantius among the Latins, perhaps also of a few others. Others assert that God is every day making new souls, and infusing them into the bodies which have been framed in the womb; while others again believe that the souls were all made long ago, when God made all things of nothing, and that all that he now does is to plant out each soul in its body as it seems good to him. This is the opinion of Origen, and of some others of the Greeks. For myself, I declare in the presence of God that, after reading each of these opinions, I am up to the present moment unable to hold any of them as certain and absolute; the determination of the truth in this question I leave to God and to any to whom it shall please him to reveal it. My profession on this point is therefore, first, that these several opinions are those which I have found in books, but, secondly, that I as yet remain in ignorance on the subject, except so far as this, that the Church delivers it as an article of faith that God is the creator of souls as well as of bodies.
7. Now as to another matter. I am told that objections have been raised against me because, forsooth, at the request of some of my brethren, I translated certain works of Origen from Greek into Latin. I suppose that every one sees that it is only through ill will that this is made a matter of blame. For, if there is any offensive statement in the author, why is this to be twisted into a fault of the translator? I was asked to exhibit in Latin what stands written in the Greek text; and I did nothing more than fit the Latin words to the Greek ideas. If, therefore, there is anything to praise in these ideas, the praise does not belong to me; and similarly as to anything to which blame may attach. I admit that I put something of my own into the work; as I stated in my Preface, I used my own discretion in cutting out not a few passages; but only those as to which I had come to suspect that the thing had not been so stated by Origen himself; and the statement appeared to me in these cases to have been inserted by others, because in other places I had found the author state the matter in a catholic sense. I entreat you therefore, holy, venerable and saintly father, not to permit a storm of ill will to be raised against me because of this, nor to sanction the employment of partisanship and of calumny—weapons which ought never to be used in the Church of God. Where can simple faith and innocence be safe if they are not protected in the Church? I am not a defender or a champion of Origen; nor am I the first who has translated his works. Others before me had done the very same thing, and I did it, the last of many, at the request of my brethren. If an order is to be given that such translations are not to be made, such an order holds good for the future, not the past; but if those are to be blamed who have made these translations before any such order was given, the blame must begin with those who took the first step.
8. As for me, I declare in Christ’s name that I never held, nor ever will hold, any other faith but that which I have set forth above, that is, the faith which is held by the Church of Rome, by that of Alexandria, and by my own church of Aquileia; and which is also preached at Jerusalem; and if there is any one who believes otherwise, whoever he may be, let him be Anathema. But those who through mere ill will and malice engender dissensions and offences among their brethren, and cause them to stumble, shall give account of it in the day of judgment.
Footnotes
430:2807Jerome Letter cxxvii. 9.
430:2808The Scorpion is Jerome’s name for Rufinus, especially after his death. He means that Rufinus had altered the too palpable expressions of heresy, so that the more subtle expressions of it might gain acceptance.
430:2809Rufinus uses the word “parentes.” Jerome in his Apology (ii, 2) scoffs at the notion that a man of Rufinus’ age (about 55) could have parents living, and supposes that he is making a false suggestion by using the word in the sense in which it was vulgarly used—that of relations generally, as it is now used in French.
431:2810Traducem, properly, the layer, by which the vine is propagated, and hence the medium through which life is communicated. This is the theory of the “traducianists” who thus made the soul to be derived from the parent by procreation. It is contrasted with that of the “creationists” who held that each soul was separately created, and infused into the child at the moment when life began.
The Letter of Anastasius,
Bishop of the Church of Rome to John Bishop of Jerusalem Concerning the Character of Rufinus.
————————————
The letter of Anastasius to John of Jerusalem was written in the year 401; it is spoken of in Jerome’s Apol. iii., c. 21, which was written in the first half of 402, as “the letter of last year.” Jerome intimates in the same passage that it was only one of several letters of the same character which Anastasius wrote to the East. Rufinus had not seen it, and refused to believe its genuineness. But there seems to be no reason for doubting this. Anastasius had, at the earnest request of Theophilus of Alexandria, formally condemned Origenism. And Rufinus’ translations of Origen’s Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν and of Pamphilus’ Vindication of Origen, and his own book on the Falsification of Origen’s works were taken at Rome as a defence of Origenism generally. Rufinus, however, appealed continually, and especially in his Apology to Anastasius, to the church of Jerusalem, where he had been ordained. “My faith,” he says, “is that which is preached at Jerusalem.” Anastasius, therefore, in condemning Origen would be understood as condemning Rufinus, and might also seem to condemn his Bishop John of Jerusalem. This will account for the fulsome praises with which the letter opens. John, moreover, had written “to consult” Anastasius about Rufinus, which probably implies some action in Rufinus’ interest; but the fact that Jerome knew the contents of the letter and Rufinus did not seems to show that Bishop John had become more friendly with Jerome and less so with Rufinus.
1. The kind words of approval that you have addressed, my dear Bishop, to your brother Bishop, is a fresh mark of your long tried affection. It is a high commendation which you confer upon me, a most lavish recognition of my services. I thank you for this proof of your love; and, following you at a distance in my littleness, I bring the tribute of my words to honour the splendour of your holiness and those virtues which the Lord has conferred upon you. You excel all others so far, the splendour of your praise shines forth so conspicuously, that no words which I can use can equal your deserts. Yet your glory excites in me such admiration that I cannot turn away from the attempt to describe it, even though I can never do so adequately. And, first, the praise which you have bestowed on me out of the serene heaven of your great spirit forms part of your own glory: for it is the majesty of your episcopate, shining forth like the sun upon the opposite quarter of the world, which has reflected its own brightness upon us. And you give me your friendship unreservedly; you do not weigh me in the balance of criticism. If it is right for you to praise me, must not your praise be echoed back to you? I beg you therefore, for your own sake no less than mine, that you will not praise me any more to my face. I ask this for two reasons: if the praise is undeserved it must excite in your brother-bishop a sense of pain; if it is true, it must make him blush.
2. Let me come to the subject of your letter. Rufinus, about whom you have done me the honour to ask my advice, must bring his conscience to the bar of the divine majesty. It is for him to see how he can approve himself to God as maintaining his true allegiance to him.
3. As for Origen, whose writings he has translated into our language, I have neither formerly known, nor do I now seek to know either who he was or what expression he may have given to his thought. But as to the feeling left by this matter on my own mind I should be glad to speak with your holiness for a moment. The impression which I have received is this,—and it has been brought out clearly by the reading of parts of Origen’s works by the people of our City, and by the sort of mist of blindness which it threw over them,—that his object was to disintegrate our faith, which is that of the Apostles, and has been confirmed by the traditions of the fathers, by leading us into tortuous paths.
4. I want to know what is the meaning of the translation of this work into the Roman tongue. If the translator intends by it to put the author in the wrong, and to denounce to the world his execrable deeds, well and good. In that case he will expose to well-merited hatred one who has long laboured under the adverse weight of public opinion. But if by translating all these evil things he means to give his assent to them, and in that sense gives them to the world to read, then the edifice which he has reared at the expense of so much labour serves for nothing else than to make the guilt the act of his own will, and to give the sanction of his unlooked for support to the overthrow of all that is of prime importance in the true faith as held by Catholic Christians from the time of the Apostles till now.
5. Far be such teaching from the catholic system of the Church of Rome. It can never by any possibility come to pass that we should accept as reasonable things which we condemn as matters of law and right. We have, therefore, the assurance that Christ our God, whose providence reaches over the whole world, bestows his approval on us when we say that it is wholly impossible for us to admit doctrines which defile the church, which subvert its well tried moral system, which offend the ears of all who are witnesses of our doings and lay the ground for strife and anger and dissensions. This was the motive which led me to write my letter to Venerius 2811 our brother in the Episcopate, the character of which, written as it was in my weakness but with great care and diligence, you will realize by what I now subjoin: “Whence, then, he who translated the work has gained and preserves this assurance of innocence I am not greatly troubled to know: it fills me with no vain alarm. I certainly shall omit nothing which may enable me to guard the faith of the Gospel amongst my own people, and to warn, as far as in me lies, those who form part of my body, in whatever part of the world they live, not to allow any translation of profane authors to creep in and spring up amongst them, which will seek to unsettle the mind of devout men by spreading its own darkness among them. Moreover, I cannot pass over in silence an event which has given me great pleasure, the decree issued by our Emperors, 2812 by which every one who serves God is warned against the reading of Origen, and all who are convicted of reading his impious works are condemned by the imperial judgment.” In these words my formal sentence was pronounced.
6. You are troubled by the complaint which people make as to our treatment of Rufinus, so that you pursue certain persons 2813 with vague suspicions. But I will meet this feeling of yours with an instance taken from holy writ, namely, where it is said: “Man seeth not as God seeth; for God looketh upon the heart, but man upon the countenance.” Therefore, my dearly beloved brother, put away all your prejudice. Weigh the conduct of Rufinus in your own unbiassed judgment; ask yourself whether he has not translated Origen’s words into Latin and approved them, and whether a man who gives his encouragement to vicious acts committed by another differs at all from the guilty party. In any case I beg you to be assured of this, that he is so completely separate from all part or lot with us, that I neither know nor wish to know either what he is doing or where he is living. I have only to add that it is for him to consider where he may obtain absolution.
Footnotes
433:2811Appointed bishop of Milan in 400, in succession to Simplicianus.
433:2812Arcadius and Honorius.
433:2813Probably the friends of Jerome at Rome, Pammachius and Marcella.
The Apology of Rufinus.
Addressed to Apronianus, in Reply to Jerome’s Letter to Pammachius, 2814 Written at Aquileia a.d. 400.
————————————
In Two Books.
————————————
In order to understand the controversy between Jerome and Rufinus it is necessary to look back over their earlier relations. They had been close friends in early youth (Jerome, Ep. iii, 3, v, 2.) and had together formed part of a society of young Christian ascetics at Aquileia in the years 370–3. Jerome’s letter (3) to Rufinus in 374 is full of affection; in 381 he was placed in Jerome’s Chronicle (year 378) as “a monk of great renown,” and when after some years, they were neighbours in Palestine, Rufinus with Melania on the Mt. of Olives, Jerome with Paula at Bethlehem, they remained friends. (Ruf. Apol. ii. 8 (2).) In the disputes about Origenism which arose from the visits of Aterbius (Jer. Apol. iii, 33) and Epiphanius (Jerome Against John of Jerusalem, 11), they became estranged, Jerome siding with Epiphanius and Rufinus with John (Jer Letter li, 6. Against John of Jerusalem II). They were reconciled before Rufinus left Palestine in 397 (Jer. Apol. i, 1, iii, 33). But when Rufinus came to Italy and at the request of Macarius 2815 translated Origen’s Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν, the Preface which he prefixed to this work was the occasion for a fresh and final outbreak of dissension. The friends of Jerome of whom Pammachius, Oceanus and Marcella were the most prominent, were scandalized at some of the statements of the book, and still more at the assumption made by Rufinus that Jerome, by his previous translations of some of Origen’s works, had proved himself his admirer. They also suspected that Rufinus’ translation had made Origen speak in an orthodox sense which was not genuine and that heterodox statements had been suppressed. They therefore wrote to Jerome at Bethlehem a letter (translated among Jerome’s letters in this Series No. lxxxiii) begging for information on all these points. Jerome in reply made a literal translation of the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν, and sent it accompanied by a letter (lxxxiv) in which he declared that he had never been a partisan of Origen’s dogmatic system, though he admired him as a commentator. He fastened on some of the most questionable of Origen’s speculations, his doctrine of the resurrection, of the previous existence of souls and their fall into human bodies, and the ultimate restoration of all spiritual beings; his permission, in agreement with Plato, of the use of falsehood in certain cases; and some expressions about the relation of the Persons of the Godhead which, at least to Western ears, seemed a denial of their equality. He appealed to his own commentaries on Ecclesiastes and on the Ephesians to show that he rejected these doctrines; and he urged that, even if he had once had too indiscriminate an admiration of Origen, he had in later years judged more clearly.
In the main Jerome’s defence was valid. But it demanded considerateness in his judges; and this quality was absent in himself. He judged Origen’s opinions harshly, and spoke of his views as poisonous (Letter lxxxiv, 3); and, when we contrast the lenity of his former judgments on the same points with his present violence, it becomes evident that he was more concerned for his own reputation than for truth. Rufinus charges him (Apol. i. c. 23 to 44) with maintaining, in his Commentaries on the Ephesians (written twelve years earlier in 388) to which Jerome had appealed (Ep. lxxxiv, 2) the views which he now denounced; and the charge, though urged too far, is substantially made out. The opinions of Origen which he introduced into this Commentary about the fall of souls out of a previous state of bliss into human bodies are set down with hardly a word of objection (comm. on ch. i, v. 4), and his speculations on the Powers and Principalities of the world to come (ib. v. 21) and on the rise of Lucifer and his angels to be subjects of Christ’s Kingdom (id. ii, 7) and their part in the final restoration of all things (id. iv, 16) are adopted as his own, thus giving some justification for Rufinus’ attack (Apol. i, 34–36. &c.). His defence of himself therefore is hardly candid. And his allusions to his opponent are exasperating, e.g. when he speaks (Letter lxxxiv, 1) of some persons “who love me so well that they cannot be heretics without me.” “I wonder that, while they speak in detraction of the flesh, they live carnally and thus cherish and nourish delicately their enemy” (Id. 8). He hardly argues fairly as to Rufinus’ assertion that Origen’s works had suffered from falsification: and he is carried so far by his animosity that he denies the Apology of Pamphilus for Origen to be by Pamphilus, though he had himself attributed it to him (De Vir. Ill. c. 7. 5) and no one can doubt that it is his. (See Dict. of Christ. Biog. Art. Pamphilus.)
But though writing thus for his friends generally, Jerome wrote at the same time a friendly letter to Rufinus himself in answer, it would seem, to one from him, (Letter lxxxi.) in which he speaks of their common friends, and of the death of Rufinus’ mother, and says that he has charged a friend whom he is sending to Italy to visit Rufinus and assure him of his high esteem; and, while remonstrating with him for his Preface to the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν, merely says “I have begged my other friends to avoid a quarrel. I count on your sense of equity not to give occasion to impatient persons; for you will not find every one, like me, able to take pleasure in praises framed to suit a purpose.” 2816
Had this letter reached Rufinus, the ensuing controversy would have been avoided. But it never reached him. It was sent through Pammachius, and he and Jerome’s other friends kept it back, while they published the letter sent them with Jerome’s translation of the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν. Rufinus who was now at Aquileia, having left Rome probably early in 399 wrote the Apology, addressing it to his friend and convert Apronianus at Rome.
Footnotes
434:2814Ep. 84.
434:2815See the Translation of Rufinus’ Prefaces given above, and the notes prefixed to them.
434:2816Or Feigned praises—figuratis laudibus.
Book I.
The following is an epitome of the argument:
1. I must submit to the taunts of my adversary as Christ did to those of the Jews.
2. Yet the substantial charges must be answered.
3. I praised him but he has wounded me.
4. I am no heretic, but declare my faith, that of my baptism.
5. I give a further proof of my faith in the resurrection of the flesh.
6–9. The resurrection body is a spiritual body.
10. Origen’s doctrines in the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν
11. What led to the translation.
12, 13. Pamphilus Apology for Origen.
14. Preface to the Translation of the Περὶ ᾽Αρχῶν
15. Treatise on the Adulteration of the works of Origen.
16. The difficulties of translation.
17. Explanation of Origen’s words “The Son does not see the Father.”
18. Difference between seeing and knowing.
19. The Translation interpolated by Eusebius of Cremona.
20. Eusebius, if acting honestly, should have shown me what he thought dangerous.
21. Jerome’s method of translation was the same as mine.
22. Jerome’s reference to his Commentary on the Ephesians.
23. Jerome has not really changed his mind about Origen.
24. Women turned into men and bodies into souls.
25. The foundation (καταβολή) of the world explained by Jerome as a casting down.
26. Jerome, under the name of “another,” gives his own views.
27. The fall of souls into human bodies is taught by Jerome.
28. Predestination.
29. “Another,” who gives strange views, is Jerome himself.
30. “Hopers” and “fore-hopers.”
31. and 30 (a). Jerome has confessed these views to be his own.
31 (a) and 32. Further identification of Jerome’s views with Origen’s.
33. The commentary on the Ephesians, selected by Jerome, is his condemnation.
34, 35. Principalities and Powers.
36. Jerome’s complaint of new doctrines may be retorted on himself.
38, 39. Origin of men, angels, and heavenly bodies.
40, 41. The body as a prison.
42. All creatures, including the fallen angel, partaking in the final restoration.
43. Arrogance of Jerome’s teaching.
44. If Origen is not to be pardoned, neither is Jerome.
I have read the document sent from the East by our friend and good brother to a distinguished member of the Senate, Pammachius, which you have copied and forwarded to me. It brought to my mind the words of the Prophet: 2817 “The sons of men whose teeth are spears and arrows and their tongue a sharp sword.” But for these wounds which men inflict on one another with the tongue we can hardly find a physician; so I have betaken myself to Jesus, the heavenly physician, and he has brought out for me from the medicine chest of the Gospel an antidote of sovereign power; he has assuaged the violence of my grief with the assurance of the righteous judgment which I shall have at his hands. The potion which our Lord dispensed to me was nothing else than these words: 2818 “Blessed are ye when men persecute you and say all manner of evil against you falsely. Rejoice and leap for joy, for great is your reward in heaven, for so persecuted they the Prophets which were before you.” With this medicine I was content, and, as far as the matter concerned me, I had determined for the future to keep silence; for I said within myself, 2819 “If they have called the Master of the house Beelzebub, how much more them of his household?” (that is, you and me, unworthy though we are). And, if it was said of him, 2820 “He is a deceiver, he deceiveth the people,” I must not be indignant if I hear that I am called a heretic, and that the name of mole is applied to me because of the slowness of my mind, or indeed my blindness. Christ who is my Lord, aye, and who is God over all, was called 2821 “a gluttonous man and a wine bibber, a friend of publicans and sinners.” How can I, then, be angry when I am called a carnal man 2822 who lives in luxury?
Footnotes
435:2817Ps. lvii. 4
435:2818Matt. 5:11, 12
435:2819Matt. x. 25
435:2820John vii. 12
435:2821Matt. xi. 19
435:2822Jerome Ep. lxxxiv, 8.
2. Nevertheless, a necessity, as it were, is laid upon me to reply, as a simple matter of justice: I mean, because many, as I hear, are likely to be upset by what he has written unless the true state of the case is laid before them. I am compelled, against my resolution and even my vows, to make reply, lest by keeping silence I should seem to acknowledge the accusation to be true. It is, indeed, in most cases, a Christian’s glory to follow our Lord’s example of silence, and thereby to repel the accusation; but to follow this course in matters of faith causes stumbling blocks to spring up in vast numbers. It is true that, in the beginning of his invective he promises that he will avoid personalities, and reply only about the things in question and the charges made against him; but his profession in both cases is false; for how can he answer a charge when no charge has been made? and how can a man be said to avoid personalities when he never ceases to attack and tear to pieces the translator of the books in question from the first line to the last of his invective? I shall avoid all pretence of saying less than I mean, and similar subterfuges of hypocrisy which are hateful in God’s sight; and, though my words may be uncouth and my style unadorned, I will make my reply. I trust, and I shall not trust in vain, that my readers will pardon my lack of skill, since my object is not to amuse others but to endeavour to clear myself from the reproaches directed against me. My wish is that what may shine forth in me may not be style but truth.
3. But, before I begin to clear up these points, there is one in which I confess that he has spoken the truth in an eminent degree; namely, when he says that he is not rendering evil speaking for evil speaking. This, I say, is quite true; for it is not for evil speaking but for speaking well of him and praising him that he has rendered reproach and evil speaking. But it is not true, as he says, that he turns the left cheek to one who smites him on the right. It is on one who is stroking him and caressing him on the cheek that he suddenly turns and bites him. I praised his eloquence and his industry in the work of translating from the Greek. I said nothing in derogation of his faith; but he condemns me on both these points. He must therefore pardon me if I say some things rather roughly and rudely; for he has challenged to a reply a man who has no great rhetorical skill, and who has not, as he knows, the power to make one whom he wishes to injure and to wound appear to have received neither wounds nor injuries. Those who love this kind of eloquence must seek it in a man whom every light report stirs up to fault-finding and vituperation, and who thinks himself bound, as if he were the censor, to be always coming up to set things to rights. A man who desires to clear himself from the stains which have been cast upon him, does not trouble himself, in the answer which he is compelled to make, about the elegance and neat turns of his reply, but only about its truth.
4. At the very beginning of his work he says, “As if they could not be heretics by themselves, without me.” I must first show that, whether with him or without him, we are no heretics: then, when our status is made clear, we shall be safe from having the infamous imputation hurled at us from other men’s reports. I was already living in a monastery, where, as both he and all others know, about 30 years ago, I was made regenerate by Baptism, and received the seal of the faith at the hands of those saintly men, Chromatius, 2823 Jovinus 2824 and Eusebius, 2825 all of them now bishops, well-tried and highly esteemed in the church of God, one of whom was then a presbyter of the church under Valerian of blessed memory, the second was archdeacon, the third Deacon, and to me a spiritual father, my teacher in the creed and the articles of belief. These men so taught me, and so I believe, namely, that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are of one Godhead, of one Substance: a Trinity coeternal, inseparable, incorporeal, invisible, incomprehensible, known to itself alone as it truly is in its perfection: For “No man 2826 knoweth the Son but the Father, neither knoweth any man the Father but the Son”: and the Holy Spirit is he who “searcheth 2827 the deep things of God”: that this Trinity, therefore, is without all bodily visibility, but that it is with the eye of the understanding that the Son and the Holy Spirit see the Father even as the Father sees the Son and the Holy Spirit; and further, that in this Trinity there is no diversity except that one is Father, another Son and a third Holy Spirit. There is a Trinity as touching the distinction of persons, a unity in the reality of the Substance. We received, further, that the only begotten Son of God, through whom in the beginning all existing things were made, whether visible or invisible, in these last days took upon him a human body and Soul, and was made man, and suffered for our salvation; and the third day he rose again from the dead in that very flesh which had been laid in the sepulchre; and in that very same flesh made glorious he ascended into the heavens, whence we look for his coming to judge the quick and the dead. But further we confess that he gave us hope that we too should rise in a similar manner, so that we believe that our resurrection will be in the same manner and process, and in the same form, as the resurrection of our Lord himself from the dead: that the bodies which we shall receive will not be phantoms or thin vapours, as some slanderously affirm that we say, but these very bodies of ours in which we live and in which we die. For how can we truly believe in the resurrection of the flesh, unless the very nature of flesh remains in it truly and substantially? It is then without any equivocation, that we confess the resurrection of this real and substantial flesh of ours in which we live.
Footnotes
436:2823Bp. of Aquileia at the time of this Apology and maintaining friendly relations with both Jerome and Rufinus. (Ruf. Pref. to Eusebius in this Volume. Jer. Ep. vii, lx. 19, Pref. to Bks. of Solomon &c. &c.)
436:2824See Jerome Ep. vii. It is not known of what church he was Bp.
436:2825Brother of Chromatius. See an allusion to him in Jerome, Ep. viii, and lx, 19. His see is unknown.
436:2826Matt. xi. 27
436:28271 Cor. ii. 10
5. Moreover, to give a fuller demonstration of this point, I will add one thing more. It is the compulsion of those who calumniate me which forces me to exhibit a singular and special mystery of my own church. It is this, that, while all the churches thus hand down the Sacrament of the Creed in the form which, after the words “the remission of sins” adds “the resurrection of the flesh,” the holy church of Aquileia (as though the Spirit of God had foreseen the calumnies which would be spoken against us) puts in a particular pronoun at the place where it delivers the resurrection of the dead; instead of saying as others do, “the resurrection of the flesh,” we say “the resurrection of this flesh.” At this point, as the custom is at the close of the Creed, we touch the forehead of this flesh with the sign of the cross, and with the mouth of this flesh, which we have so touched, we confess the resurrection; that so we may stop up every entrance through which the poisoned tongue might bring in its calumnies against us. Can any confession be fuller than this? Can any exposition of the truth be more perfect? Yet I see that this remarkable provision of the Holy Spirit has been of no profit to us. Evil and busy tongues still find room for cavilling. Unless, says he, you name the members one by one, and expressly designate the head with its hair, the hands, the feet, the belly, and that which is below the belly, you have denied the resurrection of the flesh.
6. Behold the discovery of this man of the new learning! a thing which escaped the notice of the Apostles when they delivered the faith to the Church; a thing which none of the saints knew till it was revealed to this man by the spirit of the flesh. He indeed cannot expound it without bringing in an indecency. Nevertheless, I will set it forth in his hearing both more worthily and more truly. Christ is the first fruits of those that sleep; 2828 he is also called 2829 the first begotten from the dead; as also the Apostle says, 2830 “Christ is the beginning, afterward they that are Christ’s.” Since then we have Christ as the undoubted first fruits of our resurrection, how can any question arise about the rest of us? It must be evident that, whatever the members, the hair, the flesh, the bones, were in which Christ rose, in the same shall we also rise. For this purpose he offered himself to the disciples to touch after his resurrection, so that no hesitation as to his resurrection should remain. Since then Christ has given his own resurrection as a typical instance, one that is quite evident, and (as I may say) capable of being felt and handled by the hand, who can be so mad as to think that he himself will rise otherwise than as He rose who opened the door of the resurrection? This also confirms the truth of this confession of ours that, while it is the actual natural flesh and no other which will rise, yet it will rise purged from its faults and having laid aside its corruption; so that the saying of the Apostle is true: 2831 “It is sown in corruption, it will be raised in incorruption; it is sown in dishonour, it will be raised in glory; it is sown a natural 2832 body, it will be raised a spiritual body.” Inasmuch then as it is a spiritual body, and glorious, and incorruptible, it will be furnished and adorned with its own proper members, not with members taken from elsewhere, according to that glorious image of which Christ is set forth as the perpetual type, as it is said by the Apostle: 2833 “Who shall change the body of our humiliation, that it may be conformed to the body of his glory.”
Footnotes
437:28281 Cor. xv. 20
437:2829Rev. i. 5
437:28301 Cor. xv. 23
437:28311 Cor. xv. 42-4
437:2832animale.
437:2833Phil. iii. 21
7. Since then, in reference to our hope of the resurrection, Christ is set forth all through as the archetype, since he is the first born of those who rise, and since he is the head of every creature, as it is written, 2834 “Who is the head of all, the first born from the dead, that in all things he might have the preeminence;” how is it that we stir up these vain strifes of words, and conflicts of evil surmises? Does not the faith of the church consist in the confession which I have set forth above? And is it not evident that men are moved to accuse others not by difference of belief, but by perversity of disposition? At this point, however, in arguing about the resurrection of the flesh, our friend, as his habit is, mixes up what is ridiculous and farcical with what is serious. He says:
“Some poor creatures of the female sex among us are fond of asking what good the resurrection will be to them? They touch their breasts, and stroke their beardless faces, and strike their thighs and their bellies, and ask whether this poor weak body is to rise again. No, they say, if we are to be like angels we shall have the nature of angels.”
Who the poor women are whom he thus takes to task, and whether they are deserving of his attacks, he knows best. And if he considers himself to be one of those who are bound to preach that it is not our part to attack another out of revenge, but that in this instance he is right in attacking others when they have given him no cause for revenge; or if, again, he considers that it is no business of his to take care that weak women of his company should be subjected to attacks only for real causes, and not for such false and fictitious reasons as these—of all this, I say, he is himself the best judge. For us it is sufficient to act as he said that he would act: we shall not render evil for evil. But it is evident that the man who is angry with a woman because she says that she hopes not to have a frail body in the resurrection is of the opinion that the frailties of the body will remain. Only, what then, we ask, are we to make of the words of the Apostle: “It is sown in weakness, it will be raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it will be raised a spiritual body”? What frailty can you suppose to exist in a spiritual body? It is to rise in power; how then is it again to be frail? If it is frail, how can it be in power? Are not those poor women after all more right than you, when they say that their bodily frailty cannot have dominion over them in the world beyond? Why should you mock at them, when they are only following the Apostle’s words: “This corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality?” The Apostles never taught that the body which would rise from the dead would be frail, but, on the contrary, that it would rise in power and in glory. Whence comes this opinion which you now produce? Perhaps it is one obtained from some of your Jews, 2835 which is now to be promulgated as a new law for the church, so that we may learn their ways: for in truth the Jews have such an opinion as this about the resurrection; they believe that they will rise, but in such sort as that they will enjoy all carnal delights and luxuries, and other pleasures of the body. What else, indeed, can this “bodily frailty” of yours mean except members given over to corruption, appetites stimulated and lusts inflamed?
Footnotes
437:2834Col. i. 18
438:2835Rufinus frequently taunts Jerome with having paid too much heed to the Jewish teachers from whom he learned Hebrew.
8. But suffer it to be so, I beg you, as you are lovers of Christ, that the body is to be in incorruption and without these conditions when it rises from the dead: then let such things henceforward cease to be mentioned. Let us believe that in the resurrection even lawful intercourse will no longer exist between the sexes, since there would be danger that unlawful intercourse would creep in if such things remained present and unforgotten. What is the use of carefully and minutely going over and discussing “the belly and what is below it?” You tell us that we live amidst carnal delights: but I perceive that it is your belief that we are not to give up such things even in the resurrection. Let us not deny that this very flesh in which we now live is to rise again: but neither let us make men think that the imperfections of the flesh are wrapped up in it and will come again with it. The flesh, indeed, will rise, this very flesh and not another: it will not change its nature, but it will lose its frailties and imperfections. Otherwise, if its frailties remain, it cannot even be immortal. And thus, as I said, we avoid heresy, whether with you or without you. For the faith of the Church, of which we are the disciples, takes a middle path between two dangers: it does not deny the reality of the natural flesh and body when it rises from the dead, but neither does it assert, in contradiction to the Apostle’s words, 2836 that in the kingdom which is to come corruption will inherit incorruption. We therefore do not assert that the flesh or body will rise, as you put it, with some of its members lost or amputated, but that the body will be whole and complete, having laid aside nothing but its corruption and dishonour and frailty and also having amputated all the imperfections of mortality: nothing of its own nature will be lacking to that spiritual body which shall rise from the dead except this corruption.
Footnotes
438:28361 Cor. xv. 50
9. I have made answer more at length than I had intended on this single article of the resurrection, through fear lest by brevity I should lay myself open to fresh aspersions. Consequently, I have made mention again and again not only of the body. as to which cavils are raised, but of the flesh: and not only of the flesh; I have added “this flesh;” and further I have spoken not only of “this flesh” but of “this natural flesh;” I have not even stopped here, but have asserted that not even the completeness of the several members would be lacking. I have only demanded that it should be held as part of the faith that, according to the words of the Apostle, it should rise incorruptible instead of corruptible, glorious in stead of dishonoured, immortal instead of frail, spiritual instead of natural; and that we should think of the members of the spiritual body as being without taint of corruption or of frailty. I have set forth my faith in reference to the Trinity, the Incarnation of the Lord our Saviour, to his Passion and Resurrection, his second coming and the judgment to come. I have also set it forth in the matter of the resurrection of our flesh, and have left nothing, I think, in ambiguity. Nothing in my opinion remains to be said, so far as the faith is concerned.
Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Ser. II, Vol. III, part 3 of 4. . Hermetic Cloud, https://hermeticcloud.com/library/nicene-and-post-nicene-fathers-ser-ii-vol-iii-part-3/. Public-domain text reproduced in full; markup only.